# anchor set-up...



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

This Friday I'm sailing with a friend up to Edisto Island. I'd planned to stay at the Marina, but it's Memorial Day weekend and they're out of slip space. However, I can anchor on Big Bay Creek, which is a tidal river with strong, reversing currents. At the moment I only have a 35-pound Danforth. I think I'm going to need to shackle some chain and a second anchor to the Danforth, or visa-versa in order to hold to the creekbed, which is a fairly light mud. 

Any suggestions on how to go about doing this? What anchor would be the recommendation of the learned panel?


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Hawg...I would go for a completely secondary anchor on a short (10') chain/rope rode. Obviously you don't have time for a Rocna or Spade to arrive. Can you get a manson at the local West? If not...get a Delta. Drop 'em at 90 degrees to each other...making an expanded V off your bow. Have fun!

The other option given your cruising grounds would be a Fortress on the 45 degree fluke mud setting. You might end up chucking the danforth in a locker for secondary use only since the Fortress will be lighter weight and better holding.


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

Having only one anchor, chain and rode is the start of bad news. If stuck with that situation, I think you will have to be up and about at the change of tide to lift and reset your Danforth (which I think is fairly good in soft mud).


----------



## Freesail99 (Feb 13, 2006)

As far as an anchor goes, is a Manson Supreme that much of a drop off from a Rocna ?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Danforths and other fluke style anchors are generally bad news in shifting current/wind situations. Get a Delta 22 if you can, and use that as a secondary anchor... It should be fine for a boat the size of the Hogpen.

According to Halekai, the Manson Supreme isn't as good, and he owns the Spade, the Manson Supreme, the Rocna and a few others... so he's got real world experience with them. I've never used the Manson Supreme, so can't comment on its performance directly... I did just get a Delta 22 lb. for use as a secondary anchor, with a Rocna 15 kg. as my primary.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Actually Dawg, Halekai said it wasn't that much of a difference between the Manson Supreme and Rocna. West does carry the Manson Supreme, which if you purchase one Hawg, I'd make that my primary and the Danforth as the second anchor on the short chain/rope rode. You should have at least 30' of chain on your primary (length of the boat).

Have fun, however you sort out the anchor issue.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Thanks, gentlemen!

One last question: Is the secondary anchor that you all speak of set 90 degrees in the V that Cam described, or does it trail the primary anchor?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Set it at 90˚ from the primary.


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

Sounds like an excellent opportunity to justify buying new boat goodies. Upping your primary anchor is good, and the danforth will stash away pretty easily.....everybody wins


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

Hog,

That's a pretty good sized Danforth for your boat -- you should get good holding with it if it takes the bottom. But a second anchor type would certainly be desirable.

If you don't absolutely need it for this weekend, I have a 25 lb Delta that I'd sell very reasonably (with or without the chain/line rode). PM me if interested.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

John,
Thanks for the offer, Cap'n. I'd almost certainly jump all over it if I didn't need it for this weekend. In the event that we can't go, I might give you a call. The Danforth sets pretty well, but it also has a tendency to drag with the reversing current. PB actually pointed that out to me a few weeks back when he was here, and I've since had an experience that confirmed what he told me.

So Sapper's back from his Roman holiday!


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Hate to hijack
I only draw two feet so I tend to anchor shallow.
I thought the best way to anchor in current that reverses (tidal) which is pretty much everywhere here around the bay was fore and aft. Current really doesn't affect me as much as wind.


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

sailhog said:


> So Sapper's back from his Roman holiday!


yeah i'm back....just been very busy


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

sailingdog said:


> According to Halekai, the Manson Supreme isn't as good, and he owns the Spade, the Manson Supreme, the Rocna and a few others... so he's got real world experience with them. I've never used the Manson Supreme, so can't comment on its performance directly... I did just get a Delta 22 lb. for use as a secondary anchor, with a Rocna 15 kg. as my primary.


To clarify, the performance of my Manson Supreme was identical to my Rocna. In that I mean in over 100 sets and anchorings it set and held at a rate of 100% in the first try and never dragged and never un-set on a wind or tide shift. My Rocna has done the same and they are the ONLY two anchors I've owned that have been able to do this.

That being said the Rocna is clearly a better & more robustly built anchor than the Manson. Do I think someone will break a Manson? Probably not, so in that sense it just means the Rocna is over built and I like that..

So again, my Rocna and Manson have given me 100% reliability but owning both I can honestly say the Rocna is the better built/constructed anchor..


----------



## merttan (Oct 14, 2007)

lucky bastard


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Thanks for the clarification Halekai.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

halekai36 said:


> To clarify, the performance of my Manson Supreme was identical to my Rocna. In that I mean in over 100 sets and anchorings it set and held at a rate of 100% in the first try and never dragged and never un-set on a wind or tide shift. My Rocna has done the same and they are the ONLY two anchors I've owned that have been able to do this.
> 
> That being said the Rocna is clearly a better & more robustly built anchor than the Manson. Do I think someone will break a Manson? Probably not, so in that sense it just means the Rocna is over built and I like that..
> 
> So again, my Rocna and Manson have given me 100% reliability but owning both I can honestly say the Rocna is the better built/constructed anchor..


So if both have done the same - how do you come to the conclusion the Rocna is any better than the Manson... your writing of experience is contradictory as I the casual reader seem to get they both performed the same thus if one is priced lessor then the lessor price is still the winner..

Colour me Colored..


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Jody..lets try an example. You've been out mountain climbing and you've fallen in a crevasse. Search and rescue arrives and says they're gonna winch you our of there but you have to pay for the rental on the winch from the winch rental guy and you have a choice of two. Both have been tested 50 times with people your weight with no problems whatsoever...but winch #2 has wire that is twice as thick and titanuim gears and is die cast rather than welded. Unfortunately it costs 1000 dollars a day to rent whereas the other winch costs $500. Which one will you rent? 
***********
Some people like to have the best made product even if actual performance is the same....Others like to get the best buy..a product that performs in a superior manner at a less than expected price.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

camaraderie said:


> Jody..lets try an example. You've been out mountain climbing and you've fallen in a crevasse. Search and rescue arrives and says they're gonna winch you our of there but you have to pay for the rental on the winch from the winch rental guy and you have a choice of two. Both have been tested 50 times with people your weight with no problems whatsoever...but winch #2 has wire that is twice as thick and titanuim gears and is die cast rather than welded. Unfortunately it costs 1000 dollars a day to rent whereas the other winch costs $500. Which one will you rent?
> ***********
> Some people like to have the best made product even if actual performance is the same....Others like to get the best buy..a product that performs in a superior manner at a less than expected price.


Dude - get back to you SO, That is so unrealistic and uhm... quite the complimentary to go with what works. I am going to go with what is reasonably sound... not just what costs more.. if both do the job - then what is the issue - are you being subsidized by Racnor now?


----------



## JiffyLube (Jan 25, 2008)

artbyjody said:


> So if both have done the same - how do you come to the conclusion the Rocna is any better than the Manson... your writing of experience is contradictory as I the casual reader seem to get they both performed the same thus if one is priced lessor then the lessor price is still the winner..
> 
> Colour me Colored..


I take what halekai36 is trying to say is, they are both equally good anchors, but the Rocna is better only in that it's more heavily constructed...but they are both built good. Sort of like the difference between Chevy and GMC...both good trucks (IMO), but GMC is suppose to be more heavily constructed.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

*then what is the issue - are you being subsidized by Racnor now?
*
Yeah Craig Smith gave me a 10% cut on all 3 anchors he sold here this year!


