# Another "Next Generation" anchor enters the market...



## MedSailor

TEST VIDEOS/ NEWS | MANTUS ANCHORS

Looks like there's a new Mansocna on the market. This one claims to be superior to all the others (who doesn't), but it is novel in that it is a roll-bar type anchor that disassembles for stowage. The spade is a "next generation" anchor that has this feature, but if you're of the roll-bar faith this might appeal. 









I don't see any evidence of 3rd party testing yet and one can never trust videos/tests done by the maufactuter, but I'll stay tuned. It also seems like it's pretty heavy by their recommendations chart. Don't know if that's design inefficiency or if they're just hugely conservative with their size recomendations. They could also be recommending "2 sizes up" in order to edge out the competition in upcoming tests.

MedSailor

PS Being a disciple of the almighty Bruce it's a big pet peeve of mine when they test the "bruce" against their anchor using a Lewmar Claw. I couldn't tell if they were using a Bruce or Lewmar, but I do know that neither makes a 25lb anchor like they claimed to test.


----------



## SloopJonB

MedSailor said:


> TEST VIDEOS/ NEWS | MANTUS ANCHORS
> 
> Looks like there's a new Mansocna on the market. This one claims to be superior to all the others (who doesn't), but it is novel in that it is a roll-bar type anchor that disassembles for stowage. The spade is a "next generation" anchor that has this feature, but if you're of the roll-bar faith this might appeal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see any evidence of 3rd party testing yet and one can never trust videos/tests done by the maufactuter, but I'll stay tuned. It also seems like it's pretty heavy by their recommendations chart. Don't know if that's design inefficiency or if they're just hugely conservative with their size recomendations. They could also be recommending "2 sizes up" in order to edge out the competition in upcoming tests.
> 
> MedSailor
> 
> PS Being a disciple of the almighty Bruce it's a big pet peeve of mine when they test the "bruce" against their anchor using a Lewmar Claw. I couldn't tell if they were using a Bruce or Lewmar, but I do know that neither makes a 25lb anchor like they claimed to test.


Med, they are probably using a 10Kg - 22# but I've seen them called 25# in certain "non-metric countries" (that shall remain nameless. )

P.S. is the real Bruce noticeably better than the Lewmar copy? Details please.


----------



## MedSailor

SloopJonB said:


> P.S. is the real Bruce noticeably better than the Lewmar copy? Details please.


I think so.

From The Bruce Anchor Group website:
"At first glance the genuine Bruce anchor and the look-alikes that have flooded the market appear to be the same anchor. Close inspection will reveal that the look-alike is different in a number of disturbing ways. If you line up a row of the look-alikes you will find further disturbing features: whereas the genuine Bruce anchor has the same geometry throughout the anchor range, the look-alikes have shank angles that vary widely throughout the anchor range and even between same-size look-alikes... Would you leap from a plane with a haversack on your back because it looks like the real thing and comes at a rock bottom price? Remember an anchor is a safety device upon which the survival of you and your boat may ultimately depend."

What they say sounds convincing to me. Shank angle is one of the most important aspects of anchor design. The original patent Danforth has a fluke angle of 32deg. Why thirty*TWO* degrees and not 33 or 31? Why would the shank angle vary so much between knock-offs or between sizes of Lewmar Claws. Did Lewmar spend millions of dollars of testing and find better angles? I would wager not.

The Bruce Anchor Group spends a mint on R&D to make their anchors work. Most of their business is holding oil-rigs to the ocean floor. Why do they need to spend so much on R&D Because what we ask of them is difficult to achieve. They must set quickly in all bottom types, hold on short scope, self-reset from an oblique angle, be easy to retrieve from above... etc etc. The design of anchors *is* exacting. Otherwise any old hook on a rope would set quickly in all bottoms, Minor changes can and do make massive differences in performance. Personally I would never anchor overnight to a look-alike anchor, only one that has passed some 3rd party tests and/or done the miles of experience on many boats in the real world.

MedSailor (faithful follower of the cult of Bruce)


----------



## jrd22

That bolt together anchor kind of scares me. Maybe it's meant as a back up to be carried in emergencies, but I wouldn't consider it for a main anchor (those bolts holding the roll bar on look designed to snap off).
I'm also a Bruce guy. I've looked at the Lewmar claws and there seems to be a big variance in shank angle and also fluke curve when you compare a couple of the same model on the floor (and they just look like they're made of melted down tonka toys).


----------



## cupper3

MedSailor said:


> .........
> The Bruce Anchor Group spends a mint on R&D to make their anchors work. Most of their business is holding oil-rigs to the ocean floor. Why do they need to spend so much on R&D Because what we ask of them is difficult to achieve. They must set quickly in all bottom types, hold on short scope, self-reset from an oblique angle, be easy to retrieve from above... etc etc. The design of anchors *is* exacting. ............


They may do a lot of R&D for rig work, but when is the last time they changed the anchor sailors use as a result of their R&D work? Not saying it is a bad anchor, just wondering.


----------



## tdw

If Bruce themselves no longer manufacture small boat anchors where do "genuine" Bruce anchors now come from ?


----------



## MedSailor

Bruce hasn't changed their consumer anchor design for the betterment of us all because they stopped making consumer anchors. Too many people flocked to the Lewmar Claw. Who's to blame them, it was 1/4 or less of the price and who really knows if it's different enough to drag you onto the rocks.

Here's a thought experiment. If I can weld up a Masocna look-alike would you buy it from me? Those things cost hundreds of dollars! I'll make you one for $99.00

TDW, Bruces are hard to come by now. I got lucky and saw a neighbor unshacklilng his 66lb beast in favor of a Manson. I offered him $250 for it, and he sold it to me for $150. They can still be found at swap meets, craigslist etc. 

As for the bolts holding the anchor together, why would that bother you? Properly sized bolts of the correct steel can be stronger than what they're bolted into. After all, it's bolts that hold your chain plates into your hull, and thus keep your rig upright right? Some boats even have bolts holding their keels on....

