New Anchor

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
18,745
Location
USA
Vessel Name
Willy
Vessel Make
Willard Nomad 30'
New to me anyway.

Knox Anchors

Super Sarca roll bar. Skinny like a Super Sarca.
Danforth fluke shape. Except slightly concave.
Claw shank shape. Plate material like a Rocna or Supreme .. but stronger it seems.
Ears like a Supreme or Rocna.

Extreme claims for performance. But I have a strong feeling it won’t be available at West Marine.

Have a look.
 
Last edited:
Read their story, they anchored in force 10 winds with their CQR and didn’t drag. So they decided to design a new anchor. Only a Brit could write that and expect others to believe it makes sense.
 
Last edited:
Read their story, they anchored in force 10 winds with their CQR and didn’t drag. So they decided to design a new anchor. Only a Brit could write that an expect others to believe it makes sense.
Slight oversimplification. They also had another anchor out and they kept the engine running. Odd motivation, nevertheless.
 
Don't think I will be a customer anytime soon as I love our Sarca Excel........:thumb::hide:
 
Just looking at it and applying what I may know about anchors compels me to buy one. Never (that I can recall) have I said that. It’s got lots of features that add up to great things. This could be the next plateau in anchor design. Probably due to high quality (strong) sheetmetal in a shape that benefits both strength and performance.
I e-mailed them asking where the Knox could be had it the US.
 
Just looking at it and applying what I may know about anchors compels me to buy one. Never (that I can recall) have I said that.

Well, slap my ass & call me Judy!!!

Think I'd better take a close look at this here Knox anchor!
 
To me, it looks exactly like a Manson Supreme or Rocna knock-off. Therefore hard to accept the performance figures being so much better. I'd beware the claims a bit, Eric. But no doubt it would work well, as the anchor types it emulates have already proven that. So...next question is price and availability, I guess.
 
Yeah! Another one competitor for the best anchor, let reopen the debate :)

L
 
2013 forum comment.

KnoxAnchor - has anyone any experience of using one?

To me it looks like the raided the sarca and danforth scrap bin and created an anchor with two blades causing weakness and prone to bending.

images
 
Last edited:
Just looking at it and applying what I may know about anchors compels me to buy one. Never (that I can recall) have I said that. It’s got lots of features that add up to great things. This could be the next plateau in anchor design. Probably due to high quality (strong) sheetmetal in a shape that benefits both strength and performance.
I e-mailed them asking where the Knox could be had it the US.

Has there ever been a new anchor you weren't compelled to try out? Anxious to hear your review. They should send you one free just for you to review it. Tell them you'll post your findings on Trawler Forum.
 
Just looking at it and applying what I may know about anchors compels me to buy one. Never (that I can recall) have I said that...
Good Grief!
But, I think I still like the original Sarca.
 
Simi,
Look closly at the way it uses the plate or sheetmetal to form triangles. The fluke is made of two pcs forming a triangle.
I was skeptical about the shank re side loads. But if it’s strong enough steel? Same kind of shank (plate) is used on many popular newer anchors and w the exception of Rocna’s use of mild steel all have performed well. Notice that they don’t make SS anchors saying SS is not strong enough.

One thing that does concern me is balance. The shank looks heavy. That could cause setting problems. May take awhile for that to be settled.

I don’t understand the slot in the ctr of the fluke yet. One would think the fluke would be stronger w/o it and holding power to be greater. Perhaps the slot is like Rex’s holes and far smaller slots. But the fluke shape has been proven since 1938 .. I’m refering to the Danforth of course.

If I was to build it I’d do so w less throat angle.

Just saw your post Bruce,
Reflect on the fact that the original Sarca was almost the same as the Knox but w the fluke upside down. I’ve seen pics of the original Sarca that was concave. And Rex says the original had more holding power but tore up the bottom like other anchors. Got to admit it looks more like a Sarca than anything else. And the Sarca is still my favorite anchor.
 
Last edited:
This quote from the website does not fill me with confidence. 5 meters is a long plough before it holds and rights itself.
"The Knox anchor will start to bury itself immediately and develop maximum hold after it has ploughed approximately 5 metres (depending upon bottom conditions). By that time it should have rotated to a vertical position, and should be completely buried."
Are you sure about this one, Eric?
 
The anchor markup on a ton of steel is too hard for folks to ignore.
 
Bruce,
Yes I could have made a fool of myself on this one. Been reall busy and haven’t had time to look much. My response yesterday is somewhat kneejerk and some of the things they print is at least questionable. Stumbled onto it on FB through one of my European friends. It poped up after I commented on a Navy anchor in a picturue. The guy posted a link.