----------



## Craig Smith (Jun 21, 2006)

Oi Cam are you sure it wasn't Manson giving you the cut?  You already omitted to mention that Rocna is available from West Marine also... 

In any case I believe most of Halekai's sailing is in softish bottoms, where the differences between setting performance of anchors is lessened. Manson's Rocna copy features far less tip-weight, a heavily compromised skid design, and in the West Marine / SAIL testing, performed much less consistently. The differences are not just about cheapened construction and durability. More: About the Manson Supreme Anchor



sailhog said:


> This Friday I'm sailing with a friend up to Edisto Island. I'd planned to stay at the Marina, but it's Memorial Day weekend and they're out of slip space. However, I can anchor on Big Bay Creek, which is a tidal river with strong, reversing currents. At the moment I only have a 35-pound Danforth. I think I'm going to need to shackle some chain and a second anchor to the Danforth, or visa-versa in order to hold to the creekbed, which is a fairly light mud.
> 
> Any suggestions on how to go about doing this? What anchor would be the recommendation of the learned panel?


Well you musn't depend on the single Danforth, they are not general purpose anchors and are not to be relied upon for reversing or veering pulls.

What you probably want is a Bahamian moor, both anchors off the bow and set to each deal with one direction of the tide. In this case, the Danforth would actually be okay, unless you can expect strong winds from a perpindicular angle.

Do NOT do what you suggested and use a tandem rig, that is totally inappropriate for the situation and moreover is asking for problems with a Danforth.

If you're going to be getting a new anchor at all, then clearly all the same logic applies as usual. If you do your research right then Spade and Rocna will be top on the list. Avoid all copies of anything.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

artbyjody said:


> So if both have done the same - how do you come to the conclusion the Rocna is any better than the Manson... your writing of experience is contradictory as I the casual reader seem to get they both performed the same thus if one is priced lessor then the lessor price is still the winner..
> 
> Colour me Colored..


Jody,

Perhaps you need to read it again? Cam's right on the money though the analogy is a little odd!! Seeing as I've broken anchors before I want the strongest design of a particular type I can find and the Rocna fits the bill.

Yes, performance wise they both suit me well but it's like comparing the construction quality of a Kia to that of a Toyota/Lexus. Call it personal opinion or experience but I call them as I see them..

Let's take another analogy to Cam's. You have a new boat, say a 38 footer, and it cost you LOTS of money to your budget. You want to buy a claw style anchor for it and have decided that looking for a good used FORGED genuine Bruce anchor is too much of a PITA. So you buy a $99.00 Chinese made "claw" off eBay only to find out in the first storm that it was CAST not FORGED like the real McCoy and it broke and now you're on the rocks. Both anchors will perform virtually identically but the real Bruce is a substantially better built product and MANY imitation Bruce anchors have broken....

The Manson is not as robustly constructed IMHO. I have to anchor near offshore islands used in the granite quarrying days. More than once I've had an anchor stuck in tailings and more than once I've either bent or broken anchors..

I did not have to spend my hard earned money on a Rocna, I wanted to, because I do feel it's better built that's all..

P.S. A Hunter or Catalina would have both got you sailing so why did you buy the Barberis??? Did the quality and integrity of the build or construction play any role??


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

Craig Smith said:


> In any case I believe most of Halekai's sailing is in softish bottoms, where the differences between setting performance of anchors is lessened. Manson's Rocna copy features far less tip-weight, a heavily compromised skid design, and in the West Marine / SAIL testing, performed much less consistently. The differences are not just about cheapened construction and durability. More: About the Manson Supreme Anchor


Ah Craig I have plenty of spots where even my Spades had trouble setting that's why I kept looking. From eel grass beds to hard gravel bottoms where currents whip anything soft away Maine actually does have more bottom types than just mud.. Having said that about 75% - 80% of my anchoring is in soft mud..

Both my Manson and Rocna have set every time, first time, in these "trouble" spots. I don't doubt for one second that in 1000 sets I'd see that the Rocna is a better performer but when you take the "n" down to around 100 there is less of a difference..


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I've never understood why someone who has a boat would skimp on ground tackle. It always seemed to me that it made more sense to get the best ground tackle you could, since that was often what was keeping you and your boat in one piece. 

How much is your boat worth to you? How much is your life worth to you? If you get caught anchored out in a storm... wouldn't you rather have the strongest anchor with the best setting capability, and best re-setting capability holding your boat??? 

A Danforth makes a nice lunch hook, but IMHO, it isn't a serious anchor for overnighting on. There are much better designs out there... and IMHO, the Rocna is the best of the better designs. While I haven't compared it to a Manson Supreme, as Halekai has done, I have compared it to Danforths, CQRs, Bruces, Claws, and a few others.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

I'm gonna let Craig's post stand unedited as he is basically responding to a comparison of his product with another which is legitimate. the makers of Manson are welcome to do the same if they so choose. 

As to MY recommendations...the governing factor was Hog's need for a second anchor TOMORROW. Given the extremely soft mud bottos in the area and the in store availablity choices at West...I thought the Delta and the Fortress were the two best choices.

I used a Delta for 6 years of cruising and dragged 3 times...only once due to the anchor not holding (in jello like deep mud in the DR) and twice due to anchoring by hooking debris and not the bottom. I have good confidence in the anchor but if I had to do it all over again fo extended cruising...one of the newer designs would be my choice...Rocna or Spade. 
One can always make the case for buying the best...but most of us ARE on budgets and most of us have limited cruising grounds with known conditions and won't be anchored out in "ultimate" conditions...so other choices can make a lot of practical sense without endangering the boat or crew beyond what most of us would consider very acceptable risk. 
Walking down the docks in the Chesapeake Bay or the sounds of NC...one sees row after row of 20-30 year old boats and it is rare to see anything other than a Danforth, CQR , an occasional Bruce or more recently Delta. Somehow these boats have all survived without killing their owners for decades.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

I'd have to go along with cam here. Especially in light of the Hawg's sailing habits and venue. For continual anchoring out as in cruising, then yes, spend the extra money for the best ground tackle you can. For the casual weekend type cruiser, who can and usually does avoid bad weather, then I don't think it's that much of an issue. Get something geared to your area.

I appreciate the Dawg's point, and if money and availability aren't an issue, feel it's the best way to go. But as cam pointed out, and I have noticed, most people use a CQR, Bruce or Danforth on the boats I've seen in the past year.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

I just spent $173 plus tax on a 22-pound Delta, and about $55 on some 5/16" chain. All together, my chain collection runs about 25 feet long. The boat it's going to secure is a Catalina 30, which displaces about 10,000 lbs... I'm not going to use the Danforth; it's going in the lazarette. The winds are supposed to pipe up to 20 kts on Saturday evening for a short period, but I think this ground tackle should keep me in put.

Agreed? Or not...


----------



## Freesail99 (Feb 13, 2006)

Do you have a windlass ?


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Freesail99 said:


> Do you have a windlass ?


Freesail,
Negative. But I have a winch on the mast that should be able to double as one.


----------



## Freesail99 (Feb 13, 2006)

Good, we're not as young as we once were and chain gets heavy.



> Negative. But I have a winch on the mast that should be able to double as one.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

I'd set them both Hawg. Just the prudent thing to do in the situation. Unless you can get in a creek off the main tidal flow.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

PBzeer said:


> I'd set them both Hawg. Just the prudent thing to do in the situation. Unless you can get in a creek off the main tidal flow.