MedSailor


----------



## xymotic

Put me in the bolts should not be on an anchor... camp. TO be fair, those don't seem like they would affect holding if they sheered.

BUT... you are introducing a LOT of variables.

They are strong IF they are of high Quality
IF the vendor doesn't switch them out on you
IF you check them for corrosion
IF they never see a side load 

As to your other points, no, my rig is not on bolted chainplates. My Chainplates are 1/2" Steel that is integrally Welded to the hull


----------



## PCP

It seems very similar to the new "cheap" Spade. I don't see that one on that test, nor the Spade for that matter.

They say they have tested against the "reliable" anchors in the Industry". Didn't they consider that the Spade is a reliable anchor in the Industry?

On the other hand that "cheap" spade had disapeared from the market as if it had never existed. Is this the same anchor?

Regards

Paulo


----------



## tdw

MedSailor said:


> snippy ....
> 
> TDW, Bruces are hard to come by now. I got lucky and saw a neighbor unshacklilng his 66lb beast in favor of a Manson. I offered him $250 for it, and he sold it to me for $150. They can still be found at swap meets, craigslist etc.
> 
> snippy ....
> 
> MedSailor


Med,
Any idea when Bruce stopped manufacturing small ? Interests sake only as we have one on our girl. Have to say I love the thing. Sets like a rock in fact. Overall I prefer it to the Rocna we had on the old girl. Only negative I find is that it sometimes likes to come up backwards and I have to give it a whack with boathook to spin it round. 
It was factory fitted but to be honest I have no idea if it is the real deal or a copy. Must check that out next weekend. I admit I simply presumed genuine.


----------



## SloopJonB

tdw said:


> Med,
> Any idea when Bruce stopped manufacturing small ? Interests sake only as we have one on our girl. Have to say I love the thing. Sets like a rock in fact. Overall I prefer it to the Rocna we had on the old girl. Only negative I find is that it sometimes likes to come up backwards and I have to give it a whack with boathook to spin it round.
> It was factory fitted but to be honest I have no idea if it is the real deal or a copy. Must check that out next weekend. I admit I simply presumed genuine.


The real ones have "Bruce" cast into the shank.


----------



## tdw

SloopJonB said:


> The real ones have "Bruce" cast into the shank.


hmmm .... don't recall seeing any marks .... in fact I'm thinking that we probably have a Lewmar Claw as they seem to be unmarked. I'll compare the pics with our anchor on the weekend.


----------



## cupper3

tdw said:


> Med,
> Any idea when Bruce stopped manufacturing small ? Interests sake only as we have one on our girl. Have to say I love the thing. *Sets like a rock in fact. Overall I prefer it to the Rocna we had on the old girl. *Only negative I find is that it sometimes likes to come up backwards and I have to give it a whack with boathook to spin it round.
> It was factory fitted but to be honest I have no idea if it is the real deal or a copy. Must check that out next weekend. I admit I simply presumed genuine.


What types of bottoms are you using it in?


----------



## jrd22

Med- you got a bargain, I paid $400 for our used 30kg (66lb). The reason I don't like the looks of the bolts on the roll bar are because if the bar caught on something solid it would put a side load on those two (why didn't they put two on each side?) bolts that hold it on. It wouldn't take much to snap them with the leverage of the roll bar.
TDW- It's been at least 5 years since Bruce discontinued making small anchors. They still make the huge ones for offshore drilling rigs as far as I know.
I've been using a Bruce for over 20 years here in the PNW on two different boats, never had one drag and have only had three occasions where it didn't set right away (once in heavy eel grass and two on solid smooth rock-never did get it to set those two times).


----------



## MedSailor

jrd22 said:


> Med- you got a bargain, I paid $400 for our used 30kg (66lb). The reason I don't like the looks of the bolts on the roll bar are because if the bar caught on something solid it would put a side load on those two (why didn't they put two on each side?) bolts that hold it on. It wouldn't take much to snap them with the leverage of the roll bar.
> TDW- It's been at least 5 years since Bruce discontinued making small anchors. They still make the huge ones for offshore drilling rigs as far as I know.
> I've been using a Bruce for over 20 years here in the PNW on two different boats, never had one drag and have only had three occasions where it didn't set right away (once in heavy eel grass and two on solid smooth rock-never did get it to set those two times).


I suppose the bolts on the roll bar could be vulnerable (not really if properly engineered) but then again the roll bar isn't supposed to be a load bearing.

On closer inspection the shank does intersect the fluke closer to the tip, much like the "Sword" or the "Ocean" both made by spade anchors. I wonder if the "Sword" or "Ocean" is the cheap spade that paulo was referring to.

Yeah, that $150 66lb genuine Bruce is some of the best return on dollar investment I've ever spent. Lets see, moorage for my boat runs $75/night and I've already spent around 100nights laying to it in the last 4 years.... Yeah, I'd say that's good value. I kept the 44# genuine Bruce that came with the boat too now that they're scarce, just in case I loose the big one. Although, if I lost the big B I'd probably pony up and try out a Spade. I hear good things.

It seems like it's been a couple years since a big anchor test has been done. Aren't we due for another one to stir the pot?

MedSailor


----------



## MedSailor

SloopJonB said:


> P.S. is the real Bruce noticeably better than the Lewmar copy? Details please.


Link to the 2006 Sail Magazine test of anchors. The claw didn't do well at all, they suspected that it might be because of the different geometry of the Claw as compated to the Bruce. Then again, the real Bruce didn't do well in a very well designed test from 1995. Maybe the Bruce really does suck and we believers are just in denial. Mine has held in 30kts sustained with gusts in the 40s several times.....