My first response was “that open slot between the two flukes (like a Danforth) is crazy weak. Then I saw the huge shank. Yup there’s lots of questionable stuff there. I’ll take more time looking now and consider what whizzed by me yesterday. Don’t like the looks of that winch on a plywood board and I’m very skeptical of dragging anchors on beaches. I may resort to some of that for my modded Claw for preliminary “will it rotate” evaluation. But I think my Claw will turn out to be a mud packer. The Knox is very interesting and a bit hard to judge as it’s so different. And I am attracted to things different. As far as I know I’m the only one here w an XYZ anchor. Sorry no edit ...
 
Every new anchor on the market is the "best" and we should all do away with our tried and true anchors that have held us in place for hundreds of nights to upgrade to them. :rolleyes:
 
Every new anchor on the market is the "best" and we should all do away with our tried and true anchors that have held us in place for hundreds of nights to upgrade to them. :rolleyes:

RIGHT ON! If it’s not broken, don’t fix it. :thumb:
 
Hey guys lighten up.
I started this thread to offer something interesting. Something to think about and analyze and compare to other anchors. Too many people here think everything is an debate over what’s the best thing to buy. As if there is a best thing that will fit for everybody. And “I’ve got the best” just starts arguments.

Re anchors there’s “will it fit nicely on my bow” or “will it work on my rocky bottom” ..... things that are unique often swing the purchase of anchors and other products.

So what do you see as a plus or minus in this interesting new anchor? Something that hasn’t been mentioned is that the roll bar on the Knox is further fwd possibly further than any other RB anchor. For example the Rocna’s RB is well aft. Several inches difference. Food for thought?

PS,
One of the guys on FB just said “I have anchored many many times with both Rocna and Knox anchors,I can not tell the difference between them. Both are fantastic and a million light years away from the CQRs of yesterday”
 
Last edited:
Willy

I must be more skeptical than because there is nothing on their website that makes my want to but this Anchor. I agree that I see no reason for the cut in the fluke area.

I hope you get one and give it a good test.
 
Simi 60,
Thanks, Here is a sample of some of the conversation in this forum. This from page 7 addresses the long setting distances in the Knox text.

“ 1. Storyline Writes
Registered User Location : Liverpool - boat Ardfern
There is a comment on the Knox site in the Anchoring Technique page.

The professor says the following :

A good modern anchor should start embedment immediately and develop its maximum hold or UHC after it has ploughed a 5 to 10 metres. By that time it should have rotated to a vertical position, and should be completely buried.

On face value this seems to say that a NG anchor will continue to move after the initial set. This is not something I have experienced with either of the two techniques we use now with our Rocna. If the bottom is sand then we find no finesse is needed; drop anchor, drop back, dig in (fast or slow makes no difference, the anchor buries immediately). Things are different in a couple of soft muddy anchorages we use and I now use quite a few bursts of reverse to slowly dig the anchor in. You get a feel for what the anchor is doing and typically it will set in just a few metres but with each ever increasing amount of reverse it will move backwards but never more than a very few metres.

Am I reading the professor correctly, is he saying that to achieve a full set the anchor will move back 5 - 10m ? My feeling is that the only way our Rocna could move that far (once set) is for it to break out.

He also says the anchor ends up in a vertical position - can that be right ?

John Writes

Well story line, it depends on who you believe, John Knox is clearly speaking of a anchor pull test, pulled way beyond any load you will experience from your boat when simply setting your anchor, he is quoting max load before break out or drag distance, this test is also governed by the type of substrate the anchors are being tested in, these anchor sizes are normally around 12 to 15 kilo range, anything larger when testing is too difficult to handle and would require serious winching equipment as they will not travel any further than a couple of feet.

So Yes in this instant bigger is better, if you take an enormous anchor like Noelexs on such a small boat it is any no wonder in sand and light weed his anchor travels very little distance before holding, minimum backing up distance, shuffling around, listing as he calls it and staying anchored in a change of tide or wind shift is always going to be the norm with such a large anchor on such a small boat
I do have a problem when some say they are skeptical of a anchor designers test, especially well identified we all know who John Knox is, so when publically throwing down lose comments one should check themselves, in this instant “tell us who you are” what credentials you have other than a Moderator of another forum, photographing anchors , commenting and displaying a mermaid.

Obviously we have all been treated to some eye opening problems when setting anchors,” for this I am great full “ commenting on anchor designs and how they work, you are well of the mark.
I think John Knox is a very intelligent man with anchor design experience few have, I would never insult his intelligence by saying his testing is to be treated with skepticism.

When it comes to skepticism Noelex just has to cop it on the chin for his comments Re John Knox, the anchor on Noelexs boat is huge, given to him, five months of trialing, defending, one has to become a bit partial to this anchor, certainly buds will start to flower in the relationship with the supplier, Just saying.