Will do. How are you doing, John?


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

sailhog said:


> Freesail,
> Negative. But I have a winch on the mast that should be able to double as one.


I use a line with a chain grabber at the end and lead it to a winch to break my (gen-u-ine) Bruce free. It's inexpensive and works well.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Hog, 
What scope to do you normally go with ? If the anchorage is a little bit nasty I'd make sure you had plenty of line out and that all the chain was lying on the bottom. I'd prefer more chain than 25'. 
When we had a Danforth on PB we dragged all over the place until I went to 50' of chain. After that never had a problem provided I put out plenty of scope.
On Raven we use a CQR with 35 metres of chain usually at 3-1. If overly choppy or bad current up to 5-1.
Maybe its just my experience but I do like chain on the bottom. (although silk across the nipples is my preferred form of whipping.  )


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

sailhog said:


> I just spent $173 plus tax on a 22-pound Delta, and about $55 on some 5/16" chain. All together, my chain collection runs about 25 feet long. The boat it's going to secure is a Catalina 30, which displaces about 10,000 lbs... I'm not going to use the Danforth; it's going in the lazarette. The winds are supposed to pipe up to 20 kts on Saturday evening for a short period, but I think this ground tackle should keep me in put.
> 
> Agreed? Or not...


Hog,

That sounds like the one we have for our 31 footer (I previously said it was a 25 lb-er, but I looked at it today and couldn't find any indication of weight - so judging by dimensions, it looks to be the 22). It holds okay when it's just us, but if we raft with anybody, it can't hold two boats. So we use our 35 lb CQR most of the time, which holds 2-3 boats easily. More chain would probably help our Delta -- I think it's set-up with only 15-20 feet. You should be fine with your arrangement.

P.S. That sounds like a good price too -- with the price of fuel these days it probably would have cost half that to ship mine to you!!


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Doing well Hawg, say hi to the girls for me.

My 22 lb Danforth sets fine with 10' of chain, but I use that as a secondary. On the primary, I have 30', but when I have the extra bucks, will put at least 50 on it, if not 100. Though I have a 35lb Delta on a 32' boat, I find it likes a lot of scope, regardless of what Lewmar says about holding well on short.


----------



## JiffyLube (Jan 25, 2008)

tdw said:


> (although silk across the nipples is my preferred form of whipping.  )


Hahahahaha


----------



## Craig Smith (Jun 21, 2006)

camaraderie said:


> As to MY recommendations...the governing factor was Hog's need for a second anchor TOMORROW. Given the extremely soft mud bottos in the area and the in store availablity choices at West...I thought the Delta and the Fortress were the two best choices.


Fair enough.



camaraderie said:


> I used a Delta for 6 years of cruising and dragged 3 times...only once due to the anchor not holding (in jello like deep mud in the DR) and twice due to anchoring by hooking debris and not the bottom. I have good confidence in the anchor but if I had to do it all over again fo extended cruising...one of the newer designs would be my choice...Rocna or Spade.


The Delta's a perfectly okay anchor, certainly the best of the old generation, it just isn't as efficient as modern types. The holding power "factor" on a weight for weight basis, from West Marine / SAIL's testing, compared to a Rocna, is as follows:
_(using averaged "max before release" figures)_
Rocna 15 held average of 4800lb [2180Kg] (factor of 145)
Delta 16Kg held average of 3250lb [1475Kg] (factor of 92)
The comparative factor is 145/92 = 1.58, i.e. the Rocna may be expected to hold over 50% more than the Delta, or can be sized over 33% smaller for the same performance.



camaraderie said:


> Walking down the docks in the Chesapeake Bay or the sounds of NC...one sees row after row of 20-30 year old boats and it is rare to see anything other than a Danforth, CQR , an occasional Bruce or more recently Delta. Somehow these boats have all survived without killing their owners for decades.


I don't believe that's a terribly sensible argument. CQRs continue to enjoy popularity as the result of decades of tradition, and to say they therefore cannot be so bad is to point to the use of candles instead of electric lights for millenia.

Of the boats and ships that have dragged anchor and been wrecked over the centuries, including those in the last 100 yrs with plows and claws, how many would have been saved with better anchors?



sailhog said:


> I just spent $173 plus tax on a 22-pound Delta, and about $55 on some 5/16" chain. All together, my chain collection runs about 25 feet long. The boat it's going to secure is a Catalina 30, which displaces about 10,000 lbs... I'm not going to use the Danforth; it's going in the lazarette. The winds are supposed to pipe up to 20 kts on Saturday evening for a short period, but I think this ground tackle should keep me in put.
> 
> Agreed? Or not...


A Delta 10Kg is very slightly undersized for your boat, for poor weather and poor holding (i.e. soft mud). However you could have done worse and it doesn't sound like you're expecting bad weather. It should be okay but don't trust it with reversing pulls - figure out the Bahamian moor in conjunction with the Danforth.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Craig:
*I don't believe that's a terribly sensible argument. CQRs continue to enjoy popularity as the result of decades of tradition, and to say they therefore cannot be so bad is to point to the use of candles instead of electric lights

Of the boats and ships that have dragged anchor and been wrecked over the centuries, including those in the last 100 yrs with plows and claws, how many would have been saved with better anchors?
for millenia.

*I guess I'd say that you don't find a lot of boats dragging anchor and getting wrecked in the Chesapeake and the sounds of NC or dozens of other places where recreational boating is prevalent and boats are used on benign weekends and if the wind pipes over 20 the weekend is spent in the slip or at home watching TV! The anchors they have work well in the bottoms they will deal with and in the conditions that they are likely to face. If they do drag...they'll be aboard and notice or find themselves on a mudbank rather than a lee shore. Some of them will be rich enough or scared enough to go out and get the best anchor system they can. Others will not...Both wll probably be just fine over the decades. 
The full time or wide ranging cruiser and those who live in more challenging waters can't afford not to very carefully select anchoring components, secondary anchoring components and storm anchoring components for their boats and they are likely to encounter a wide variety of bottoms and in all kinds of weather. 
I don't think the issue for recreational sailors in relatively benign waters/conditions is much like your candle vs. lightbulb analogy...probably more like flat screen HD TV's vs. the old tubes. When all you want to see is CNN...any set will do.


----------



## Craig Smith (Jun 21, 2006)

Ah yes but my trump card argument relates just to efficiency... even if you don't need super high performance, then it means that with a modern anchor you can get away with a smaller, lighter, and cheaper anchor to do the same job...


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

*Hawg..*

Perhaps the most important feature of ANY anchor is proper use.

Your anchor MUST be properly set! If you can apply 80% of your max throttle (max cruising RPM), in reverse, and not move the anchor, it is then, and only then, properly set.
*
Here's how I do it:*

#1 Find anchoring spot.

#2 Glide your boat, into the prevailing wind, (by that I mean .3 to .5 knots) past the "spot" and as it stops moving forward and the wind begins moving you backwards begin lowering the anchor. Do not let the anchor hit bottom until your boat is moving backwards. It will increase your set rate dramatically!!!

#3 As the anchor begins to hit the bottom DO NOT just let the rest of your scope out. Play it along the bottom while gently playing out scope, with resistance, to about 4:1 or 5:1. Once you feel it begin to set, and you are at at least a 5:1, snub it for a few seconds and make sure the line goes tight.