2006 Sail Test: http://www.alberg37.org/Project%20DB/2006AnchorTest/2006%20IndependentAnchorTest.pdf

From the article:
The Claw is Lewmar's version of the Bruce to the ocean floor. Bruce no longer make yacht Claw doesn't share the original geometry anchor which has been around since 1972. anchors, hence our testing this version. The of the Bruce design? Were the Claw's fl ukes Used by cruisers the world over, it was Claw is made from a single piece of high-grade simply not sharp enough to penetrate the developed to secure oil rigs steel and stows well on the bow-roller. harder clay-like sand? We recorded similar We were surprised that it was one of the results at 7:1 scope. The beach-pull trials worst performers in our tests. The maximum showed the Claw ploughing a longer trench resistance at 5:1 scope was 886 lb - for a brief down the beach than most. spike before breaking out. The tension graphs Our conclusions were that the fl ukes of showed that the anchor never penetrated the Claw weren't sharp or weighted enough properly, setting and releasing rapidly or simply to penetrate.scraping the bottom. Was this because the Price: £58.35

1995 US Sailing test: http://www.ussailing.org/safety/Anchor/anchor_study.htm


----------



## tdw

cupper3 said:


> What types of bottoms are you using it in?


Varies a bit but sand (both loose and firm) and mud mainly. Our old CQR would start to let loose at around 35 knots in mud and worse case anchored in over 40 knots we moved half a boats length before holding firm, that in thick mud. Rocna was marginally better. In loose sand the CQR was utterly hopeless the Rocna fine. Our "Bruce" has performed faultlessly in all conditions though this is the new boat so not a direct comparison I guess.



jrd22 said:


> snippy
> 
> TDW- It's been at least 5 years since Bruce discontinued making small anchors. They still make the huge ones for offshore drilling rigs as far as I know.
> I've been using a Bruce for over 20 years here in the PNW on two different boats, never had one drag and have only had three occasions where it didn't set right away (once in heavy eel grass and two on solid smooth rock-never did get it to set those two times).


John .... Have done some reading and while our anchor is eight years old so could have feasibly come from the Bruce factory its stainless and I believe they were never made by Bruce in stainless. Be interesting to see what the end result re "who made it" actually is. Not likely to change my opinion though, I still love the thing.

ah yes ... a ps .... Malo use a lot of Lewmar gear on their boats, so maybe thats a clue to origin of anchor.


----------



## Brent Swain

Test any anchor on dry land before trusting it on your boat. Danforths we made with too wide an angle, flipped on their side and dragged easily, until we reduced the angle. Then it dove in securely. Less than 32 degrees still works , one degree over 32 degrees reduces holding power by 50%. Any more, and it will flip on it's side and drag forever without biting in. 
Looks like the anchor shown has the same problem as a Bruce and many others. Get a rock the right size in and it will drag forever. A plow or Delta will let the rock slide out to one side. 
I hope to try a roll bar instead of ballast on the next delta I build.
I also hope to make it collapsible. A huge , grossly oversized, collapsible anchor in the bilge can be great insurance in a hurricane. With an alternator , I can easily weld it together when I need it , instead of bolting it.


----------



## JimMcGee

OK, here's a question. I picked up a 33# Manta claw for $13 when the local West Marine shut down (yes $13 that's not a typo).

Looking at the Manta chart I figured it would be a good upgrade from the 22#Danforth on the bow now. My boat is a 30' Catalina, 10,300lbs unloaded and the 22# Danforth is supposed to be rated for boats up to 38'.

*Manta Size Chart*
16.5lb Claw Anchor for Boats 24'-30'
22lb. Claw Anchor for Boats 31'-35'
33lb. Claw Anchor for Boats 36'-40'

Reading this thread got me curious. The size charts for the Lewmar are the same as the Manta, but the charts for the Manson Ray are quite different though it looks like the same design. Is this just a case of Manson being more conservative or is there some real difference?

*Manson Size Chart*
22lb. Ray Anchor, 18' to 25' Boat Length 
33lb. Ray Anchor, 25' to 30' Boat Length 
44lb. Ray Anchor, 30' to 40' Boat Length










BTW, no windlass so whatever I put on the bow comes up by hand. 

I figure either the Danforth or Manta should be enough anchor for my boat, but from reading I understand the Bruce style anchors are quicker to reset.

Thoughts?


----------



## cupper3

Anyone notice that the bolts are not only on the hoop, but also holding the shank to the fluke?

Those are the bolts that would concern me.


----------



## MedSailor

cupper3 said:


> Anyone notice that the bolts are not only on the hoop, but also holding the shank to the fluke?
> 
> Those are the bolts that would concern me.


Why is everybody so concerned about bolts? Bolts hold most chain-plates on, and hold many a keel in place.....

Boltophobia..... 

MedSailor


----------



## tdw

JimMcGee said:


> OK, here's a question. I picked up a 33# Manta claw for $13 when the local West Marine shut down (yes $13 that's not a typo).
> 
> Looking at the Manta chart I figured it would be a good upgrade from the 22#Danforth on the bow now. My boat is a 30' Catalina, 10,300lbs unloaded and the 22# Danforth is supposed to be rated for boats up to 38'.
> 
> *Manta Size Chart*
> 16.5lb Claw Anchor for Boats 24'-30'
> 22lb. Claw Anchor for Boats 31'-35'
> 33lb. Claw Anchor for Boats 36'-40'
> 
> Reading this thread got me curious. The size charts for the Lewmar are the same as the Manta, but the charts for the Manson Ray are quite different though it looks like the same design. Is this just a case of Manson being more conservative or is there some real difference?
> 
> *Manson Size Chart*
> 22lb. Ray Anchor, 18' to 25' Boat Length
> 33lb. Ray Anchor, 25' to 30' Boat Length
> 44lb. Ray Anchor, 30' to 40' Boat Length
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, no windlass so whatever I put on the bow comes up by hand.
> 
> I figure either the Danforth or Manta should be enough anchor for my boat, but from reading I understand the Bruce style anchors are quicker to reset.
> 
> Thoughts?


