Thank you Soio Valley'
But here is the nearly full article W/O the advertisement. At least most all of it. The pics I can't seem to copy and paste and there is some picture comments missing.
• In the December 1999 issue, on which of 17 anchors set and hold best in mud. Tops for setting was the Delta with six anchors tied for second; for holding power, the rank was the Bar- nacle, CQR and Bulwagga.
At the end of those three test sessions, the sand/mud holding power was combined and the top three anchors were the Spade, Bulwagga and CQR.
Because considerable information about how anchors behave is includ- ed in the above, it is our opinion that all of these reports, plus this new one, should be read before selecting an anchor.
Consider, for instance, this find- ing. While setting anchors with an electric winch and measuring the load on a dynamometer, it was noted that even moderate readings on the dyna- mometer immediately started down when the hauling ceased. This indi- cates clearly that the anchor is moving...minutely, of course, but if
Above: Practical Sailor’s editor, Dan Spurr, wearing waders, indicates with his right hand the distance traveled by the Spade anchor when the rode lead was changed. In his left hand is a fiberglass stick used to mark the original position. The Spade anchor, which has a yellow face, appears to be out of the water, but is submerged. The anchor and the two rodes indicate how easy it was to closely observe the anchors.
subjected to some tugging in a roily harbor, the minute creeping can be- come what is called dragging.
For even more complete coverage of this important subject, other re- ports have been published on anchor rode loads; swivel shackles; chain tests; rope/chain splices; sentinels; bow rollers; tests of many makes of rope anchor rodes, and a two-part report on anchor windlasses.
Makes Now Involved
Practical Sailor started out several summers ago with 11 anchors. That
W hen a sailor hooks his beloved boat to good, old Mother Earth, he hopes his anchor will stay put—for lunch, for a good night’s sleep, to ride out a storm or to keep the boat safe while
unattended.
If done well, the anchor system
should give him the cherished peace- of-mind.
However, there’s one threat that nags at him, especially when he’s not aboard.
It occurs when the wind or current sharply changes direction, a not un- common phenomenon. That means that the well-set anchor must some- how re-align itself to the new head- ing. Two questions present them- selves:
1. Does the anchor, without losing much of its grip, simply swivel in the mud or sand and steady up?
2. Or does the anchor pull free, flip- ping on its back or roll up on edge, and then re-set itself?
Seeking answers to these questions produced some dramatic results for this latest report in Practical Sailor’s continuing series on the in-the-water performance of about two dozens makes and types of anchors. Rather than one big test aimed at finding the perfect, all-purpose anchor, Practical Sailor has approached this subject carefully. Three years of work thus far has produced these published reports:
• In the February 1, 1998 issue, on which of 11 different anchors set best in sand. The top three, in order, were the Bulwagga, Spade and Bruce.
• In the January 1, 1999 issue, on
which of 15 had the best holding power in sand. Top-ranked were the Spade, Bulwagga and CQR.
• In the December 1999 issue, on which of 17 anchors set and hold best in mud. Tops for setting was the Delta with six anchors tied for second; for holding power, the rank was the Bar- nacle, CQR and Bulwagga.
At the end of those three test sessions, the sand/mud holding power was combined and the top three anchors were the Spade, Bulwagga and CQR.
Because considerable information about how anchors behave is includ- ed in the above, it is our opinion that all of these reports, plus this new one, should be read before selecting an anchor.
Consider, for instance, this find- ing. While setting anchors with an electric winch and measuring the load on a dynamometer, it was noted that even moderate readings on the dyna- mometer immediately started down when the hauling ceased. This indi- cates clearly that the anchor is moving...minutely, of course, but if
Above: Practical Sailor’s editor, Dan Spurr, wearing waders, indicates with his right hand the distance traveled by the Spade anchor when the rode lead was changed. In his left hand is a fiberglass stick used to mark the original position. The Spade anchor, which has a yellow face, appears to be out of the water, but is submerged. The anchor and the two rodes indicate how easy it was to closely observe the anchors.
subjected to some tugging in a roily harbor, the minute creeping can be- come what is called dragging.
For even more complete coverage of this important subject, other re- ports have been published on anchor rode loads; swivel shackles; chain tests; rope/chain splices; sentinels; bow rollers; tests of many makes of rope anchor rodes, and a two-part report on anchor windlasses.
Makes Now Involved
Practical Sailor started out several summers ago with 11 anchors. That......
Page 2.
Above: Left to right, the Danforth, Fortress, Nautical Engineering, Vetus and West Marine Performance2 are remarkably similar in appearance and performance, except for the NE, which has too short a stock.
number did not remain constant over the ensuing tests.
An industrialist who sails had his engineering staff design the “perfect” anchor. He submitted the stainless steel prototype for testing. It was with- drawn, unnamed, after the first round. Although said to be undergoing mod- ifications, it was not heard from again.
An anchor that simply would not set, even in sand, was dropped from subsequent tests, as was a box-like folding anchor really meant for a small boat.
