Anchoring a Grand Banks Europe 52

[Nomad Willy]

rslifkin wrote;
“Getting the seabed off my Vulcan usually takes a minute, but with a good washdown pump it's easy enough”

True, I wish I had one haha.
But a plugged anchor on the bottom can deep six all the Vulcan’s holding power. That’s consequential whereas cleanliness on the deck ... not so much.

 

[Nomad Willy]

PeterB you forgot to mention that Rex’s early Sarcas WERE concave. About as concave as the present day Sarca is convex. But Rex Frances decided the best configuration was slightly convex .. I agree.
Aircraft have both anhedral and dihedral wings. But most all aircraft have at least some dihedral (wingtips higher than a flat wing). So in the aviation world anhedral is almost universal. And the anhedral wing is equatable to the convex anchor re performance of lift (wing) and resistance (anchor).

 

[Xlantic]

Re Xlantic wrote;
“For my current GB50 I bought a 40kg Rocna which has been reliable. But, from what I have read and seen in Panope's videos, I wish I had forked out a little bit more money and bought a Spade.

Most here seem to think if it’s over a year old in design it’s gotta be old school and not worth looking at. Not so IMO

Interestingly, the Spade is not that new. I suspect it may have well been the first (and I believe the best as well) of the "new-style anchors".

I don't know the history but I first read about it in the excellent "The Complete Book of Anchoring and Mooring", published in 1994. If I recall correctly the newest anchor mentioned in the book, before the Spade, was the Delta.

 

[rslifkin]

rslifkin wrote;
“Getting the seabed off my Vulcan usually takes a minute, but with a good washdown pump it's easy enough”

True, I wish I had one haha.
But a plugged anchor on the bottom can deep six all the Vulcan’s holding power. That’s consequential whereas cleanliness on the deck ... not so much.

Agreed, although in the SV Panope tests and in my experience, it seems to do just fine and hasn't been an issue. I've only had the big mud clumps not fall off without help in certain seabeds. Plus, if I change to anything else, I either have to downsize or modify my roller setup. I picked the Vulcan mostly because of the short roller to tip length allowing me to fit a larger size then any other non rollbar design (and I can't clear a rollbar).

 

[Simi 60]

Posting about anchors is always potentially contentious, but here goes...

On our GB46eu (with extended bimini and flybridge clears, so lots of windage), we use a stainless steel Ultra anchor and 100 metres of stainless chain.

Never dragged anchor once in the 7 years or so of ownership.

Expensive set up, but it works every time.

H.

Not having a go at you but you would be saying the same if it was a galvanized version costing a whole lot less.

Well, you wouldn't be saying "Expensive set up"

Our galvanised Manson supreme on a vessel with a lot more windage again has never let us down either in 5 years of full time use, zero marinas.
The 13mm chain has deformed (80+ knots), but we have never moved.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Gilberto,
Not that new yes.
And I’m quite sure it’s older than the Rocna. Perhaps by quite a few years.
Both Spade and Delta have been around for some time.

One aspect of the Delta and Vulcan is the ballast weight chamber. The cross section of the chambers is typically as large as a playing card. Depending on size of anchor that would amount to a large cross sectional area. And that “V” shaped chamber will need to not only penetrate the seafloor but go through the seafloor and downward if any serious depth-penetration is to be achieved. Depth =holding power all other elements being equal. I had thought that it would be better to have an anchor that has low fwd drag as a result of having a low cross sectional area. Like the Boss. Just some stout sheet metal slicing through the sub-strait below the sea floor.

But ballasted chambered anchors seem to work just fine. But I’m of the opinion that on a soft bottom the Boss would probably out perform the Spade, Vulcan and others w the ballasted chambers. I have a ballasted anchor in the Excel. It’s heavily ballasted and works flawlessly tho I haven’t used it all that much. I prefer the Sarca. But I’ll bet if I went to Alaska again and used them alternately anchoring the’d almost certainly both work perfectly. I’s not as much fun as my experimental modified anchors but a lot less work.

I can’t find Gilbertos post.
Perhaps I posted on the wrong thread .. or he deleted for some reason.

 

[rslifkin]

Based on mud residue, in medium-soft sticky mud (the kind that comes up in a gelatinous blob on the fluke), I've seen mud packed onto my Vulcan all the way up the shank, shackle, etc. indicating that it was likely fully buried. So while it may not bury quite as easily as a design without a big chunk of ballast, it seems to bury well enough for practical purposes.

 

[Peter B]

PeterB you forgot to mention that Rex’s early Sarcas WERE concave. About as concave as the present day Sarca is convex. But Rex Frances decided the best configuration was slightly convex .. I agree.