Not ever had our 'Bruce' require resetting I can't say whether they do it quicker or not. I have very rarely experienced real dragging once anchor was set but in both cases I can think of I'm prepared to put the blame on not enough scope. When our CQR dragged in sand it simply never set at all.
Once I've had at least 3:1 plus depth of water plus allowance for freeboard and all chain I've not had any problems including the old CQR.


----------



## xymotic

JimMcGee said:


> OK, here's a question. I picked up a 33# Manta claw for $13 when the local West Marine shut down (yes $13 that's not a typo).


Are you sure that wasn't Boater's World? West usually ships it to another store.


----------



## JimMcGee

xymotic said:


> Are you sure that wasn't Boater's World? West usually ships it to another store.


Yep, West Marine. They were holding it in the back for somebody who never came back to claim it. It was down to the last day or so before they shut down and the manager was playing lets make a deal.

It didn't hurt that I bought a ton of stay-set, three strand dock line, etc.


----------



## ottos

Jim,
What town was that WM in?

.


----------



## Stumble

I actually find anchor recomendations to be grossly undersized, and would always go up at least one step. The problem is that big anchors are expensive, and everyone buys on price. So manufacturers recommendations are the minimum you can get away with...

In addition most anchor recomendations are made for 50kn of wind... Since the force imparted by the wind goes up with the square of wind speed, what will work in 50 may not hold in 60, and will be grossly inadequate at 80kn. So unless you have somewhere to run too in the event of a major storm, a bigger anchor is always better.

This is why for sizing I recommend the biggest anchor you can get back on board, like the Dashew's I am convinced an anchor isn't big enough until people start laughing at you. I also recommend minimal amounts of chain, and putting that weight back into the anchor. The cantenary effect in major storms is a myth, but massive anchor weight isn't.


----------



## SloopJonB

Stumble said:


> I actually find anchor recomendations to be grossly undersized, and would always go up at least one step. The problem is that big anchors are expensive, and everyone buys on price. So manufacturers recommendations are the minimum you can get away with....


Why would a manufacturer recommend an undersized anchor? It's in their best interests, both financial and reputation-wise to recommend MORE than you really need.


----------



## blt2ski

Most recommendations I have seen are only for 40 knots of wind. Some anchor manufactures do have recommendations for 20 and 60 knot winds too. With most saying if you have a higher windage rig, ie catamaran or big power boat, to upsize also.

In the meantime, if you think the recommendations are too small, Try out this factor if I can type it correctly for the minimum anchor per the local race rules, and minimum of anchor and chain, or all chain!

(LOA/17) 3rd power for max anchor. For my 30' boat, that is 5.5 lbs IIRC, ie (30/17) = 1.7x1.7x1.7 IIRC

min metal total is X squared/80 or 11.25 lbs for my 30' boat,

with adequate sized diam rope at min 150' in length! 

Most anchor manufactures are in the 15-25 lb range for a 30' boat like mine. Depending upon the style etc. Danforths seem to be a bit lighter in recommendation vs a claw/spade style. Aluminum danforths are as light as 7 or 11 lbs for my boat manufacture recommended.

Marty


----------



## denverd0n

SloopJonB said:


> Why would a manufacturer recommend an undersized anchor? It's in their best interests, both financial and reputation-wise to recommend MORE than you really need.


Well, yes and no. They want to make the sale. That means that they want to convince you that their anchors are better than the next guy. If they can sell you on the idea that a 30 lbs. anchor of theirs, which costs $200, is as good as the 40 lbs. anchor of the other kind, which costs $275, then you are more likely to buy their anchor.

So they kind of have paradoxical incentives--both to sell you a bigger anchor, and to convince you that you don't need a bigger anchor.


----------



## SloopJonB

blt2ski said:


> Most recommendations I have seen are only for 40 knots of wind. Some anchor manufactures do have recommendations for 20 and 60 knot winds too. With most saying if you have a higher windage rig, ie catamaran or big power boat, to upsize also.
> 
> In the meantime, if you think the recommendations are too small, Try out this factor if I can type it correctly for the minimum anchor per the local race rules, and minimum of anchor and chain, or all chain!
> 
> (LOA/17) 3rd power for max anchor. For my 30' boat, that is 5.5 lbs IIRC, ie (30/17) = 1.7x1.7x1.7 IIRC
> 
> min metal total is X squared/80 or 11.25 lbs for my 30' boat,
> 
> with adequate sized diam rope at min 150' in length!
> 
> Most anchor manufactures are in the 15-25 lb range for a 30' boat like mine. Depending upon the style etc. Danforths seem to be a bit lighter in recommendation vs a claw/spade style. Aluminum danforths are as light as 7 or 11 lbs for my boat manufacture recommended.
> 
> Marty


When Bruce made recreational anchors their web site spec'd a 10 kilo (22 LB) working anchor and a 20 kilo (44 LB) storm anchor for my 22,000 Lb Columbia 43.

I've seen people successfully anchor a 30 footer in a sheltered cove with a 2 1/2 kilo Bruce.

Unless you are a world cruiser, sizing your anchor for over 50 knots of wind is just creating work for Osteopaths and physiotherapists.

Of course, around here, there are hurricane holes everywhere.


----------



## klem

SloopJonB said:


> Unless you are a world cruiser, sizing your anchor for over 50 knots of wind is just creating work for Osteopaths and physiotherapists.


I would argue that in many places, sizing for 50+ knots is not unreasonable for coastal cruisers because of severe thunderstorms. For example, this year, I have already been at anchor for 4 thunderstorms that qualified as severe and New England certainly is not the worst place for these types of storms. While thunderstorms with 50+ knot winds are not very common, sooner or later you end up anchored in one if you cruise enough, I can think of several for me.