#4 Now play out your rode to 7:1 or higher and once the wind has taken the slack up move to the helm and gently increase reverse thrust until you hit max cruise rpm. Continue for a sufficient amount of time or until "prop walk" spins your boat off axis more than 30-45 degrees.

#5 If your boat is still moving backwards and dragging anchor you'll need to re-set and start over.

#6 If you don't have swing room for a 7:1 shorten to a 5:1. With a DELTA I would NOT feel comfortable (I've owned one) on anything less than 5:1 especially with only 25 feet of chain and a 22 pounder on a 30 footer.

Just for perspective, I have a 44hp four cylinder diesel on my 36 footer. I can NOT budge either my Manson, Spade or Rocna, once properly set, even with 80% or more of reverse throttle on a very soft mud bottom. With 80% reverse thrust after a proper set I can tow my CQR, of the same physical weight to my Spade, Rocna or Manson, in the same bottom, around the bay like I was plowing a field......

* Measuring scope:*

Scope is MAX water depth plus the height of the bow from the water plus any differential from your depth sounder not being calibrated to waterline.

So, if you come in at low tide and there is ten feet but you have a three for tide your base water depth for calculating scope is 13 feet. Now add the height of your bow chock or cleat from the water, we'll call it 4 feet. So 13 + 4 = 17 feet for your scope baseline. Now multiply your scope baseline by 7, 6 or 5 as in; 17 X 7 (for 7:1) is *119 feet of rode* for 13 feet of water that you'll need to play out..

Now lets figure your depth transducer is actually two feet bellow the waterline but not calibrated. You actually had 12 feet of depth not 10. So now it's 15 feet (with max tide) plus 4 feet of bow height. 15+4 = 19, 19 X 7 = 133 feet of rode for a depth sounder reading of 10 feet!!

Anything less than a FULL bury, with sufficient back winding of the sails or engine power, is NOT properly set..


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

As Halekai points out-*don't forget to add tide changes and the height of your bow roller off the water*... as that can drastically affect your scope.

If you're anchored 10' of water at low tide, and the tidal range is three feet, and the height of your bow roller is four feet, at 7:1 scope, the amount of scope you'll have out is as follows:

Water depth only: 70' 
Water depth + tide: 91'
Water depth + bow height: 98'
Water depth + bow & tide: 119'

The difference between the water only scope of 7:1 of 70' to the water, tide, bow roller scope of 119' is 49' or 70% more rode than if you had just used the depth of water alone. It makes a big difference. With only 70' of rode out, you're really only at 4.1:1 scope...which is awfully short.

Of course, the deeper the water you anchor in, the less necessary the bow height addition becomes... the larger the tidal variance, the more important it is to account for it.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

I've routinely rafted up with 7-8 boats (including 20k pound monohulls) hanging off my little bitty 25 pound Danforth using 25 feet of chain and setting with a 6-7 to one scope. Never dragged, knock wood. 
I dragged once in a squall but that was later found to be caused by a bad set, I anchored with no motor (fuel pump had died) and the anchor caught a piece of foam rubber in the teeth, it was good until the wind piped up then slowly dragged to a leeward.

I can set and put 100% thrust in reverse in the mud I've found so far, no problem, only had to double drop one time.

Which of these other super anchors works on a bow roller, more importantly - my bow roller - which is my #1 concern.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Chuckles-

You've been damn lucky then.  The Rocna might fit... I don't know the specs on the gemini bow roller well enough to say for sure...but you'd probably want the 15 kg Rocna on your boat.


----------



## JiffyLube (Jan 25, 2008)

halekai36 said:


> Just for perspective, I have a 44hp four cylinder diesel on my 36 footer. I can NOT budge either my Manson, Spade or Rocna, once properly set, even with 80% or more of reverse throttle on a very soft mud bottom. With 80% reverse thrust after a proper set I can tow my CQR, of the same physical weight to my Spade, Rocna or Manson, in the same bottom, around the bay like I was plowing a field......


How do all these anchors compare when it comes time to break them loose?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

From my experience with the Rocna, I would guess that the Manson Supreme, Spade and Rocna all come up with about 30 lbs. of mud on the damn thing... and are a bear to break out...

The CQR and Delta probably don't come up with much, if anything on them.

Remember, the Rocna, Spade and Manson Supreme are essentially cupped in shape, unlike the CQR and Delta, which are plow shaped.


JiffyLube said:


> How do all these anchors compare when it comes time to break them loose?


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

JiffyLube said:


> How do all these anchors compare when it comes time to break them loose?


It's a *****~~! The Rocna and Manson bring up Rhode Island size chunks of bottom..!


----------



## JiffyLube (Jan 25, 2008)

halekai36 said:


> It's a *****~~! The Rocna and Manson bring up Rhode Island size chunks of bottom..!


I guess you can't have everything huh


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

I think that is finally a good wrap on experience with these highly touted anchors. Some folks may prefer to be able to reset if need be - but be able to get going when the time comes. Unsetting an anchor is just as important as setting one and how it behaves when set. I use Danforths myself as they work well in the PNW and never drifted off on one... but, if it came to a point that it took me extremely longer to pull the anchor than it did to set...

That would be a issue...and a new anchor would be in mind...anchor windlass or not...


----------



## Craig Smith (Jun 21, 2006)

It's not an issue, if you don't like how well the anchor holds (too well) then use a smaller one.

In any case retrieval is no problem in the majority of circumstances. Nobody's ever returned a Rocna complaining it's too hard to recover.

The fact that certain anchors come up clean speaks solely to their (in)ability to grip the bottom.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

Craig Smith said:


> It's not an issue, if you don't like how well the anchor holds (too well) then use a smaller one.
> 
> In any case retrieval is no problem in the majority of circumstances. Nobody's ever returned a Rocna complaining it's too hard to recover.
> 
> The fact that certain anchors come up clean speaks solely to their (in)ability to grip the bottom.


You know - I was ok with the first part, " Nobody's ever returned a Rocna complaining it's too hard to recover."... they would feel silly if they did..kinda a chuckle

But the last part, eh - I look at the anchor as a tool for the job, and that tool requires my knowledge of the environment I will be using it in. It is JUST AS important as being able to be set as it is to be retrieved. Going smaller to make it easier to retrieve means a loss of holding power as well. Hence why there are different style anchors for different environments and handling capability. Your anchor certainly is touted highly - but is not the end all of end alls not having it as Danforths (the real ones) and others do quite well of a job considering their environment used. When it comes to anchors there is no real - "Just one" just like there is no one laptop that suits the needs of the masses. Everything comes down to budget, where and how you use one, and ultimately just how user friendly it is from beginning to end. Always a compromise...

I have no experience with your anchor, but never had a reason to ditch the ones I use either.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Jody-

I am pretty sure that if you tried a next gen anchor, like the Rocna or Manson Supreme, you'd probably think otherwise.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

sailingdog said:


> Jody-
> 
> I am pretty sure that if you tried a next gen anchor, like the Rocna or Manson Supreme, you'd probably think otherwise.


Maybe, but not gonna fork out money when I drop my Danforth at 200+feet and hold all night long without a worry...someone wants me to sport it and test it great - but seriously for what most of us do.. "conventional" works well enough...

Things that would be interesting in a anchor test:

1. How easy to set (usually documented)
2. How easy to unyank (never mentioned really)
3. How long it holds you in period of days while on the hook in calm conditions.
4. How long it holds in adverse condition such as documented tidal, wind, wave surges..