Eric, I didn't exactly forget that Rex had experimented with concave Sarca, but just didn't want to make the post too long. However, having just reviewed Steve's latest summary of anchor setting tests, where he gives all the anchors a rating out of 5, (see previous Youtube link

), for a list of performance characteristics, it is notable that the only one that scores nearly the full 5 is the Sarca Ex-cel...


To cheat, and see the list of results, one can jump to about 33mins, 48secs in the video.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Sorry my friend I had no intention of calling you delinquent.

 

[BrisHamish]

Not having a go at you but you would be saying the same if it was a galvanized version costing a whole lot less.

Well, you wouldn't be saying "Expensive set up"

Our galvanised Manson supreme on a vessel with a lot more windage again has never let us down either in 5 years of full time use, zero marinas.
The 13mm chain has deformed (80+ knots), but we have never moved.

Yes Simi, that is right. If there is a galvanised version of the "Ultra shape", then I think you (the OP) would get the good performance at a much better price.

My choice of the stainless chain is deliberate, however. I would not swap my stainless chain for galvanised chain, despite the significant cost saving. A whole different topic, and there are threads on it already, but stainless chain is always 'slippery' and hence it flakes nicely into the chain locker and because it doesnt get 'sticky' it never forms a pyramid in the chain locker which then topples on itself and jams the chain.

Hamish.

 

[FF]

Back when anchors were far larger , kept on deck, sometimes disassembled and used a crane device to get them over the rail, there was less controversy about brand.

The question was about anchor weight

.Some cruisers considered 10 lbs for every foot of water line right, inshore folks got away with about 5 lbs.

Today not too many folks carry just 2 lbs per foot , and wonder why they dragged.

 

[backinblue]

Yes Simi, that is right. If there is a galvanised version of the "Ultra shape", then I think you (the OP) would get the good performance at a much better price.

My choice of the stainless chain is deliberate, however. I would not swap my stainless chain for galvanised chain, despite the significant cost saving. A whole different topic, and there are threads on it already, but stainless chain is always 'slippery' and hence it flakes nicely into the chain locker and because it doesnt get 'sticky' it never forms a pyramid in the chain locker which then topples on itself and jams the chain.

Hamish.

Being slippery means the chain also comes up cleaner with less mud clinging to it. I'm a little divided about whether price has a place in performance testing. Of course it can tell you what is the best anchor for the money, But for me anyway, that's not something I would base my purchase on. i.e. I wouldn't buy a mediocre performer because it was the least expensive. It should also be noted that the chart in the video is specific to the 45lb range so ymmv depending on size. Still a very good and helpful video.

 

[AndreHuizing]

On our Selene 53 (18m LOA, 50tons) we use a 75 kg (yes that's kilo) Spade. We had a 50kg CQR that I sold to a bobsleigh team as it was sliding on any surface. After that we had a 55kg Spade which we really love. However because I wanted a backup anchor and a ketch anchor the 55 became the ketch and the new 75 the main. It's totally brilliant. We are semi live aboards and cruising the Med where we anchor most of the time (Med mooring and free anchoring). The anchor is never an issue. 99% sets first time and never moves again. A few anchoring "truths":
- When they don't ridicule you over the large size of your anchor, it's too small;
- Stainless anchors are for marina's not for anchoring;
- A plough is designed to move in the ground...not stay stationary;
- Chain is important...but not in extreme circumstances. A chain won't hold you, the anchor does.
- Invest in 1 big 3rd generation anchor. Don't fiddle with 2 anchors etc.

Cheers, André

 

[backinblue]

On our Selene 53 (18m LOA, 50tons) we use a 75 kg (yes that's kilo) Spade. We had a 50kg CQR that I sold to a bobsleigh team as it was sliding on any surface. After that we had a 55kg Spade which we really love. However because I wanted a backup anchor and a ketch anchor the 55 became the ketch and the new 75 the main. It's totally brilliant. We are semi live aboards and cruising the Med where we anchor most of the time (Med mooring and free anchoring). The anchor is never an issue. 99% sets first time and never moves again. A few anchoring "truths":
- When they don't ridicule you over the large size of your anchor, it's too small;
- Stainless anchors are for marina's not for anchoring;
- A plough is designed to move in the ground...not stay stationary;
- Chain is important...but not in extreme circumstances. A chain won't hold you, the anchor does.
- Invest in 1 big 3rd generation anchor. Don't fiddle with 2 anchors etc.

Cheers, André

Although it's true that stainless anchors look nice on the bow at a marina, why do you discount them as an effective tool? If they were priced the same as galvanized, would that change your mind?