----------



## blt2ski

Sloop,

I have a 7.5kg bruce/lewmar knock off. 15' of 1/4HT chain and 1/2" rope IIRC. works well so far in some 25-30 knot winds. Somebody makes a 7 lb version, have toyed with one of them for my race anchor with 4' of 5/16" chain, IIRC that is the 1lb per foot size. Then going to 20-25' of chain on the 7.5, or going to a 10kg. Not sure really that a 10 would help much around here if I add some more chain frankly. Delta makes/made a 9 lb fastset which has been the one I have really toyed with. Lewmare makes an 11 lb bruce too. Could do that with 3' of 1/4 also. I do have a 5 lbs bruce, that has held me in some 10-15 knot stuff. I actually use that for a race buoy. But it did better than an equal lb danforth in equal winds while setting buoy. i also do not have to worry as much about resetting with the bruce when the tide wind shifts, like a danforth.

marty


----------



## Ferretchaser

I use a 30 Kg bruce with 70 mtr. of 10mm chain and my 35" Bonito does not drag wherever I drop the hook. Works for me and I am not about to experiment with a anchor that look like it came out of a mecano set.

Michael


----------



## cupper3

Ferretchaser said:


> I use a 30 Kg bruce with 70 mtr. of 10mm chain and my 35" Bonito does not drag wherever I drop the hook. Works for me and *I am not about to experiment with a anchor that look like it came out of a mecano set.*
> 
> Michael


I think you just nailed the primary reason people are not jumping up and down on this one. It may test well on holding on different surfaces, but needing another piece of hardware that needs constant vigilance and maintenance to ensure all the bolts are tight would scare me away from this being a primary anchor.

It might be OK as a backup, but it better be priced accordingly.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

*more preying Mantus*



MedSailor said:


> TEST VIDEOS/ NEWS | MANTUS ANCHORS
> 
> Looks like there's a new Mansocna on the market. This one claims to be superior to all the others (who doesn't), but it is novel in that it is a roll-bar type anchor that disassembles for stowage. The spade is a "next generation" anchor that has this feature, but if you're of the roll-bar faith this might appeal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see any evidence of 3rd party testing yet and one can never trust videos/tests done by the maufactuter, but I'll stay tuned. It also seems like it's pretty heavy by their recommendations chart. Don't know if that's design inefficiency or if they're just hugely conservative with their size recomendations. They could also be recommending "2 sizes up" in order to edge out the competition in upcoming tests.
> 
> MedSailor
> 
> PS Being a disciple of the almighty Bruce it's a big pet peeve of mine when they test the "bruce" against their anchor using a Lewmar Claw. I couldn't tell if they were using a Bruce or Lewmar, but I do know that neither makes a 25lb anchor like they claimed to test.


My 
Name is Greg I am the founder of Mantus Anchors, i appreciate the discussion Mantus has generated on this forum. I would be more than happy to answer any questions.
In the matter of sizing WE ARE conservative with our recommendations!
An anchor is a piece of gear that lives depend on! Heavier size increases both: the holding power and the likelyhood the anchor will set.
Now I know Mantus is the best setting anchor on the market today, but of course the burden of proof is on us and we are in the process of submitting Mantus for independent testing. Still If you believe us that we did not alter or influence the videos, which we did not, than you will find our Test Videos on Mantus Anchor page convincing. 
Greg


----------



## SVAuspicious

Hello Greg. The link you posted didn't work for me. 

The results seem odd to me as the relative performance of the other brands does not align with independent testing over the last few years. That is odd.

I do like your chain hook.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Dave, thanks! I just fixed the link.
In reference to individual anchor performance in our tests, can you be more specific about what data cast doubt in your mind?
In general our tests show agreement with previous results. In really soft silty bottoms all anchors can set, so blade surface area decides the best holding. In this situation 
Danforths/Fortress perform better than the lot, as these anchors offer bigger blades for the given size. In harder more challenging bottoms, setting ability becomes more important, this is where new generation anchors shine. We claim Mantus to be the best in its ability to penetrate hard packed soil. This setting ability not only effects initial penetration but also the depth it dives and ultimately, holding power. In more forgiving soils it is sometimes hard to show the difference between the more traditional anchors and the ones designed to penetrate. But an anchor is a piece of gear that lives depend on. It needs to work everywhere, all the time and that's what we have achieved with Mantus.
Greg


----------



## SVAuspicious

Mantus Anchors said:


> In reference to individual anchor performance in our tests, can you be more specific about what data cast doubt in your mind?
> In general our tests show agreement with previous results. In really soft silty bottoms all anchors can set, so blade surface area decides the best holding. In this situation


Since you asked so politely ... *grin*

Caveat - I watched once through on my phone and paused at the graphs so I may have missed something.

I saw really outstanding performance from CQR in one particular bottom that surprises me. I saw generally low performance from Rocna that surprised me.

We got really pounded by TS Debby here and are still in recovery so Internet is up and down, slow when we have it. I'll be happy to look more carefully in a few days. Do you have a test protocol? Did you do 30 or more sets of each anchor in each location to get some statistical significance? I did like what I saw of your test set-up. If you meet professional academic standards have you considered writing a paper for a peer-reviewed journal? The real science would be cool to see from someone. I've been working on a protocol off and on for a couple of years that would allow truly apple-to-apples comparisons of multiple evaluations at multiple sites. I need a civil engineer or ocean engineer with chops for saturated soils to finish and publish. Anyway - that's a digression.

Best of luck with your product.


----------



## SloopJonB

Mantus Anchors said:


> Greg


I have a couple of questions about your anchor. First, what are the spec's, materials etc. of the bolts used to assemble it? Next, why does it seem to outperform the seemingly nearly identical "Mansocna" - sharpness? Blade angle? Lastly, why do you have the shank merely bolted to the fluke? It would seem intuitively that having the fluke slotted so it could slide over the shank (which would be T shaped at the end) and THEN be bolted would make it stronger. As it is, it appears the tensile loading on the shank/fluke bolts is the only thing holding it together.


----------



## AllThumbs

I bought one and I will let you know how I like it after our cruise in August. I have received it and it looks to be of good quality and the bolts don't bother me one bit. Half our world is held together by bolts. The wheels on your car are bolted on and nobody frets about those.