Two other anchors, which were attempts to improve on established designs, proved not as good and were retrieved by their inventors–one a co- owner of one of the world’s most successful anchor manufacturers, the other a dedicated individual.
Meanwhile, other new or lesser-
known anchors were submitted by their creators, including three that strongly challenge established favor- ites. The three are the Barnacle, the Bulwagga and the Spade.
One truth emerges: Be assured that as you read this there are some very ingenious, recusant individuals work- ing diligently to produce an anchor that “does it all.” And it may happen, much to the benefit of all sailors.
In fact, for this phase of the testing, PS has three new anchors, which means that, as before, prior tests in sand and mud must be duplicated to obtain comparable data. The three new anchors are the Herreshoff Bronze, the Hydro-Dyne and the Sea- grip.
In all cases, the size of anchor selected for the tests was determined by asking each manufacturer for the anchor they recommend for a 30'-32' boat anchored in up to 42 knots of wind in sheltered water. (For test purposes, an anchor is considered set when it withstands a 200-lb. load; an anchor meets the above criteria when it withstands a 400-lb. load.)
The 18 anchors in this round of the tests are the 25-lb. Barnacle, the 22-lb.
Left: The Barnacle, shown at the left, is an unusual one-fluke anchor that stows flat. At the right is the Bulwagga anchor that challenges the Spade in every category. The Bulwagga’s only shortcoming: It’s clumsy to handle and difficult to stow.
Above: Shown here are several ‘old reliables’ plus the French-made Spade. From left to right are the CQR, Delta, Spade and two versions of the Supermax, one with a fixed shank, the other adjustable for different type bottoms.
Bruce, the 17-lb. Bulwagga, the 22-lb. Claw, the 35-lb. CQR, the 20-lb. Dan- forth Deepset II, the 22-lb. Delta, the 10-lb. Fortress FX-16, the 15-lb. Hans C-Anchor, the 17-lb. Herreshoff Bronze, the 10-lb. Hydro-Dyne, the 20-lb. Nautical Engineering, the 33- lb. Seagrip, the 26-lb. Supermax Ad- justable, the 26-lb. Supermax, the 16.5- lb. Spade, the 12-lb. Vetus and the 25- lb. West Marine Performance2.
(Practical Sailor has tried unsuc- cessfully to obtain for testing a Ger- man anchor called a Bugel, about which several readers have inquired.)
The 18 anchors in hand defy cate- gorization by type, but an attempt is made in the photos to group the light- weight, twin-fluke types, those re- sembling a plow and those that fit neither category. The three new an- chors—the Herreshoff Bronze, the Hydro-Dyne and the Seagrip—are shown in separate photos.
The Test Procedure
Practical Sailor’s anchor tests are con- ducted in shallow water. Working from boats in deep water was rejected because of numerous difficulties clear- ly evident in the vague results ob- tained in many other anchor tests.
Working in shallow water facili- tates very precise control of the all- important scope, but even more im- portantly permits careful observation by a test team member in the water of exactly what each anchor does. The hauling and measuring equipment is ......
Pahe 3.
securely mounted ashore—on sea- walls, docks or other solid bases.
The objective in this test was first to set each anchor in sand. (Previous experimentation has indicated that an anchor can be considered set when resistance reaches 200 lbs.) The rode then was relaxed.
A load then was applied to a sec- ond rode led back about 140° to 150° off the original rode’s line. The scope was held between 7:1 and 6:1.
Pulling at 90° was rejected as too likely to roll the anchors sideways. Leading back at exactly 180° also was discarded as too likely to induce the anchors to do a back flip. Most prone to doing a back flip are the twin-point lightweight anchors because of their inherently balanced distribution of weight.
As it turned out, experimenting with different angles revealed no sur- prises. Neither did laying an anchor
with an unbal- anced or hinged shank (like the Barnacle and CQR) on one edge or the oth- er. And several
experiments with the lightweight an- chors produced the back flipping men- tioned above. (See photo on page 8)
As a load was applied to the sec- ond rode, the observer in the water noted carefully how each anchor went about realigning itself by either swiv- eling, rolling or flopping on its back. Of particular interest was whether the anchor broke out completely or re- tained some or all of its grip while rotating horizontally in the sand. Then, after the anchor, whether re-set or simply twisted to the new direc- tion, withstood the 200-lb. test, the distance from the “old set” to the “new set” was measured.