I am not necessarily convinced just because it sets deeper that it hold any longer..There are many factors to "deploy" in analyzing and marketing speaks to one subset, real world experience in a variety of conditions speaks the other. When someone states - just get a lessor one to be able to pull it up - sorry, thats like saying getting a lighter pickup for the gas mileage but you can still haul your crap...something somewhere gives...

But, as my original post stated - if it is that hard to get back up..then its not necessarily the optimum anchor...for some folks (myself mainly)...and these are the issues I look for - when looking at whom are recommending what for what reasons...

I am just being somewhat argumentative btw...


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

artbyjody said:


> Some folks may prefer to be able to reset if need be -


Can you point me to a situation where it would be good to un-set "if need be" or twist out while on the hook???



artbyjody said:


> but be able to get going when the time comes.


I can always get going and it takes me no longer with my Rocna than it did with my CQR. Just because it brings up bottom with it does NOT mean it WON'T un-set. It's all in the technique.

Because I actually SET my anchors, something I witness very few boaters actually do (maybe 10%), they all require a "snub" (even my CQR's) and forward boat momentum to break free. This is easy to do and is not rocket science. Simply hit forward with a short blast, put back in neutral, then go to retrieve the rode with little to no resistance seeing as the boat is actually acting as your windlass. As the rode becomes vertical simply "snub" the rode and wait for the bots weight to break out the anchor then haul it up. If the anchor has mud on it, leave it snubbed about 3-4 feet bellow the surface, and power slowly out of the anchorage. Once the boat has washed the anchor clean simply pull it back into it's roller and your ready to roll.. Yes my CQR, DELTA and BRUCE all came up with less mud and required less "towing through the water" but cleaning the Rocna or Manson has NEVER been a huge problem. I'd much rather take the three minutes of "towing the anchor" than retrieving my vessel off the rocks.



artbyjody said:


> Unsetting an anchor is just as important as setting one and how it behaves when set.


I think you're alone on this one. As someone who has dragged anchors before, that HAVE been properly set, and buried, I can assure you that most boaters are looking for setting, holding and re-set ability and NOT un-set ability.

How difficult an anchor is to un-set is NOT a characteristic that I would even consider a nuisance let alone "just as important as setting one and how it behaves when set. "...???



artbyjody said:


> I use Danforths myself as they work well in the PNW and never drifted off on one... but, if it came to a point that it took me extremely longer to pull the anchor than it did to set...


This has NEVER happened and both setting and retrieving take me about the same amount of time. When I used CQR's, which I did for many years long ago, It would sometimes take me foru or five attempts to get the anchor to actually hold. I tried EVERY method of setting the CQR including the "drop and wait for it to self bury method" which then required you to back down after about an hour..??

With the old generation anchors I would have gladly traded this POOR setting performance (remember close to 90% of boaters I've witnessed here in the NE DON'T actually set their anchors so they are clueless as to the REAL holding power) for an anchor with repeatability and first try set and hold...

In 2003 a storm blew through the Vinalhaven Island area off the Maine coast. Of 15 boats in the anchorage 13 dragged and four wound up aground. It was a stressful night and the mornings aftermath was not good. It was not because their anchors could not necessarily hold their boats, though even if properly set some still would have dragged, it was because they were never set properly nor had the proper scope for the conditions.



artbyjody said:


> That would be a issue...and a new anchor would be in mind...anchor windlass or not...


I really can't believe what I've read and that you would value un-set-ability equally to set-ability. To each his own, but perhaps a trip to the rocks will change your methodology and thinking.

P.S. Every single one of the owners I talked to, after the dragging incident in Vinalhaven, said "I don't know what happened I've never dragged before", or something to that effect........ Never happened before in benign summer conditions for the ten years I've been a boat must mean your doing something right???? Not necessarily!!


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Jody....sorry...but I REALLY disagree on this one. I would NEVER even think of how easy an anchor is to "un-set". They are ALL easy to un-set if you let the boat do the work. Now the WEIGHT of the anchor and chain AFTER being un-set by the boat MAY be an issue if you are doing the hauling up manually and the Aluminum anchors may be at the top of the list for folks who must be concerned about their physical ability...OR as Craig points out...you can buy a smaller really good anchor that will hold better with lighter weight. But how easy it is to break an anchor out would be a good reason for NOT selecting an anchor cause if it is easy for you to break out...it is easy for winds and seas to do the same.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Jody-

I'm sorry, but I'm with Cam and Halekai on this one... I'd rather have an anchor that sets exceptionally well and is a bit more difficult to retrieve than one that sets only so-so and is easier to retrieve. *The amount of time I've saved because the Rocna basically sets every time I drop it, on the first try and deeply... because I don't have to retrieve the anchor, and try and re-set it four or five times, more than makes up for the slight increase in retrieval time, mainly spent washing the mud/sand/sludge off the anchor. *


----------



## JiffyLube (Jan 25, 2008)

halekai36 said:


> It's a *****~~! The Rocna and Manson bring up Rhode Island size chunks of bottom..!


That's not so bad ...now if you would have said California size chunks I would have been concerned!


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

JiffyLube said:


> That's not so bad ...now if you would have said California size chunks I would have been concerned!


California clearly would have been an exaggeration...


----------



## SEMIJim (Jun 9, 2007)

sailhog said:


> I just spent $173 plus tax on a 22-pound Delta, and about $55 on some 5/16" chain. All together, my chain collection runs about 25 feet long. The boat it's going to secure is a Catalina 30, which displaces about 10,000 lbs...


So what's the final verdict, SH? Did that 10 kg Delta do the job for you?

I'm particularly interested because at some point I'm going to have to do something about the anchor situation on our boat. The PO only raced her, so she's currently got only the minium Danforth, chain and rode necessary to be race-legal. The Rocnas and Manson Supremes sound great, but I don't have that kind of cash. I'm thinking perhaps the 10 kg Delta would be fine for our Pearson P30, which weighs-in at somewhere around 8100 lbs. (3682 kg).

I'd go heavier, but the next step up is 16 kg (35 lbs), and I'm thinkin' that, along with the chain, might be a bit much for The Admiral. True: In all likelihood I'll be the deck monkey dealing with it, but we're trying to set everything up so either one of us can go it alone, if need be.

Plus: Anchor, chain and rode will have to be hauled from the starboard lazerette, deployed, hauled back out, the rode neatly coiled and secured, and the whole thing stowed back in the lazerette. So ease-of-handling and hauling-about on the deck is going to have to figure somewhat into the equation.

Jim


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

SEMIJim said:


> So what's the final verdict, SH? Did that 10 kg Delta do the job for you?
> 
> I'm particularly interested because at some point I'm going to have to do something about the anchor situation on our boat. The PO only raced her, so she's currently got only the minium Danforth, chain and rode necessary to be race-legal. The Rocnas and Manson Supremes sound great, but I don't have that kind of cash. I'm thinking perhaps the 10 kg Delta would be fine for our Pearson P30, which weighs-in at somewhere around 8100 lbs. (3682 kg).
> 
> ...


If this is really your situation a 10kg Manson Supreme would get you the surface area (read holding power) of a 35 Delta.

You can't afford to cheap out on anchors and a 22 Delta, on a P30, would make me twitch in anything over 15 knots...

Find someone with a Port Supply account and see if they will let you buy off it??

PS price on a Manson 10kg is... (a good deal) don't tell anyone I told you though. If you want the actual PS price email me through my web site and I'll tell you..

Here is a surface are comparison:

From Left to Right CQR 25, Manson 24 & Spade 35

The Manson has as much surface area as the Spade 35 and gobs more than the CQR 25!!


