Secondary Anchor

Traumagas · Jan 18, 2022

mantus m 2 bolts together hence stores easy for that day you need it

j

JRO · Jan 18, 2022

In the Bahamas I found that many sand areas are pan hard. I would jump in, break the sand to set the anchor then back down on it. I’d only do that if I was in tight with shore or other boats. If there was plenty of room I’d just drop 200’ of chain and let the total weight keep me in a general area.

Peter B · Jan 18, 2022

cardude01 said:
Interesting that the Rocna performed so poorly in this test. I have a 55 lb Rocna and it’s never failed to stick and hold, except for one 40 knot blow in the Bahamas where I had trouble getting it to stick in some sand. Maybe it doesn’t like sand.

I watched that new video of Steve's right through. I was intrigued as to how it all panned out, but when you really analyse it all, thinking of the real time use we put anchors to, the stand out feature that most folk want and like is that the newer anchors set so much more quickly, reliably, and effectively than some of the older ones like the CQR.

The series of sets then shows that once set, the CQR performed quite well. It was getting the CQR, or even worse, the knock-offs of it, to set that drove us mad, and set us off on the search for a better anchor, right..?

Then there was the somewhat surprising finding that several of the most popular anchors appeared to not do that well, yet as Cardude says, his Rocna appears to perform extremely well, but did not in Steve's drag test.
Yet Steve Dashew swore by his large Rocna for the much renowned Windhorse.

The stand-out for me was the concave anchors, set well, and hold quite well, unless they are subjected to foces that cause a slow drag. That is when the concave fluke tends to fill with mud, and this tends to prevent re-setting, so eventually they pop out. I suggest most folk do their best to avoid anchoring when and where they might be faced with such conditions, so their anchor is not faced with this situation. If it has never failed, it never fails, right..? Being the flip-side to the saying that an anchor never fails...until it does..!

Conversely, the ones that tend to perform the best in the more extreme conditions are those with convex flukes, eg the Sarca Excel, Delta, and some others, or those with very a shallow concavity in the fluke, like the Viking, Mantus 2, and Rocna Vulcan, that then are able to keep moving slowly through the substrate, but their fluke does not fill up with gunk, so they don't tend to pop out, or if they do, they shed the gunk, and re-set. Again, as most avoid the extremes likely to expose these differences, it explains why most are satisfied with their anchor.

All in all though, an excellent test series, and allowing for the bottom conditions, gives a quite good comparison among the range, with some rather unexpected outcomes.

FF · Jan 18, 2022

IF one is going to use a single anchor as the "all purpose" anchor its fine if its oversized.

I try to size to the windlass lifting ability , if it can easily handle the weight , anchoring big IS better.

mbdana · Jan 18, 2022

Primary Anchor/Fuel Tank lining

Hi Blarg21, many great responses for which would be a great primary anchor. I won't belabor this topic except to say We have a Rocna for our 36' and has held steady through thick and thin. Funny I recently saw a different video test of anchors that showed the Rocnar perform well....burying itself well below the mud surface.

I don't want to hijack this thread, but noticed in your first couple of sentences that you mentioned you had your fuel tank lined....I have steel tanks that are in good shape but who knows....is lining a good alternative to tank replacement? I'm all ears! Who does fuel tank lining? What is it?

Thanks very much.
Best
Mike Dana
Third Reef
36'Grand Banks Classic
Potts Harbor Maine

cardude01 · Jan 18, 2022

Peter B said:
I watched that new video of Steve's right through. I was intrigued as to how it all panned out, but when you really analyse it all, thinking of the real time use we put anchors to, the stand out feature that most folk want and like is that the newer anchors set so much more quickly, reliably, and effectively than some of the older ones like the CQR.

The series of sets then shows that once set, the CQR performed quite well. It was getting the CQR, or even worse, the knock-offs of it, to set that drove us mad, and set us off on the search for a better anchor, right..?

Then there was the somewhat surprising finding that several of the most popular anchors appeared to not do that well, yet as Cardude says, his Rocna appears to perform extremely well, but did not in Steve's drag test.

Yet Steve Dashew swore by his large Rocna for the much renowned Windhorse.

The stand-out for me was the concave anchors, set well, and hold quite well, unless they are subjected to foces that cause a slow drag. That is when the concave fluke tends to fill with mud, and this tends to prevent re-setting, so eventually they pop out. I suggest most folk do their best to avoid anchoring when and where they might be faced with such conditions, so their anchor is not faced with this situation. If it has never failed, it never fails, right..? Being the flip-side to the saying that an anchor never fails...until it does..!

Conversely, the ones that tend to perform the best in the more extreme conditions are those with convex flukes, eg the Sarca Excel, Delta, and some others, or those with very a shallow concavity in the fluke, like the Viking, Mantus 2, and Rocna Vulcan, that then are able to keep moving slowly through the substrate, but their fluke does not fill up with gunk, so they don't tend to pop out, or if they do, they shed the gunk, and re-set. Again, as most avoid the extremes likely to expose these differences, it explains why most are satisfied with their anchor.

All in all though, an excellent test series, and allowing for the bottom conditions, gives a quite good comparison among the range, with some rather unexpected outcomes.

The reason I ditched my old CQR for my 55 Lb Rocna is I had trouble getting the CQR to set quickly (or at all). It sets so hard and fast I rarely back down on it in fact.

I also have a Fortress FX-37 I can deploy if I’m really worried, but I rarely use it.

Peter B · Jan 18, 2022

Exactly, Cardude, and that was my experience as well with a Knock-off CQR type. I sometimes tried so many times to get a secure set I gave up and moved on. The Super-Sarca I then bought, on the strength of a revealing video at a boat show a short time later, was a Godsend, as it always set quickly, and never let me down. However, it was not right up there in Steve's vids. Yet the Sarca Excel was one of the best. They had not been developed when I bought the S-Sarca

I suspect the downfall of the CQR type because of its poor setting, is due to the hinged shank, which must have seemed a good idea at some time - presumably to cater for tidal swings better. However, so often that is its Achilles heel..! Because if the tip does not engage quickly to engage the fluke properly, it then just bounces along on its side, with the hinge then preventing any chance of the tip re-engaging. What I would love to see is how a typical CQR performs with the hinge welded solid..? It might then be a great anchor. Calling Nomad Willy, Eric..?

ranger58sb · Jan 19, 2022

Peter B said:
The Super-Sarca I then bought, on the strength of a revealing video at a boat show a short time later, was a Godsend, as it always set quickly, and never let me down. However, it was not right up there in Steve's vids. Yet the Sarca Excel was one of the best. They had not been developed when I bought the S-Sarca

Didn't realize the Excel came along after the Super SARCA...

-Chris

Secondary Anchor

Traumagas

Member

JRO

Veteran Member

Peter B

Guru

FF

Guru

mbdana

Veteran Member

cardude01

Guru

Peter B

Guru

ranger58sb

Guru

Similar threads

Latest posts