 

[Xlantic]

On our Selene 53 (18m LOA, 50tons) we use a 75 kg (yes that's kilo) Spade. We had a 50kg CQR that I sold to a bobsleigh team as it was sliding on any surface. After that we had a 55kg Spade which we really love. However because I wanted a backup anchor and a ketch anchor the 55 became the ketch and the new 75 the main. It's totally brilliant. We are semi live aboards and cruising the Med where we anchor most of the time (Med mooring and free anchoring). The anchor is never an issue. 99% sets first time and never moves again. A few anchoring "truths":
- When they don't ridicule you over the large size of your anchor, it's too small;
- Stainless anchors are for marina's not for anchoring;
- A plough is designed to move in the ground...not stay stationary;
- Chain is important...but not in extreme circumstances. A chain won't hold you, the anchor does.
- Invest in 1 big 3rd generation anchor. Don't fiddle with 2 anchors etc.

Cheers, André

I would sleep like a baby anchored with a 75 kg. Spade!

 

[rslifkin]

Although it's true that stainless anchors look nice on the bow at a marina, why do you discount them as an effective tool? If they were priced the same as galvanized, would that change your mind?

I'll throw in my 2 cents. Stainless anchors work fine, but they don't hold any advantages big enough to justify the huge price increase. I'd rather buy a size bigger plus a good second anchor and still spend less than the stainless one. plus, the stainless one will hurt a lot more if you ever lose it in a bad situation.

 

[AndreHuizing]

Although it's true that stainless anchors look nice on the bow at a marina, why do you discount them as an effective tool? If they were priced the same as galvanized, would that change your mind?

Not really. The problem with SS is that you cannot have only a SS anchor, you need everything including chain in SS...at least when you anchor a serious amount of time. Normal 316 SS chain is weak and brittle and does not warn you before it breaks. Galvanized will deform first. SS just breaks. When you want to do that right you need to go to SS alloys like Cromox...and then yes it becomes a money thing. A similar setup as we have would take a 80kg Ultra + 160 meters of Cromox chain would approx. set me back around $20000+

 

[Alaskaflyer]

- A plough is designed to move in the ground...not stay stationary;


Cheers, André

LOL!

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who had that thought strike them.

 

[Creek]

I agree with much of what has been written earlier about the better performance of the newest generation of anchors.

My observations are as follows, based on anchoring out during uninterrupted months of sailing dometically and abroad:

1. Whenever another boat dragged anchor, I observed what anchor was in use. The most common types that dragged were CQR and Bruce. First the CQR - its design does not seem to be up to the task though it does largely what all plough anchors do - which is plough, but not to remain at a fixed point. Then the Bruce - I think this anchor has merit, perhaps most useful in rocky bottoms, but my observation is that most people significantly undersize their Bruce anchors which is why they tend to drag in soft bottoms. Whatever size Bruce you are thinking about, multiply by at least 2x.

2. As said earlier, Danforth style anchors are excellent in mud. Their principal weakness is with the lightweight fluke anchors which have flexible shanks. Testing has shown that those can be twisted or bent under sideways loads, leading to failure.

3. Spade - These are really superior anchors. This was one of 3 anchors I had aboard, but it was so good I never once needed either of the other 2.
I used it in every possible condition, except for rocky bottoms in which almost nothing works anyway. My Spade was always deployed on a 275' 5/16" chain. I rode out a 2 day full gale with my 50' boat on this 30KG (66#) Spade. It was so deeply set it took over an hour to extract it from the sand/clay bottom. The only time it ever dragged was in soupy mud and due to my putting out insufficient scope for those conditions.

4. Don't believe what anyone writes about using a smaller diameter nyon snubber to allow for stretch and shock absorbtion. During that gale, I had over 1' of stretch on a 7/8" snubber that was 20' long. The stretch was so great that it peeled the chafe protection off the snubber as it moved back and forth. I replaced it with a 1" snubber that was still stretching significantly, but not as much. No matter what anyone says about shock absorbtion, the more important thing is protecting your snubber from excessive stretching and chafe in a high wind situation. In conditions of lower wind, the catenary affect of putting out a large amount of chain will absorb most of the shock load, so you will not need a smaller snubber. However, if it makes you feel better, have a smaller snubber on hand that you can replace with the big one in a real blow.

Just my opinion! Good luck with your choice.

 

[rslifkin]

4. Don't believe what anyone writes about using a smaller diameter nyon snubber to allow for stretch and shock absorbtion. During that gale, I had over 1' of stretch on a 7/8" snubber that was 20' long. The stretch was so great that it peeled the chafe protection off the snubber as it moved back and forth. I replaced it with a 1" snubber that was still stretching significantly, but not as much. No matter what anyone says about shock absorbtion, the more important thing is protecting your snubber from excessive stretching and chafe in a high wind situation. In conditions of lower wind, the catenary affect of putting out a large amount of chain will absorb most of the shock load, so you will not need a smaller snubber. However, if it makes you feel better, have a smaller snubber on hand that you can replace with the big one in a real blow.

In general, as weather gets heavier, you'll want a heavier snubber for strength. The only downside to a heavier snubber is that you'll need to make it longer to get enough stretch.

Personally, I like to size the lazy loop of chain so that the chain goes tight around 20% stretch on the snubber. That prevents over-working the snubber and greatly reduces the risk of failure (as you can't cycle it to as high a load). If the chain starts to pull tight, it's time to put on a bigger, longer snubber and let it (and a bit more chain) out.

 

[backinblue]

Not really. The problem with SS is that you cannot have only a SS anchor, you need everything including chain in SS...at least when you anchor a serious amount of time. Normal 316 SS chain is weak and brittle and does not warn you before it breaks. Galvanized will deform first. SS just breaks. When you want to do that right you need to go to SS alloys like Cromox...and then yes it becomes a money thing. A similar setup as we have would take a 80kg Ultra + 160 meters of Cromox chain would approx. set me back around $20000+

Funny but I mentioned in another thread how many people mix stainless and galvanized components without apparently much thought. Could be a stainless anchor with galvanized chain or even a galvanized anchor and chain with a stainless swivel in between.

 

[Simi 60]

Yes Simi, that is right. If there is a galvanised version of the "Ultra shape", then I think you (the OP) would get the good performance at a much better price.

We already have outstanding performance at a much better price with our Manson supreme. The fact that it held us in 80+ knots and the chain stretched is evidence of that.

I have seen nothing, apart from marketing hype, that demonstrated that any new gen anchor is markedly better than another.
They are all great imho and I would be happy with any of them as long as they fit and the price was agreeable.

My choice of the stainless chain is deliberate, however. I would not swap my stainless chain for galvanised chain, despite the significant cost saving. A whole different topic, and there are threads on it already, but stainless chain is always 'slippery' and hence it flakes nicely into the chain locker and because it doesnt get 'sticky' it never forms a pyramid in the chain locker which then topples on itself and jams the chain.

Hamish.

In 5 years of daily use we have never had that problem with galv.
Exceptionally large anchor locker perhaps?

 

[Simi 60]

Being slippery means the chain also comes up cleaner with less mud clinging to it. .

Less mud so you still need to wash it

I would rather spend the extra coin on a more powerful pump to blast the mud off faster
And on an even larger galvanised new gen anchor

And for the thousands of dollars I still have left over ????

 

[Johnboyrtw]

I just bought a grand Banks 42,1996 a month ago. Has a 44# CQR with 200 ft of chain. Replacing it with the Sarca Excel, galvanized 06 model. Your boat would take the 08 model anchor, here’s the link. https://www.groundtackle.com/online-store/Sarca-Excel-Galvanized-Steel-Anchor-p67306691
The Sarca anchor is made in Australia and Ground Tackle is located in British Columbia, the only North American dealer for these anchors.
I just ordered mine last week. There is a shipment enroute now from Australia. My research convinced me that this is the anchor to get. I would get the Sarca excel over the Super Sarca.
My advise is to get the best anchor you can afford. Having peace of mind at anchor is worth every penny.

 

[backinblue]

What's that quote? I spent most of my money on women, liquor, and boats. The rest I wasted!

 

[Freja]

Ultra Anchor for sure. We have a Fleming 65 and the 60kg Ultra has always let me sleep comfortably without concern. Once it's set and grabbed it is bulltetproof.

 

[R lucky]

My GB 42 is quite a bit heavier than originally equipped, so I think I'm safe in this conversation . I bought a 65lb Mantus after watching Steve's vids, based on higher marks for resetting vs. the Spade. The 65lb is rated as a storm anchor by Mantus for my boat. The first night I used it, the conditions were considerably stronger than forecast, and even on short scope it held perfecrly (in sand). Nonetheless, I was a little unnerved and upgraded to an 85lb. Mantus.

The first two times I used the 85 lb (also in sand), it hooked up so fast and set so hard that the force stripped the chain out of the gypsy as I wasn't getting the chain out fast enough while backing down . A far different experience than my old CQR, which held tenaciously but needed to be dragged for a while first. The Mantus is a beast -- highly recommended.

 

[backinblue]

Ultra Anchor for sure. We have a Fleming 65 and the 60kg Ultra has always let me sleep comfortably without concern. Once it's set and grabbed it is bulltetproof.

Drop it, set it, forget it!

 

[Simi 60]

Drop it, set it, forget it!

Same goes for any new gen anchor.

 

[RickyD]

A walk along the docks in any marina will allow you to see how many of each type of anchor mentioned here, are in use by mariners of every level of experience.
As I do this where I boat, the most common anchors that are in use are the older designs, CQR, Bruce, Danforth. Then in much reduced numbers the Delta style and last, the ones with a roll bar, like Rockna.
That tells me that very few people are dissatisfied with the performance of their old style anchors, so those remain on bows.
In your area, results may vary.

In an effort to be contrary, most of the boats on my dock don't even anchor at all.