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Thanks to everyone who replied...

I only had to anchor out one night, as I found slip space for the other two nights. The winds were 5-10 kts out of the ENE which put me in a bit of a wind shadow on the south end of Edisto Island. The current was rolling along at 2-3 kts, but the boat wasn't going anywhere. The Delta 22 did just fine. It was, however, a bit of a back-breaker bringing her back up without a windlass. 

Gents, thanks again...


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

halekai36 said:


> You can't afford to cheap out on anchors and a 22 Delta, on a P30, would make me twitch in anything over 15 knots...


Why? Meaning - do you have specific experience with this or is it just a "gut feeling".

I routinely anchor a 35 foot boat using Fortress FX-16 (which is only 10 lbs really) and it held just fine in wind of up to 30kts, gusting above that (in various density mud). And thats half the weight of Delta - though the holding characteristics are probably different.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

brak said:


> Why? Meaning - do you have specific experience with this or is it just a "gut feeling".
> 
> I routinely anchor a 35 foot boat using Fortress FX-16 (which is only 10 lbs really) and it held just fine in wind of up to 30kts, gusting above that (in various density mud). And thats half the weight of Delta - though the holding characteristics are probably different.


Brak,

Yes I do have experience with this as I have owned a Delta Fast Set. Anchor weight and surface area are NOT mutually paired up.

The FX-16, I currently own two and use it as a direct line pull stern anchor, as their re-set ability is weak, is made of aluminum so it has lots of surface area for it's weight.

Weight is NOT what holds the boat and the design, shape and surface area are the factors that, once set, determine how well an anchor will hold not the weight of the anchor.

That being said, I own two Spades that in size and shape are absolutely 100% identical. My aluminum A-80 weighs about 14 pounds and it sets like crap! My S-80, again same shape and physical size, sets very, very well compared to it's aluminum brother so weight does play a role in the actually setting but not the holding. Once set both of my Spades perform the same it's just getting the A-80 to set that's an issue.

The Delta, CQR and Spade all use lead weights in the tips of the anchor to aid in setting. Adding lead to the tip is mathematically going to reduce the anchors surface area if you want to keep it say a 22 or 35 pounder.

The Manson and the Rocna do not need weighted tips so the weight the others use for setting can be used for added surface are or what translates to holding power. When I said I would not like to use a 22 Delta on a P-30 it was not a direct reference to the physical weight, as I 'd feel totally comfortable with a Manson 24 or Rocna 22, but rather the sheer surface area, or lack there of, with the 22 Delta.

I'd feel very comfortable on a P-30 with a Delta 35 but just not a 22 in anything but benign summer conditions with no chance of squalls..

* This is my 33 pound Rocna compared to my 35 pound CQR and my Spade A-80 (35 pounds in steel).*









* Here is a cross sectional view of the weighted tips of the Spade & CQR vs. the Rocna (middle). Which anchor do you think will penetrate a hard bottom better??*


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

halekai36 said:


> Brak,
> 
> Yes I do have experience with this as I have owned a Delta Fast Set. Anchor weight and surface area are NOT mutually paired up.


I certainly agree with this, but it would appear that most people (including anchor manufacturers) go by the weight in the first place. Consider this passage from Rocna site:



> There is a tendency amongst anchor manufacturers to recommend sizes smaller than those really required. They invariably suggest very optimistic sizes for impractically light conditions. For example, a certain world-renowned name-brand advises the use of a 20Kg (44lbs) anchor on a heavy cruising yacht of LOA up to 14.8m (49'). This recommendation is clearly far too light. Another brand states that a working anchor should hold "up to 30 knots of wind", which is also quite bizarre.
> 
> We have been sure to resist this temptation, and the recommendations in our sizing table are appropriate for heavy-duty use in all conditions. In our view a working anchor should hold its boat in practically anything.


As you can see, they do use weight as a proxy for anchor holding power, which as you said is not a correct approach.

It is also interesting, that they follow the same principle of "working anchor for all conditions". Personally, I strongly disagree with this. An anchor that is set up for a night, has to be easy to set, fast to deploy, not taxing on the crew (especially if singlehanding) and hold well in reasonable conditions (including an occasional thunderstorm or squall perhaps). My own definition would be a sustained wind of perhaps 30-35kts, may be gusting another 5-10kts (which, incidentally, is what the other "disreputable" manufacturer suggests  ).

Conditions worse than that are something to be handled separately (casual working anchorage would probably be unsuitable for anchoring in anything more severe anyway). My own choice would be to deploy a few smaller anchors rather than one big one. In any case, the ever persisting advice (not from you) of getting the biggest possible anchor/rode/etc for daily use seems misguided to me. Just my 5 cents.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

The Delta 22 is recommended for 30'-40' boats, but the recommendation is dependent upon displacement. If it's a heavy displacement like the C30, then they claim it's appropriate.


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

sailhog said:


> The Delta 22 is recommended for 30'-40' boats, but the recommendation is dependent upon displacement. If it's a heavy displacement like the C30, then they claim it's appropriate.


What's the displacement of C30?


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

Speaking of multiple anchors - I've been thinking about this for a while and I still don't know what the good solution is. 

With two anchors out presumably anchor rode may get tangled if boat goes around in circles. On the one hand, if the rope is getting tangled, this may not be a complete disaster (but presumably chafe may be a problem). Chain getting tangled seems worse.

So, I've been thinking of connecting two anchors somehow to a swivel or some such. However, if I do that, I see a few options which I can't really chose among:
1) Connect swivel to the chain portion of the rode of each anchor, then connect a single rode (chain or rope) to the swivel, and run it to the boat. The downside is that with 30' of chain, swivel will be pretty close to anchors and I will need quite a bit of additional rode.
2) Connect swivel to the rope part of rode, further back - however I am not sure how to connect anything to rope for anchoring.
3) In option 1 I didn't really address what to do with the rest of the rode (I can't disconnect the rope, of course). Lead it aboard slack? Drop it in the water in a coil? 

Any other ideas on this one are welcome.


----------



## therapy23 (Jul 28, 2007)

brak said:


> Any other ideas on this one are welcome.


Technique - 2 Anchors

Boater's Pocket Reference - Google Book Search


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

therapy23 said:


> Technique - 2 Anchors
> 
> Boater's Pocket Reference - Google Book Search


Not to be ungrateful, but I always wondered when I ask a specific question and get a googled non-answer - what's that about. I am pretty well familiar with usual two-anchor techniques. However, this isn't what my question was about. None of these methods have anything to say about rode entanglement - which is a possibility with multiple anchors.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Brak...I've been in a number of anchorages where "2" was the standard and they DO get twisted up with the wind and the tide. 
Even if you have a top notch main anchor...you HAVE to put out a second so you don't swing into others in the anchorage with a large swinging circle. Fortunately...there is a simple solution that does not require swivels, shackles or arcane arrangements. You simply return from shore in your Dinghy and use it to push your stern around and "unwind" the tangle before tying off and hopping aboard.


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

camaraderie said:


> Brak...I've been in a number of anchorages where "2" was the standard and they DO get twisted up with the wind and the tide.
> Even if you have a top notch main anchor...you HAVE to put out a second so you don't swing into others in the anchorage with a large swinging circle. Fortunately...there is a simple solution that does not require swivels, shackles or arcane arrangements. You simply return from shore in your Dinghy and use it to push your stern around and "unwind" the tangle before tying off and hopping aboard.