----------



## blt2ski

in Some cases, bolts/rivots are better than welding! Not sure if this is the case..........not sure the bolts would worry me too much. 

is there a 9lb version or there abouts?

Marty


----------



## Mantus Anchors

*Preying Mantus*

Marty we do have 8 lbs and 13 lbs models. You can see sizing guide and available sizes on 
Mantus Anchor Page. on our website.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

SVAuspicious said:


> Since you asked so politely ... *grin*
> 
> Caveat - I watched once through on my phone and paused at the graphs so I may have missed something.
> 
> I saw really outstanding performance from CQR in one particular bottom that surprises me. I saw generally low performance from Rocna that surprised me.
> 
> We got really pounded by TS Debby here and are still in recovery so Internet is up and down, slow when we have it. I'll be happy to look more carefully in a few days. Do you have a test protocol? Did you do 30 or more sets of each anchor in each location to get some statistical significance? I did like what I saw of your test set-up. If you meet professional academic standards have you considered writing a paper for a peer-reviewed journal? The real science would be cool to see from someone. I've been working on a protocol off and on for a couple of years that would allow truly apple-to-apples comparisons of multiple evaluations at multiple sites. I need a civil engineer or ocean engineer with chops for saturated soils to finish and publish. Anyway - that's a digression.
> 
> Best of luck with your product.


Dave, we have four different videos posted, in the off the boat test in galveston... Where we are using a shrimp boat we pulled 3 times per anchor...
Per location. When Cqr And Delta actually set in softer bottoms they did not show to be inferior to Rocna, in hard sandy mud Rocna was second best. Also note we used a 35lbs Cqr. The major problem we found is bottom often changes very quickly and it is difficult to drop in identical bottom every time. What usefull from this are the trends, andbthere was not much variation between the three attempts.
We were testing how mantus anchor performs in progressively more challenging hard packed bottom as compared to the rest. We will continue to test and post our results.
I hope this helps.
Greg


----------



## SVAuspicious

SVAuspicious said:


> Caveat - I watched once through on my phone and paused at the graphs so I may have missed something.


I went back and looked more carefully. The relative performance of Rocna, Spade, Delta, and CQR do not match either previous evaluations or more personal experience in bottoms similar to those you tested in.

Ignoring my own experience, if you had compared your findings with previous evaluations and either found and corrected your methodology or developed a reasonable explanation for the differences your findings would be more credible.

I suggest that the greatest shortfalls in anchor tests have been:

1. Inadequate number of pulls (for statistical significance should be 30)
2. Inadequate range of anchor sizes for each anchor type (generally one of each size - it would be great to see three or even five)
3. Failure to measure and record projected surface area (data which you do in fact show)
4. Failure to measure and record soil characteristics (shear strength for example)

There isn't a lot of good scientific method in the anchor wars.


----------



## SVAuspicious

Oops - I was working on my post while you were posting.

The problem with truly scientific testing is the time and expense of execution. 

While I have some doubts about the precision of your results it does look to me, superficially, that you have a product that should perform much like the other new generation anchors (Rocna, Spade, Raya, Manson Supreme) out in the world.

Best of luck to you moving forward.


----------



## RickWestlake

Greg,

Thank you for 'coming on board' to discuss this anchor with us! It looks interesting to me as a 'backup' or 'big backup / storm' anchor, even though I do have my reservations about the bolts.

A few years ago I bought a Raya Tempest 800 to use on my trailer-sailer, a MacGregor 26X - this is a 7.5 kg anchor that's similar to the Spade, but it has a wedge-fitting removable shank that pulls up (from the underside) through a sturdy welded receiver collar in the fluke. It could be bolted in place with one through-bolt, but the shank's wedge fit into the collar took all the stress; you simply couldn't have pulled it out without tearing apart the slot in the fluke! I still have the anchor, as it is just big enough to use as a backup on my current boat, a Bristol 29.9; I would love to find a bigger one for my next sailboat, but poor João has Gone West.

(I tried to upload a diagram from João's old web-site, that I'd saved on my computer. It shows the wedge fit of the shank in the fluke's receiver. Unfortunately, SailNet didn't cooperate.)

The notion of bolting the shank to the top of the fluke is what I find disquieting about the Mantus. The bolts appear to be a weak link in the anchor. I am with Sloop Jon B in this - if the shank pulled up through a receiver in the fluke, so that it was held in place by a heavy collar of welded steel, I'd be very very interested in the Mantus!


----------



## Brent Swain

The shank looks mighty thin.


----------



## cupper3

Mantus Anchors said:


> There has been several readers expressing concern about the bolts and suggesting that bolts would be the weakest link.
> 
> The bolts are oversized with such margin that discussions regarding bolt strength are not really relevant. A single bolt is more than sufficient to deal with expected loads, even in a hurricane situation. Just think cleats on boats are bolted in, wheels on the car are bolted on. A grade 2 bolt has min yield stress 33000 psi, 1/2 inch bolt is good for approx 25000 pounds and we have 4 of them on our 35 and 45 pound models. These models are sized boats that weigh 15-20,000 pounds so you could literally suspend the boat of that bolt. For example expected loads on a 45 lbs anchor if properly sized for a boat are less than 10,000 even in the worst imaginable conditions. The chain, the cleat, or the shank hole will brake long before the bolts on the anchor will, not to mention the shank will bend. Now the reason we did not have the shank plate take the load is bc we found that a smooth bottom on the fluke is very important for penetration. Prototypes with shank slotted through the fluke did not do well in hard bottoms bc of added volume to drive through undisturbed hard clay for example. This is why Spade Anchor has difficulty in really dense soils, the nose has too much volume.
> The nuts on our anchors are to be used with compression washers and grease and if you don't feel like ever taking the anchor apart until the time comes to re-galvanize it, than you can forget about the bolts after initial assembly.
> We do offer a lifetime warranty on the anchor and all its parts.
> I hope this alleviates some of the concerns raised about using bolts. Again remember bolts are on wheels of your car, attach rotors of the helicopter blades, there is a whole world bolted out there..... of-course size matters!
> 
> I hope this conversation alleviates some concern about the use of bolts in the expected load path on our anchor.
> 
> However, the discussion on bolts and anchors ability to break down for storage is a tangent. The main point I want to communicate and hopefully convince some of you
> Is that Mantus Anchor's ability to DIG IN is unparalleled. This was the whole point of the design after all, otherwise there is no room for just another anchor.
> Ok my rent is over.... Happy 4th everyone
> 
> Greg


Good answer, especially your point about added volume on hard bottoms.

I think what everyone is waiting for are indendant tests, on both holding and the bolts. You need to remember, we just went through a period whereby Rocna swore up and down of what strength steel they were using, yet when tested, it was found that they were lying. In fact, Rocna has now lowered their standards as opposed what was promoted for a very long time.

I'm discussing the Rocna fiasco because of the shadow of doubt that has been cast on any new anchor. That is just reality.

So, keep in mind that you are now claiming extraordinary holding power compared to other similar anchors. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, especially with the Rocna situation fresh in many peoples' minds.

May I suggest that the testing that needs to show will comprise of a number of things:


SHHP - A Lloyds certification would be very useful. For all size ranges.
Metallurgical specs that can be independently verified
Multiple independent anchoring tests. And yes, I recognize those may be difficult to arrange, but seeing the beach test is really not enough.

Good luck with your product, and please consider these points.

Others may expand on them. Your marketing to a skeptical audience. If you win them over by performance, you will have a winner.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

I apologize for the confusion, but do to the lack of communication Jeff was not informed that I am a paid advertiser, and I hope will remove this post once this gets cleared up.
Sincerely Greg
Mantus Anchors


----------



## Maine Sail

blt2ski said:


> Sloop,
> 
> I have a 7.5kg bruce/lewmar knock off. 15' of 1/4HT chain and 1/2" rope IIRC. works well so far in some 25-30 knot winds. Somebody makes a 7 lb version, have toyed with one of them for my race anchor with 4' of 5/16" chain, IIRC that is the 1lb per foot size. Then going to 20-25' of chain on the 7.5, or going to a 10kg. Not sure really that a 10 would help much around here if I add some more chain frankly. Delta makes/made a 9 lb fastset which has been the one I have really toyed with. Lewmare makes an 11 lb bruce too. Could do that with 3' of 1/4 also. I do have a 5 lbs bruce, that has held me in some 10-15 knot stuff. I actually use that for a race buoy. But it did better than an equal lb danforth in equal winds while setting buoy. i also do not have to worry as much about resetting with the bruce when the tide wind shifts, like a danforth.
> 
> marty


About ten or twelve years ago we dragged our 33 pound genuine Bruce nearly 1/8 of a mile while the anchor remained set and this was at 9:1+ scope. This was on a 30' boat in very good holding mud. She just did not have the sheer holding power /surface area to deal with the 45-55 knot winds for that boat.. The Bruce is/was a great design but in my experience up-sizing them by TWO sizes is much more in-line with how they actually hold. Much has been written on properly sizing Bruce style anchors.. It is not necessarily the weight of the anchor but the surface area biting into the mud that matters...


----------



## SVAuspicious

Mantus Anchors said:


> I apologize for the confusion, but do to the lack of communication Jeff was not informed that I am a paid advertiser, and I hope will remove this post once this gets cleared up.


Greg - I regret that you appear to have been poorly treated by SailNet. I hope it works out quickly. Given the language used I hope you get the sort of public redress you deserve.


----------



## SVAuspicious

Maine Sail said:


> The Bruce is/was a great design but in my experience up-sizing them by TWO sizes is much more in-line with how they actually hold. Much has been written on properly sizing Bruce style anchors.. It is not necessarily the weight of the anchor but the surface area biting into the mud that matters...


Agreed. I think CQRs and Bruce anchors both should be two sizes up from manufacturer recommendations. The Delta should be one up. Rocna and Spade seem to work fine at the recommended size. Fortress seems to be fine at recommended size also. I can't speak so well to other brands from personal experience.


----------



## SloopJonB

Mantus Anchors said:


> I apologize for the confusion, but do to the lack of communication Jeff was not informed that I am a paid advertiser, and I hope will remove this post once this gets cleared up.
> Sincerely Greg Mantus Anchors


I don't understand the problem - you clearly identified yourself as the manufacturer and were merely answering the questions put to you by the members.

JeffH - can you clarify this?


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Jeff H was just doing his job! All is well!
A post was erased in the confusion, so I will re-post it, here:

There has been several readers expressing concern about the bolts and suggesting that bolts would be the weakest link.

The bolts are oversized with such margin that discussions regarding bolt strength are not really relevant. A single bolt is more than sufficient to deal with expected loads, even in a hurricane situation. Just think cleats on boats are bolted in, wheels on the car are bolted on. A grade 2 bolt has min yield stress 33000 psi, 1/2 inch bolt is good for approx 25000 pounds and we have 4 of them on our 35 and 45 pound models. These models are sized boats that weigh 15-20,000 pounds so you could literally suspend the boat of that bolt. For example expected loads on a 45 lbs anchor if properly sized for a boat are less than 10,000 even in the worst imaginable conditions. The chain, the cleat, or the shank hole will brake long before the bolts on the anchor will, not to mention the shank will bend. Now the reason we did not have the shank plate take the load is bc we found that a smooth bottom on the fluke is very important for penetration. Prototypes with shank slotted through the fluke did not do well in hard bottoms bc of added volume to drive through undisturbed hard clay for example. This is why Spade Anchor has difficulty in really dense soils, the nose has too much volume.
The nuts on our anchors are to be used with compression washers and grease and if you don't feel like ever taking the anchor apart until the time comes to re-galvanize it, than you can forget about the bolts after initial assembly.
We do offer a lifetime warranty on the anchor and all its parts. 
I hope this alleviates some of the concerns raised about using bolts. Again remember bolts are on wheels of your car, attach rotors of the helicopter blades, there is a whole world bolted out there..... of-course size matters! 

