Rocna Comparison?

[BrianSmith]

Can't offer a comparison, but we LOVE our Rocna Vulcan! Recently spent 3 nights anchored in a cut in the Exumas, changing direction every 6 hours. Anchor never seemed to move - just spun around.

 

[ScottH]

I appreciate your input. We had a Rocna 20 on our sailboat which was terrific, but it won't fit on our new 1986 trawler. Glad to know the Vulcans work equally well.

 

[ScottH]

Thanks for your input on Vulcans vs Rocnas

Just want to thank all of you for taking the time to give me your thoughts on how the Vulcans compare to the Rocnas. Had a traditional Rocna on our sailboat which we loved. But the roll bar won't fit our new (to us) Mainship 40. Your input about the Vulcans makes me feel a whole lot better about making the switch.

 

[AKDoug]

Yes but you probably could do exactly the same thing w one of a dozen well selected other anchors.

SteveD noted the Rocna "could" fail to reset after a 180 degree current change, so I was stating my experience with my anchor over the past six years. I anchor multiple times daily, current change every six hours, significant tides up here, no issues.

Not an anchor test, just a statement of my experience with that particular anchor over a statistically relevant period of time...

 

[jrhodes777]

We have a 76# Spade which is very similar to the Rocna Vulcan. First time I used it I thought it would tear my pulpit off. We chose the Spade over the Vulcan because its shank fits our pulpit and it uses a lead filled keel helping it set.

 

[Rebel112r]

Replaced my Lewmar with a Vulcan. Both in the 70# range. 10 weeks on boat, anchored 60% of time, this summer. Vulcan has performed great. Sets very quickly, and brings up loads of bottom, usually have to drive boat over it to break loose. Backing down to set, I take it very slowly, it will bring the boat to a halt in short order. I have used both Danforth and CQR on a sailboat. Bruce and CQR copies on 2 other power boats. I like the Vulcan better then the others I have used. It also fits the pulpit better than the Lewmar did. Also twice as costly as the Lewmar.

 

[garychurch]

There is no perfect anchor that will hold under all situations and circumstances. The latest designs, be it spade, Rochna, Vulcan, etc., all do a very good job compared to older anchor designs such as a CQR.

I use a 121 pound Vulcan as my primary anchor (carry a Fortress as well as an inherited CQR). We held firmly during a 50 kt blow south of Jekyll island in the mud of the ICW. On the other hand, we didn’t do so well in off one of the Bahama Islands with a layer of sand over limestone.

Conclusion is regardless of anchor know to the best of your ability the bottom and if uncertain or a major wind or current shift keep a close anchor watch.

Good luck.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Lot’s of different anchors. Many that haven’t even been born yet. Like my modified Claw.

I’ve been trying my modded Claw. Yup it scoops up LOTs of mud. But it actually works too. Hooks up quickly (not instantly) makes the rode really tight and is dificult to break out. A number of positive things to be happy about. Need to use it in other places and drill many holes for the mud problem.

 

[Corky Row]

No comment but thanks for asking the question. I am in the early stages of anchor selection and had same question.

 

[Sailor of Fortune]

Used a 40 kg Rocna Vulcan for two 6 month trips from Anacortes to Glacier Bay & back--no problems.
I would buy it again


Look at the shank, it has a taper--make sure it will be compatible with any constriction you might have on your roller-pulpit.

Your my new hero! 40 K Rocna for a 24' boat? Even Eric must admire you! Whats are you using for hauling it up?

 

[Rebel112r]

I think his boat was 52 feet.

 

[Biggusstickus]

I have the Vulcan and even did a bit of a test on it. Had it 2 more years since the test now and it has not failed me once. Great anchor.

https://youtu.be/7JuxlMUAenQ

 

[ranger58sb]

Need to use it in other places and drill many holes for the mud problem.

If the "mud problem" is about holding in slime... I'd think drilling holes would be going the wrong direction.

???

If the "mud problem" is about bringing lots of it to the surface as you weigh anchor... I don't think that kind of mud will pass through holes that would likely be too small. That kind of mud here mostly comes up in clumps, often slides off the fluke as a whole piece...

-Chris

 

[Nomad Willy]

Ranger my friend,
The holes are not for mud.
They provide a path for water to pass through the shank and cover the surface so mud dosn’t get a grip and stick. If it does more mud will stick to that until the anchor can’t be seen for all the mud. And the new shape of the anchor resists very little so it drags easily and breaks out. Eventially no holding power at all.