If you go through any anchor forum, you will find there are now many, many concave anchor roll bar designs dragging,” mainly related to mud” one design as mentioned in this thread is becoming common place and stands out in particular, it has made headlines in the past for all the wrong reasons, looks like it will do it again, if we are talking real world tests over time then this is as real as it gets, even though the bigger is better slogan was mysteriously born shortly after concave roll bar designs hit the market, it has not solved this problem.

Who am I, I am a supplier and advisor for varying sections of the Marine industry, I am involved with ports, fisheries, heavy work barges and delivery of goods to oil Riggs in Bass Strait.

Yours truly John.
Read more at KnoxAnchor - has anyone any experience of using one? - Page 7
 
So what do you see as a plus or minus in this interesting new anchor? Something that hasn’t been mentioned is that the roll bar on the Knox is further fwd possibly further than any other RB anchor. For example the Rocna’s RB is well aft. Several inches difference. Food for thought?

Interesting comment Eric. However, I don't think the for/aft position of the base of the roll bars are that different, but I have always felt the that the thing that could well have an effect on the setting of the Rocna, and Manson to some extent, especially in very soft mud, was the thickness of the bar, and the angle of the plane of the roll bar. If you look here again, and compare the Rocna and Supreme near top of the group...
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5677c3c19cadb68edf5284f5/t/58c5378686e6c02103d72392/1489319853474/JHK+PBO+article.pdf
The Manson's is fairly vertical, but the Rocna's is definitely tilted forwards, away from the shank. Whereas that of the Super Sarca is tipped back towards the shank a tad.
Super Sarca Galvanised Anchor Sizes No 0.5 - 15
That, and being thin is why it does not just scoot across the surface of the very soft mud, but tips the anchor over quickly, which was the tendency of the Rocna in testing, and the Manson also to a lessor extent.

This Knox anchor looks like the angle of the roll bar plane is sort of between the Manson and the Rocna. I mised the divided fluke at first glance in the link you put up. More clear in Simi's post link. Certainly one wonders why you would do that - other, that is, than to make it just different enough to not infringe patent law..? Because although, yes, your point about shedding mud better is valid, it also does make it much more likely to foul either chain or bottom debris, making a re-set at current change more likely to be impeded, in my view. My thoughts on an interesting item, anyway.
 
Take all the theory in the world and I don't care. Now, when Eric actually tests one, then I'll be interested.
 
Not shown in the Knox website is a weldment near the fluke tip joining the two fluke halfs together preventing the anchor chain from running down the slot.

The most interesting thing about this anchor is that all is explained except the reason for the slot. However it is said that the slot is the reason for the anchors outstanding holding power. But it seems to be a secret. I’ll try and find the copy on that.
 
Take all the theory in the world and I don't care. Now, when Eric actually tests one, then I'll be interested.

BandB,
If you’re interested in interesting conversation and ideas hang on or jump in. If you want an anchor goto the store.
I do intend to test my Mod Claw.
May be a coupla weeks though.
 
Willy

Will your Anchor penetrate ice?

Sorry, I live in south Florida,
 
BandB,
If you’re interested in interesting conversation and ideas hang on or jump in. If you want an anchor goto the store.
I do intend to test my Mod Claw.
May be a coupla weeks though.

You're not going to be testing the Knox? You know you can't resist.

We don't actually need an anchor. The ones we have work just fine. Not very adventurous or expert on anchors. We have the anchors we got when we got the boats and that's it. Are they the best possible? I doubt it. I do consider you extremely knowledgeable on them.
 
Peter,
Here is the copy that states the reason for the high performance is the slot.
“From the Website...

"The key innovative feature of the Knox anchor is its patented DIVIDED FLUKE rigidly welded to the shank. The Divided Fluke is responsible for the exceptional holding power of the Knox Anchor.

The two half-flukes, with sharpened edges, are mounted at a dihedral angle of 20˚ to enhance immediate initial embedment of the anchor."

I have always used Danforths (now fortress) but this NGA has got my attention... Its the first one that to my eye looks the business, do not know why....

Will be interesting in seeing one next time I am at a show...

Also on there table for 35 foot boat (9kg) comes in 1 kg lighter than Fortress. Reading thread with interest, looking forward to forum feed back...
Read more at KnoxAnchor - has anyone any experience of using one? - Page 2

From the Knox website I assume.
 
HaHa BandB,
I have no intention of buying any anchor much less a Knox. Got too much stuff anyway including anchors. I modded my Supreme again too.
Thanks for the nice compliment. I’ll do anything for you for awhile. :blush:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom