For Those With Bruce Anchors
- Thread starter menzies
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
sunchaser
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2008
- Messages
- 10,194
- Location
- usa
- Vessel Name
- sunchaser V
- Vessel Make
- DeFever 48 (sold)
Simple, use 5:1 scope and you'll be fine. I anchored in all sorts of places with a right size Bruce and my drags were always on shorter scopes. The Bruce was replaced with a bigger Vulcan which has proven to be a real short scope workhorse. What is your primary anchor?
Further, I have never found a need for a backup anchor. Mine is a Fortress 55. Put a coat of Galvinizing on your Bruce and it will look good (unused too) forever!
Further, I have never found a need for a backup anchor. Mine is a Fortress 55. Put a coat of Galvinizing on your Bruce and it will look good (unused too) forever!
Last edited:
OP
OP
menzies
Guru
75# CQR plow.
Old deckhand
Guru
I have used a 33 and 66 Bruse with all chain. Both found the infamous Bruce rock and failed to hold even in almost calm conditions. Congrats on a great video!
Doing it "retro" (old school).
Ted
Possibly too small an anchor? HOPCAR could have the right size anchor to you before you depart. May I suggest a Vulcan?
We've cruised 5 seasons in the Bahamas from Mayaguana to the Abacos. We had a cqr that worked well in grass where the Bruce didn't. We now have a Rocna that works better than the cqr in more varied conditions. 75lb anchor for a 53' boat, I'd upsize.
FF
Guru
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2007
- Messages
- 22,552
IF you don't have a real Danforth
a Bruce works almost as well, and is frequently easier to get on the bow roller.
a Bruce works almost as well, and is frequently easier to get on the bow roller.
sunchaser
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2008
- Messages
- 10,194
- Location
- usa
- Vessel Name
- sunchaser V
- Vessel Make
- DeFever 48 (sold)
Menzies
You most likely will do just fine with what you have. Raising the bash the Bruce specter is enticing though for those of us that have successfully anchored time and again with a right sized Bruce on decent scope.
Check out the other anchor thread about dragging a 45# Manson and now the owner is wondering why he removed a perfectly good larger Delta.
So long as submergible Go Pros exist any anchor can have its day in short scope court.
You most likely will do just fine with what you have. Raising the bash the Bruce specter is enticing though for those of us that have successfully anchored time and again with a right sized Bruce on decent scope.
Check out the other anchor thread about dragging a 45# Manson and now the owner is wondering why he removed a perfectly good larger Delta.
So long as submergible Go Pros exist any anchor can have its day in short scope court.
OP
OP
menzies
Guru
Oh, I have no concerns at all regarding the tackle I have.
Just thought some would find the video interesting. And was wondering what was proven by it, to me nothing much at all.
Any anchor will lift with too short a scope, and who is to say what will hold with an engine going 3000 RPM in reverse!
Last edited by a moderator:
Nomad Willy
Guru
I'll tackle the original question.
There's two parts of the test. 1. The short scope capability 2. The 3 knot tidal reversal. Or Veering test to the extreme.
1. Short scope performance is probably little known here as most are afraid to do it. The significance of Steve's test is that it's clear that the Bruce and a number of other anchors do have remarkable short scope performance. I have anchored from 2-1 to 3-1 in many anchorages in Alaska and when I speak of it here many are usually horrified that I would even try such a "stunt" and say that they would'nt anchor ever at less than 7-1.
One of the great things foruns do is expand our knowledge, opinions and come much closser tp knowing what others are doing. The Bruce has had a good rep for short scope for 40 years. But seeing it in action beats dock talk big time. Thank you Steve.
2. Steve's reversal test dos'nt show us much about what we may come up against as this violent of a reversal is very unlikely to happen. Gentle reversals are far far more likely to happen. That said the test shows some anchors can cope w it. That in itself is amazing. But the apparent causes give much opportunity for analysis. The Danforths dragged on their side! Something I would have thought impossible and points out the very important role the stock plays in the Danforth type anchor. The Supreme readily clogged w "salad" and that just about eliminated it's effectiveness.
So I think a great deal was learned and Steve showed us it was easy to uncover unknowns and show us there is always more to learn.
There's two parts of the test. 1. The short scope capability 2. The 3 knot tidal reversal. Or Veering test to the extreme.
1. Short scope performance is probably little known here as most are afraid to do it. The significance of Steve's test is that it's clear that the Bruce and a number of other anchors do have remarkable short scope performance. I have anchored from 2-1 to 3-1 in many anchorages in Alaska and when I speak of it here many are usually horrified that I would even try such a "stunt" and say that they would'nt anchor ever at less than 7-1.
One of the great things foruns do is expand our knowledge, opinions and come much closser tp knowing what others are doing. The Bruce has had a good rep for short scope for 40 years. But seeing it in action beats dock talk big time. Thank you Steve.
2. Steve's reversal test dos'nt show us much about what we may come up against as this violent of a reversal is very unlikely to happen. Gentle reversals are far far more likely to happen. That said the test shows some anchors can cope w it. That in itself is amazing. But the apparent causes give much opportunity for analysis. The Danforths dragged on their side! Something I would have thought impossible and points out the very important role the stock plays in the Danforth type anchor. The Supreme readily clogged w "salad" and that just about eliminated it's effectiveness.
So I think a great deal was learned and Steve showed us it was easy to uncover unknowns and show us there is always more to learn.
Ken E.
Guru
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2016
- Messages
- 1,974
- Location
- United States
- Vessel Name
- Hatt Trick
- Vessel Make
- 45' Hatteras Convertible
I'd like to hear what Nomad Willy and Eye Schulman might have to say on the video, being anchor gurus. Seems like bottom type is a big part of the equation in terms of scope required to stay put.
That was my point in post #9. The Bahamas, where Menzies is heading, all have their own set of challenges; sand, grass, thin layers of sand over hard pan, rocky areas plus you're usually anchoring in depths less than 15' . A 5-1 scope is not very much even adding for the height of your bow. We rarely put out less than 100' and 125' is more the norm. The bottoms aren't very sticky there.
Ken E.
Guru
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2016
- Messages
- 1,974
- Location
- United States
- Vessel Name
- Hatt Trick
- Vessel Make
- 45' Hatteras Convertible
That was my point in post #9. The Bahamas, where Menzies is heading, all have their own set of challenges; sand, grass, thin layers of sand over hard pan, rocky areas plus you're usually anchoring in depths less than 15' . A 5-1 scope is not very much even adding for the height of your bow. We rarely put out less than 100' and 125' is more the norm. The bottoms aren't very sticky there.
In the PNW and Alaska, and on mostly mud bottoms, it is rare that I'll use more than 3:1 scope with a 66 lb. Lewmar (Bruce knockoff), 3/8 all-chain rode. Maybe more if the wind comes up, but it would have to be blowing pretty hard to go to 5:1. I've always stayed put using this formula, 15 years in this Hatteras and with my earlier boats. On hard pan or rock though, more scope would certainly pay dividends.
Xsbank
Guru
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2013
- Messages
- 3,791
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Gwaii Haanas
- Vessel Make
- Custom Aluminum 52
Very timely this thread: I got very tired of plowing up my favourite anchorages, trying to get my old Delta to take a set so a friend got this for me, 30kg Trefoil (Italian Bruce clone) in 316 stainless. It's now the shiniest thing on my boat (the only shiny thing on my boat) and here it lurks, awaiting its first test.
This photo will look just right to our Aussie members, for the rest I apologize.
This photo will look just right to our Aussie members, for the rest I apologize.
Attachments
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,731
- Location
- California Delta
- Vessel Name
- FlyWright
- Vessel Make
- 1977 Marshall Californian 34 LRC
That was my point in post #9. The Bahamas, where Menzies is heading, all have their own set of challenges; sand, grass, thin layers of sand over hard pan, rocky areas plus you're usually anchoring in depths less than 15' . A 5-1 scope is not very much even adding for the height of your bow. We rarely put out less than 100' and 125' is more the norm. The bottoms aren't very sticky there.
OK, I have one of those dreaded Lewmar Claw Bruce knockoffs. Mine is only 33 lbs/15 kg on my 24000 Lb 34 LRC. Mine has served me well in the SF Bay and CA Delta where I operate but YMMV.
Great info in these 3 posts, IMO. The bottom matters...and in my area, depths less than 15 ft grow grass and weeds and I avoid anchoring in them except for the MOST protected coves. Fortunately we have LOTS of semi-sticky mud that to me seems just right. Just sticky enough to hold the anchor but it's relatively easy to wash off. Often, I don't even have to rinse it.
If you're not bare-handing the rode, why not put out lots? Aside from crowded conditions, I let it a lot hang out there...never less than 100 ft.
I frequently anchor near Alcatraz Island facing the Golden Gate for Fleet Week in San Francisco. It's typically 50 ft deep and the place is packed with boats of all kinds. Several times I have anchored there at 3:1 without a concern. The thing about crowds at events like this is that some know how to anchor and, as I found out, some don't. I was anchored in about 40 ft with 240 out - about a 5:1 scope. That's when a 65 ft Hatteras landed on my bow like a pickle on a fork. My anchor held me AND him in about 15K of wind on an opposite direction ebb flow.
Since then I have anchored overnight with my boat plus a rafted 40+ ft trawler (40 DeFever and 42 GB) on my single claw without dragging. I will admit to laying out 7:1 for raftups and other times when room allows. Why not run the windlass a few more seconds? It's not costing me anything.
In my area, on my boat and IMO, the claw is king. But then again, YMMV...
markpierce
Master and Commander
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2010
- Messages
- 12,557
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Carquinez Coot
- Vessel Make
- penultimate Seahorse Marine Coot hull #6
Al, my knock-off Bruce anchors have always secured on the first attempt and survived 2.5-knot 180-degree tidal changes several times a day in the San Francisco Bay/Delta/Estuary.
Northern Spy
Guru
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,075
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Northern Spy
- Vessel Make
- Nordic Tug 26
OP
OP
menzies
Guru
Well that just HAS to be the definitive answer.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2008
- Messages
- 13,731
- Location
- California Delta
- Vessel Name
- FlyWright
- Vessel Make
- 1977 Marshall Californian 34 LRC
Love it, NS! Is that the first we've seen this fine vessel?
I think the Bruce could have handled a MUCH bigger wreath!
Northern Spy
Guru
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,075
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Northern Spy
- Vessel Make
- Nordic Tug 26
There are pictures under my profile.
But you are right, no one pointed and laughed at the wreath, so I probably could go a size or two higher.
Northern Spy
Guru
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,075
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Northern Spy
- Vessel Make
- Nordic Tug 26