Sure, thats a method - but what if you expect a storm/bad weather/will be out for some time, and can't dinghy up to the boat.
Especially in a storm this sounds like a problem - tangled chain is bad, chafed rope is worse.

My main point here is whether to have a whole separate chain setup for this, or whether I can come up with something that tackles onto the current rode (and keeps the rope part out of the way somehow).


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

brak said:


> What's the displacement of C30?


10,400 lbs.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Speaking of anchor weight and surface area, where do you folks reckon my stern anchors comes in (yes it's tied to the tree):


----------



## SEMIJim (Jun 9, 2007)

Addressing several comments in one go...



sailhog said:


> The Delta 22 is recommended for 30'-40' boats, but the recommendation is dependent upon displacement. If it's a heavy displacement like the C30, then they claim it's appropriate.


So if it's a lighter displacement boat, such as our P30 (looked it up: 8320), it's not? IOW: The heavier the boat the _lighter_ the required anchor? 



halekai36 said:


> If this is really your situation a 10kg Manson Supreme would get you the surface area (read holding power) of a 35 Delta.


Cost isnt' the only issue. One of my concerns with the MS and similar is this:



sailingdog said:


> From my experience with the Rocna, I would guess that the Manson Supreme, Spade and Rocna all come up with about 30 lbs. of mud on the damn thing... and are a bear to break out...


Not to mention haul up onto the boat once you _do_ get them loose. I know: I've done it. I've done it with much smaller anchors that hold far less crap once they're out of the bottom, and it can be a stone ***** to work with.



halekai36 said:


> You can't afford to cheap out on anchors


I'm not trying to "cheap out." I'm _trying_ to identify the most affordable primary anchor for our boat that is both adequate for her size/displacement and is manageable for her crew. (We do not have an anchor locker up front, much less a bow roller or windlass. Nor will we ever have these on our current boat.)



halekai36 said:


> and a 22 Delta, on a P30, would make me twitch in anything over 15 knots...


I realize you've probably fooled with anchors far more than just about the entire rest of Sailnet's membership combined, but...



brak said:


> I routinely anchor a 35 foot boat using Fortress FX-16 (which is only 10 lbs really) and it held just fine in wind of up to 30kts, gusting above that...


Then I look at this comparative holding power chart:










and note the Fortress rates quite a bit below the Delta.

Then I consider the 10 kg Delta is recommended for boats from 30' to 40', and ours is at the bottom end of that.

Putting it all together: I'm inclined to think the Delta, while perhaps not the Absolute Bestest Anchor In The Whole Wide World, will probably be sufficient to our needs. And in the case where I think I may need more, I can add our existing Danforth to the effort, no?

Jim


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

SEMIJim said:


> Addressing several comments in one go...
> 
> Putting it all together: I'm inclined to think the Delta, while perhaps not the Absolute Bestest Anchor In The Whole Wide World, will probably be sufficient to our needs. And in the case where I think I may need more, I can add our existing Danforth to the effort, no?
> 
> Jim


I'd like to add a comment - I use Fortress pretty much exclusively with soft mud bottom of Chesapeake (or East Coast areas I visited). (As an aside, I am yet to see anything else around here  ). Each anchor is good for its purpose. Fortress (in my experience as well as based on their claims) is excellent for these types of bottom, but as some mentioned (and I think they may be right though I have no personal experience with this) - it will set badly or not at all in harder bottoms or over weeds.

Presumably various new ploug style anchors (Delta included) will do well there. So, consider where you anchor and go with that.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Anchoring is like religion, everyone has opinions and thoughts.
I've done a fair bit of reading, not as much as some, more than some. 
There is no one good anchor for everywhere and every situation/bottom, anyone saying their product is the best for everywhere/every bottom immediately gets a hairy eyeball from me.

I do know absolutley in the bottom of my heart that that tree was not going to drag before my bow anchor did - and it seems to me that was a bad situation which is why I'm adding a smaller danforth to my boat this week as my stern anchor.
If my bow anchor had dragged I'd have been beam or worse stern side aground before I could have done a thing (we were 20 feet off the hard, in 4 feet of water). I'd rather break free from the stern and swing on the bow than break bow and swing to shore.


----------



## SEMIJim (Jun 9, 2007)

brak said:


> ... [the Fortress] will set badly or not at all in harder bottoms or over weeds.
> 
> Presumably various new ploug style anchors (Delta included) will do well there. So, consider where you anchor and go with that.


Lake St. Clair is known for its weediness, amongst other things. (Shallowness, excessive population of power-boaters, etc.) But there are non-weedy areas. Bottom varies from sand to soft mud, I understand. (I believe this is typical for the Great Lakes region, in general.) There are some rocky areas, but they're shallow, I understand, so not areas into which I'd venture.

Ideally, the anchor I'd obtain would be suitable for anchoring most anywhere in the Great Lakes and connecting waterways. (Other than for rocky areas, which would probably demand a 3rd anchor type.)

Jim


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Jim,
The Delta 22 anchor is recommended for boats between 30'-40'. However, if your boat is closer to 40' and displaces a lot of water, then you should probably move up a size. If your boat is 30' and heavy like the C30, then it's the recommended size. All I know is what I read in the brochure...


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

brak said:


> Sure, thats a method - but what if you expect a storm/bad weather/will be out for some time, and can't dinghy up to the boat.
> Especially in a storm this sounds like a problem - tangled chain is bad, chafed rope is worse.
> 
> My main point here is whether to have a whole separate chain setup for this, or whether I can come up with something that tackles onto the current rode (and keeps the rope part out of the way somehow).


Brak...my experience is that storms and bad weather give you ONE wrap since they clock around before they dissipate and the boat is held in position by th wind so it is not really a problem even if they last for several days. I've also never found chafe at the wrap to be an issue. I guess you could always put a hitch on the nylon rode with a second line and take up the pressure from the rode while you untangle things but Ive never found it necessary.


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

camaraderie said:


> Brak...my experience is that storms and bad weather give you ONE wrap since they clock around before they dissipate and the boat is held in position by th wind so it is not really a problem even if they last for several days. I've also never found chafe at the wrap to be an issue. I guess you could always put a hitch on the nylon rode with a second line and take up the pressure from the rode while you untangle things but Ive never found it necessary.


I see. So I am overthinking it, perhaps  
Well, my plan of using two anchors for bad stuff still stands. Though after running numbers and thinking some more, I probably will upgrade my anchor to FX-23 (when my budget permits) and move FX-16 to stern duty


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Hey Brak,
I heard you need your boat delivered! Remember... I'm available!


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

sailhog said:


> Hey Brak,
> I heard you need your boat delivered! Remember... I'm available!


I can help with that !!


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

sailhog said:


> Hey Brak,
> I heard you need your boat delivered! Remember... I'm available!


 Wait till september/october  I may need crew again - in opposite direction. (Oh, it's THAT kind of a thread again  )


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

John Pollard and I would like to offer our services. If, say, you'd like your boat moved from North Carolina to, say, Florida, we would be willing to do that. Of course we would make a rhumb line for Denver to reprovision, and then head directly for the Suez. I don't know if you've heard, but the Panama Canal is awfully crowded these days, and a lot of people are taking the Suez as alternate.

John and I have gone over various routes time and again, and although we have had bitter arguments about which way is best (he's "Mr. Southern Ocean"), I think he's coming around to see the wisdom in my ideas.