The rodes were a 250' continuous piece of 1/2" Samson Super Strong
Page 4.5 1' 6"
Name
Barnacle 1'6"
Bruce 4"
Bulwagga 2'
Claw 2'
CQR 9'
Danforth Deepset II 1'
Delta 5'
Fortress FX-16 6"
Hans C-Anchor no set
Herrreshoff Bronze 3'
Hydro-Dyne no set
Nautical Engineering 14'
Seagrip 7'
Supermax (Adj. shank) 0'0"
Supermax 4'
Spade Model 80 0'0"
Vetus 8'
West Performance2 2'
What Happened
Swiveled in flat plane (tried on both sides)
Rotated horizontally, with little movement
Balanced on 2 flukes, fell over, took hold
Swiveled up and out, then reset
Rolled out on hinged arm, but dug back in
Did not break out flukes, stayed buried
Rolled on side, came loose and dug back in
Swiveled very flat, crown moved very little
Swiveled but then dragged
Rolled out, but stock forced other fluke in
Dragged on its side
Rolled, flopped, short stock finally grabbed
Swiveled, pulled out and reset
Turned in horizontal plane, moved very little
Rolled out, flipped on back, dragged on side
Aligned to new pull with little movement
Rolled out, tripped on stock, flattened, reset
Rolled up 45°, pivoted on 1 fluke, flattened
How Far Moved Before Reset
nylon double braid, the hauling was done with a Harken 32 self-tailing winch, the blocks used were Lewmar and Schaefer ball-bearing models, and the load measurements were done with a calibrated Dillon dynamome- ter with a very handy “max” needle.
The Results
The sandy bottom appeared very reg- ular and the anchors were under con- stant visual observation. Each anchor
was pulled at least once, more if any- thing unusual was observed, such as a long distance to reset.
When the 140° resets were com- pleted, we tried one lightweight an- chor at 180°. After resetting the West Marine Performance2, the rode was reversed to 180°. When the load was applied, the anchor backed straight out of the sand until, when about half out, the shank lifted up and over and, as one would expect, the anchor
flipped on its back. It refused, however, to re- set, even when pulled a consid- erable distance.
It then was noted that the flukes were not pointed down. When lifted from the water, the observer found a clam stuck in the angle between a fluke and the shank! Though unlikely, this is a possible scenario for any lightweight- type anchor. Not only shellfish can cause the flukes to jam, but also a piece of wood, rock, etc.
Once again we were reminded that seemingly minute variations in the bottom can produce magnified differ- ences in how an anchor sets. There- fore, the chart data showing how far each anchor was pulled before setting and satisfying the 200-lb. pull require- ment, should not be regarded as a precise number that will be true in all situations.
Instead of ranking the anchors, Practical Sailor placed them in four groups. The groups, from the poorest to the best, are those that broke free and failed to reset, those that reset in 3' or more, those that reset in 6" to 3' and, finally, those that moved less than 6" while swiveling into the new position.
The anchors that broke free and did not reset, but merely skipped or slid along the sandy ocean bottom, were the Hans C-Anchor and the Hy- dro-Dyne.
The remainder of the anchors, in the other three groups, either did not break out or did reset themselves.
The group that broke out and dragged 3 or more feet before resetting
Page 4+
and holding 200 lbs. included the CQR, the Delta, the Nautical Engi- neering, the Seagrip, the Supermax and the Vetus.
Better test results—meaning that the anchors either didn’t break out completely or that they reset them- selves very quickly in between 6" and 3'—were the Barnacle, the Claw, the Bulwagga, the Danforth Deepset, the Herreshoff Bronze and the West Ma- rine Performance2.
In the best test group, those that did not break out and moved very little (from not measurable to no more than 6"), were the Bruce, the Fortress FX-16, the Supermax (with the ad-
justable shank) and the Spade.
The behavior of each anchor is noted in the comments column of the chart on page 7.
Would the same re- sults prevail in mud or a gravel bottom? The an- swers must await other rounds of this continuing series of tests.
The Bottom Line Although minute differ- ences might not seem important when consider- ing an anchor’s ability to with- stand a pull in a new direction, those that did not break out surely are pref- erable to those
that broke out, moved some distance and re-set. An anchor that must reset itself represents a danger—partly be- cause the bottom might change, de- bris can be picked or the rode can foul the anchor.
The Herreshoff Bronze was a sur- prise. This very handsome new ver- sion of a very traditional anchor set quickly, in 2', and broke out and reset itself in 3'. In sand, its weak point is holding. It dragged at 300 lbs., 100 lbs. short of the 400-lb. requirement. It essentially is a rock anchor.
The best lightweight anchor was the Fortress, which simply swiveled
Left: On the 180° reverse set with the West Performance2, the anchor backed halfway out, flipped on its back and refused to reset. When plucked from the water, a clam was found neatly wedged between the flukes and the shank.This can be a problem with any lightweight anchor.
in a horizontal plane around the shank and took up its new alignment. In the setting and holding tests, the Fortress ranked near the middle.
The performance of the Bruce was no surprise, considering it ranked near the top for setting (in either sand or mud). Because of its mediocre hold- ing power, Practical Sailor recom- mends that if a Bruce is selected, a larger size should be in order. The same is true of the Supermax.
The Bulwagga and the Spade per- formed in a manner that did nothing but enhance the showings they made in the sand/mud setting and holding phases of the PS tests. ■