I think there is more water on the backside of the fluke than the face. Water comming through the holes should lubricate the upper working surface so the mud (ect) should slide along and not stick to the fluke. That’s the real reason for the holes/slots. IMO

The above is just my thinking on the matter. I once thought the slots on the Super Sarca would act like holes in the wing of an aircraft and one would loose lots of lift. Kinda like a sieve. So I thought holding power of an anchor would go south. But now I think anchor flukes are not acting primarily on pressure differentials like ac wings. They rely on the weight of the mass of the bottom strata on top of the fluke. This is not all there is to it but just what I think of the essence of the matter now.

Love ideas. What’s yours?

 

[ranger58sb]

Ranger my friend,
The holes are not for mud.
They provide a path for water to pass through the shank and cover the surface so mud dosn’t get a grip and stick.

Love ideas. What’s yours?

Ah. Got it. Could work.

'Fraid I'm not all that much of an idea guy, when it comes to anchors. I've read boatloads of reviews, sometimes by folks who have even anchored once or twice -- so I mostly just tried to select a) something that will fit our pulpit/roller/windlass system, that b) gets consistently good reviews for the kind of bottoms we deal with. Happens that landed us on SuperMAX as our current primary, and Fortress as our first back-up. Apparently with great results, so far, knock wood... with anchor watch set...

But I've seen decent reviews for Rocna and Vulcan, Mantus, Mansons, Sarcas, Ultra, Spade... (some of which are newer than when I was making our original purchase decisions)... and I'd guess some of those would likely hold well in various substrate too.

How's that for waffle?



-Chris

 

[Bigsfish]

I’m convinced the new generation of anchors are so much superior to what we had twenty years ago any of them would be impressive. With that as my premise I will say of the six or so new generation anchors there probably isn’t ten percent difference across the various types of bottoms as an average. Buy one, add the proper rode and learn how to anchor, you’ll be happy.

Just my SSO.

 

[BandB]

I’m convinced the new generation of anchors are so much superior to what we had twenty years ago any of them would be impressive. With that as my premise I will say of the six or so new generation anchors there probably isn’t ten percent difference across the various types of bottoms as an average. Buy one, add the proper rode and learn how to anchor, you’ll be happy.

Just my SSO.

I've gone with the anchor as recommended and supplied by each boat builder and, fortunately, to this point, never had a problem. All good anchors. I can't say if any of them are the best or not.

 

[Bigsfish]

BandB

Your also an experienced boater which has is a plus.

 

[dhays]

I've gone with the anchor as recommended and supplied by each boat builder and, fortunately, to this point, never had a problem. All good anchors. I can't say if any of them are the best or not.

That makes sense but.... My Catalina 400 had a CQR on it that I believe was supplied by Catalina. The PO never really anchored much and the CQR always held for me, but often it took several attempts to get it to set. My North Pacific 43 had a CQR copy supplied by the builder. The PO used it but I don’t know how much. I do question his seamanship and experience, but the only time the boat ended up on the rocks was when he was at the helm, not asleep in his cabin.

In both cases I don’t think the builder gave it a lot of thought other than supply an anchor that was reasonable in cost and wouldn’t raise too many eyebrows among their target audience.

I wasn’t really pleased with the CQR on my 40’ sailboat and so was not at all sanguine about the same size CQR copy on my 43’ trawler. I quickly swapped it out for a modern design and slightly larger anchor. (BTW, I have a perfectly good CQR copy in my garage that is free to a good home.)

In general I agree with Bigsfish, I think the modern designs are all good general anchors that the differences in performance between are probably marginal.

 

[BandB]

That makes sense but.... My Catalina 400 had a CQR on it that I believe was supplied by Catalina. The PO never really anchored much and the CQR always held for me, but often it took several attempts to get it to set. My North Pacific 43 had a CQR copy supplied by the builder. The PO used it but I don’t know how much. I do question his seamanship and experience, but the only time the boat ended up on the rocks was when he was at the helm, not asleep in his cabin.

In both cases I don’t think the builder gave it a lot of thought other than supply an anchor that was reasonable in cost and wouldn’t raise too many eyebrows among their target audience.

.

We had those conversations with the builders and always made sure we were specked on the conservative side, to be sure. No, going light to save a builder money.

 

[motion30]

Ranger,
Yes but that was an extreme mud test. Too specialized to tell if the anchors were good all-around anchors.

Motion,
The aluminum Spades don’t match the performance of the steel anchor. But most likely he snagged some debris. The real difference in holding power would probably go to the Spade but not to a degree that would promote a person to buy one or the other.

Fish,
You’d trust opinions over numerous experts in the field doing their best to limit the many variables? Mine included. You should read the anchor tests and then judge where the objectivity lies.

The big cat with the spade is a full-time live aboard he's had the anchor in and out of the water multiple times so I don't think snagging anything is the issue. But I do know several times when the storm picked up he started the motor to take the load off the anchor. That is how little faith he has in his gear.

 

[ranger58sb]

In both cases I don’t think the builder gave it a lot of thought other than supply an anchor that was reasonable in cost and wouldn’t raise too many eyebrows among their target audience.

Yeah, I think that's quite common. And happens especially with off-the-shelf boats (so to speak) that aren't usually spec'd by the actual buyer.

Ours came with an under-sized Delta, I expect because it was easily sourced, easily mounted, inexpensive, builder had no expectation that people would actually try to seriously anchor boats like ours, etc.

An appropriately-sized Delta might not even have been a bad choice, in the grand scheme of things...

-Chris

 

[Delfin]

Not sure I would always take the boat builders recommendations for anchors as appropriate. Cutwater boats are very popular up here in the PNW. They sell them as "ready to cruise" and offer a knock off Bruce anchor that from a small distance appears to have come off a charm bracelet they are so tiny. For their 5 ton 30' with enough windage to sail to Hawaii they provide a 22# hook.

C-30 CB

Even Fleming undersizes the Ultra they provide on their 58 by around 30%, at least according to Ultra.

 

[freshalaska]

In my reading it seems like a lot of people have confidence in their anchor.
To me this just means they have gotten away without dragging. Have they ever put the anchor to a real hard blow? I think mostly not.
Guess I’m pretty conservative when it comes to anchoring as we do it so much and I really don’t want to end up on the beach, rocks.
I see people drop the hook and don’t even back down on the anchor or only just give a short burst of reverse or use very little scope.
I try and anchor with the worst case scenario in mind or close to it.
On our Alaska sailboat 40 feet we have a 72 pound Rocna with 5/16 chain and set to a 5 to 1 scope in 60 feet of water and had the anchor drag a number of times on setting in reverse. What works in a 40 knot wind is a whole different kettle of fish in 60 knots. Here in Alaska we get willawas over 100 miles an hour, usually in the winter and in mountain terrain.
I hear people talk about the anchor reset after a tide shift in direction. A two knot current probably wasn’t even enough to reset the anchor, it’s still points the way it was originally set.
I like to sleep good at anchor and not be so worried when the wind picks up.
If your windlass and bow roller can take it get a heavy anchor. No such thing as too much.
Anyway that how I look at it.

 

[ghost]

Okay, so I wouldn’t mind trading in my antiquated CQR for a new fangled model. But as a full time data scientist I have to observe that what was once considered one of the reliable cruising anchors, you would think they suddenly just stopped working one day. I also note that everyone replaces their old anchor with a significantly larger new style. So are we measuring “new” or just bigger anchors?

All of the anchor tests are ridiculous, heavily skewed for either bottom conditions or pulling in one direction, or lacking both independence and candor. I also try to glean what I can, but an a/b test, this is not.

Anyhoo, my Victron inverter/charger just shat the bed last week unexpectedly. $$. There will be no new anchor this season. I hope my terrible CQR doesn’t get wind of the news that it supposedly never really worked for the past ten years. I might have to wrap it in tin foil so people can’t see what’s on my bow for the rest of the season.

 

[Carl Martin]

Okay, so I wouldn’t mind trading in my antiquated CQR for a new fangled model. But as a full time data scientist I have to observe that what was once considered one of the reliable cruising anchors, you would think they suddenly just stopped working one day. I also note that everyone replaces their old anchor with a significantly larger new style. So are we measuring “new” or just bigger anchors?

All of the anchor tests are ridiculous, heavily skewed for either bottom conditions or pulling in one direction, or lacking both independence and candor. I also try to glean what I can, but an a/b test, this is not.

Anyhoo, my Victron inverter/charger just shat the bed last week unexpectedly. $$. There will be no new anchor this season. I hope my terrible CQR doesn’t get wind of the news that it supposedly never really worked for the past ten years. I might have to wrap it in tin foil so people can’t see what’s on my bow for the rest of the season.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Ghost,
Great post but you’re being too hard on tests. But to your point many are in that category. Most here can pick out the objective (or mostly objective) tests. All have some degree of bias but as I’ve said tests are the best source of information. All the anchors are submitted to the same test. But even the test itself can be the bias.
What I would say to someone that had a CQR and didn’t like it to look on CL and find an excellent old forged Danforth. The Dan is real performance for the low buck. I used mine last night and as always it worked perfect. Had a 180 reversal and some wind too.

 

[Rebel112r]

Wasn’t the original poster, asking for a comparison of the Rocha models?

 

[psneeld]

Modern medicine in the late 1800s seemed pretty good at the time.....


In many ways it has gotten more expensive...kinda like anchors.

That's what research and lawsuits bring....

 

[Peter B]

Modern medicine in the late 1800s seemed pretty good at the time.....


In many ways it has gotten more expensive...kinda like anchors.

That's what research and lawsuits bring....

Ain't that the truth..?