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

Halekai, so Spade A80 (aluminum) is not very good at setting? There is one on Ebay (here, I bet I just helped sell it) and I wonder if it's worth the hassle.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Brak...friends with a Spade traded their aluminum back for the steel. LOVED the steel...hated the Aluminum.


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

I see. I am not a big fan of steel anchors - handling them is just too hard (and my windlass isn't big enough for anything significantly over 30lbs). 

Well, anyway, I'll let this one pass then and see what else I can find. 

BTW I have an idea for a completely new type of anchor  but I am not putting it out here until I get it patented


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

brak said:


> BTW I have an idea for a completely new type of anchor  but I am not putting it out here until I get it patented


Does it use magnets?? I'd like an anchor that uses magnets.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

brak said:


> Halekai, so Spade A80 (aluminum) is not very good at setting? There is one on Ebay (here, I bet I just helped sell it) and I wonder if it's worth the hassle.


I'll sell you mine!! it sets fine in soft mud but in anything hard it does not have the oomph to penetrate like the steel version does.. Once set & buried though it does fine!

Personally I'd buy a Manson 25 though before I bought an A-80 every day of the week! It's only 10 Lbs more yet sets like you hit a brick wall and has the same amount of surface area as the A-80...


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

halekai36 said:


> I'll sell you mine!! it sets fine in soft mud but in anything hard it does not have the oomph to penetrate like the steel version does.. Once set & buried though it does fine!
> 
> Personally I'd buy a Manson 24 though before I bought an A-80 every day of the week! It's only 10 Lbs more yet sets like you hit a brick wall and has the same amount of surface area as the A-80...


What is Manson 24? I see 25 which is 25lbs, is that it? I do like both Rocna and Manson for their shape, but Manson probably won't fit my bow roller because of how it's shank is built. Well, in any case that may be the way to go.

I do like to keep my bow light - my boat has little buoyancy in the bow and it tends to get buried relatively easily, so keeping heavy stuff away is important.


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

JohnRPollard said:


> Does it use magnets?? I'd like an anchor that uses magnets.


Nope, just string and duck tape


----------



## MysticGringo (Oct 9, 2006)

sailingdog said:


> Set it at 90˚ from the primary.


I haven't read the whole topic, but is 90 degrees really the right answer? I forget all vector diagramming stuff, but I know in climbing when you set up an anchor you want it less than 60 degrees for optimum force distribution. The wider the angle, the more force you end up putting onto each anchor line. At an angle of 60 degrees, you are putting 58% of the load (the boat in this case) onto each anchor. At 90 degrees, you are putting 71% of the load onto both anchors. At 120 degrees, both anchors actually take 100% of the load each. And, if you were able to set up the anchors to be at 170 degrees, each anchor would actually feel 573% of the load of a pulling boat.

Maybe equalizing anchors for sailing is a little different than climbing, but I am not sure of that. And, I have not yet anchored with 2 anchors at the same time yet, so I might not know what I am talking about.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

brak said:


> What is Manson 24? I see 25 which is 25lbs, is that it? I do like both Rocna and Manson for their shape, but Manson probably won't fit my bow roller because of how it's shank is built. Well, in any case that may be the way to go.
> 
> I do like to keep my bow light - my boat has little buoyancy in the bow and it tends to get buried relatively easily, so keeping heavy stuff away is important.


Sorry typo..!


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

Well, while we are on topic - here is another anchor idea (this one is not the same as the one I mentioned, it is just a modification of the usual fluke anchor). What if flukes were bent downward (well, let's ignore for a second the issue of anchor landing on the wrong side) - wouldn't this provide better burying and re-setting ability avoiding situation where anchor lies flat on the bottom and gets dragged along? (As far as keeping the proper side down, something along the line of arcs on Rocna and the like would keep it properly turned, I think)


----------



## Stillraining (Jan 11, 2008)

chucklesR said:


> Speaking of anchor weight and surface area, where do you folks reckon my stern anchors comes in (yes it's tied to the tree):


DO YOU EVER SWIM IN THAT WATER..


----------



## brak (Jan 5, 2007)

Stillraining said:


> DO YOU EVER SWIM IN THAT WATER..


It's Chesapeake - upper Ches. water looks like that. And that black sticky mud from the bottom smells exactly like raw sewage. 
Lower Chesapeake is occasionally better - I can see about a foot underwater, even make out the shape of my rudder


----------



## NautiG (Apr 23, 2007)

I just bought a delta like Sailhog's. Any advice on methods of deployment and retrieval, as it would differ from the danforths I'm accustomed to? The literature describes the delta as "self-launching", whatever that means. Also, there are two eyelets on the shank. One at the end and one towards the plow-head. How is this second eyelet meant to be used?

Currently, retrieving an anchor without a windlass, I pull in the rode until the boat is directly above the anchor. Then I tie off the chain and put the engine in forward until the anchor breaks loose from the bottom.

Scott
Gemini Catamaran Split Decision
Captain's Blog


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Stillraining said:


> DO YOU EVER SWIM IN THAT WATER..


I don't swim with fish as a general rule. In the Chesapeke, if I get hot I rinse with the transom shower after the briefest of dips.

The water in this case is after record breaking rainfall over a two week period and is much muddier than normal.


----------



## SEMIJim (Jun 9, 2007)

NautiG said:


> ... there are two eyelets on the shank. One at the end and one towards the plow-head. How is this second eyelet meant to be used?


Retrieval line?

Jim


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

NautiG said:


> I just bought a delta like Sailhog's. Any advice on methods of deployment and retrieval, as it would differ from the danforths I'm accustomed to? The literature describes the delta as "self-launching", whatever that means. Also, there are two eyelets on the shank. One at the end and one towards the plow-head. How is this second eyelet meant to be used?
> 
> Currently, retrieving an anchor without a windlass, I pull in the rode until the boat is directly above the anchor. Then I tie off the chain and put the engine in forward until the anchor breaks loose from the bottom.
> 
> ...


The hole at the plow head can be used to rig an anchor trip line, or shackle another anchor in tandem as Giu does, or to run a pin through on your bow roller (as I do) so the anchor won't come loose and self deploy in rough conditions. 
Self launching means that in a bow roller...once you release the anchor chain or rode, the weight of the plow head will cause the anchor to drop by itself. 
My own technique with the Delta is to let the head hit the bottome then slowly pay out the rode as the current or wind pushes you back. At about 1/3 of the intended rode, take a quick snub around a cleat to make the anchor bite...you will feel it do so. Then let out the rest of the rode intended and watch for a bit to insure you are not dragging. Some like to set with the engine. I find this tends to pull the anchor out in softer bottoms and prefer to let the wind and tides do the work.


----------



## EO32 (Jan 7, 2008)

Some people tie on floats so you can see the anchor location.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

I tie a anchor float to tell me where the anchor lies, but don't use line heavy enough to trip the anchor mainly in case some idiot runs over it - I really don't want a boat that close to me to suddenly have his/her prop caught up and loose power going in who knows what direction.


----------



## NautiG (Apr 23, 2007)

Thanks Cam. We're leaving Baltimore next week for Martha's Vineyard. We don't have to be there until the end of June, so it'll be a leisurely cruise. I'll give your delta anchoring technique a try.

Scott
Gemini Catamaran Split Decision
Captain's Blog


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

Jody got pretty into this thread in support of genuine Danforth anchors. Today I spotted this item;


NewsReader said:


> The Bellingham Herald
> <img alt="" height="1" width="1">
> *Man, dog rescued from sailboat crashed into rocks in Bellingham Bay*
> *The Bellingham Herald*
> ...


----------