I hope this conversation alleviates some concern about the use of bolts in the expected load path on our anchor.

However, the discussion on bolts and anchors ability to break down for storage is a tangent. The main point I want to communicate and hopefully convince some of you 
Is that Mantus Anchor's ability to DIG IN is unparalleled. This was the whole point of the design after all, otherwise there is no room for just another anchor.
Ok my rent is over.... Happy 4th everyone

Greg


----------



## FormerAdministrator

Let me intervene here so that we can move on.

Mantus Anchors is indeed a NEW Sailnet advertiser in good standing. He has been dealing with our marketing person here at Sailnet and I was away on the water last week enjoying the blistering heat of Chesapeake Bay (but nice breezes) and often had very limited connectivity with the marketing person here at Sailnet who had been working with Mantus.

I was unaware of the dealings that Mantus had with our marketing person and when asked by the Moderators if Mantus was an advertiser I replied No and they did their job based on the 'mis information' that I gave them.

I want to publicly express my deepest apologies to the membership here and to Mantus Anchors for this mistake.

The responsibility falls solely on me for this mistake.

We are taking steps to insure that I am not the sole conduit in the future for information regarding new advertisers coming on line so that this type of unfortunate mistake never occurs again.

regards

Jeff J
Sailnet Administrator


----------



## SVAuspicious

administrator said:


> The responsibility falls solely on me for this mistake.


Thank you Jeff.


----------



## Jeff_H

And I too wish to weigh in and express my sincere apologies. I had accidentally banned Greg on the erroneous assumption that he was an not a paid advertising member and who was posting commercial materials and links in violation of Forum Rules and disregarding warnings against doing so. I wish to apologize publically for my actions in banning Greg and Mantus Anchors, but also more forcefully and perhaps more significantly for my choice of words in doing so. While the responsibility for the mistake in banning Mantus can be shared, my choice of words, was a mistake all my own, and for that I am truly sorry. 

So that everyone understands little more about this, one of the less visible, and perhaps more controversial (amoungst us moderators) aspects of being a SailNet moderator is addressing advertising embedded within member avatars, signatures and posts. We treat the restriction against posting commercial material very seriously and try very hard to be fair minded in this. 

As an unwritten policy, we, moderators will remove any links from non-advertising member's posts and send a PM to that member advising them that they are in violation, please desist or become an advertiser. (We do summarily ban obvious spammers.) 

The Moderator's standard practice when there is a second violation is that we send a more strongly worded warning with the threat of temporary banning. In this case, as Jeff_J had explained above, we had been inaccurately told that Mantus Anchors were not an advertiser, the second message went out, and seemed to be ignored. As a result, I responded by issuing a temporary ban. Mantus was an advertiser and my ban and choice of associated language was eroneous and unfair. 

beyond this case, member posting of self-promoting material remains a complex issue. On one hand, being able to post commerical materials is one of the benefits of being a paid advertiser. Allowing members to freely post commerical material therefore diminishes the benefit of being a paid SailNet advertiser. SailNet is in part funded by advertising and so this privilege is important to protect. 

Where this becomes awkward is that forum rules allow members to post links to other people's commercial sites. And perhaps more awkward still, is when we have a long term member who is posting a link to their own site, which has some enterprise with either some relevance to a discussion or has minimal finacial gain; such as perhaps a book they have written, or a blog with advertising. 

What makes this seem uncomfortable to me personally is that on one hand, I and my fellow moderators believe that we need to both be fair, and appear to be fair in how we administer the rules. 

But on the other hand, I believe that it is important for SailNet to support its members and in that regard, it is useful for members to be able to read information "straight from the horse's mouth" but also to provide a place for long term members to talk about what they are doing that might be usefuil to our community or simply discuss what they do outside of SailNet. 

The other associated issue is that we sometimes get manufacturers who come here only to promote their product in less than forthright ways. We have had members join under assumed names to either recommed their product or slam their competition. But we also have had members who identified who they were and were posting inaccurate information promoting their product, or grossly inaccurate slams against their competitors. This form of activity violates a different forum rule than the prohibition on posting an ad, but becomes harder to enforce when the violator is a paid advertiser. 

These are types of ongoing issues that the moderators and owners have been discussing, and we are hoping to provide creative ways of addressing these issues in the future. I do regret that Mantus Anchor was unfairly treated in the interim.

Jeff


----------



## johnnyandjebus

So I have been following this thread for two reasons;
1 The topic of anchors interests me as I will be buying at some point in the near future.
2 The design incorporating bolts into the anchor is both interesting and worrying(in my un-informed mind) Greg, it appears, has cleared this up.

So a mistake was made by sailnet and Greg stood by, waiting for it to be cleared up, which it was, with a detailed explanation. 

Two thumbs up to both the moderators and Greg for there response to this, It speaks well of both party's. Other anchor manufactures have not done so well with their online presence. 


Greg I took a look at your website. I have a question around anchor size and your recommendations. I sail a Contessa 26, 5400 pounds, 26 feet in length. Your site recommends a 25 pound anchor for 20-30 ft boats < 5000 pounds. Given my boat is 26 feet but weights 5400 pounds would I go a size up in your opinion?

John


----------



## blt2ski

Main,

I understand the wt vs surface area when it comes to holding power. For me any how, the smallish one follows the local minimum race rule so one does not hobby horse the boat due to too much wt in the front. BUT below, a bigger one would be available. Then smaller, is not designed to in reality, hold in 50+ knot winds. If I get a smaller one, ie around 8-10 lbs, then I would probably go to something in the 20-25lb range for the overnight style anchor. 

Along with "most" of the soil I anchor in here in puget sound is fine to course sand. There is some what I would call true mud, ie silt to clay size particles. Most is sand sized, ie .2-2mm or larger particles. 

I also do not wish to go to a fotress as the main one, as even tho an 11 lb one will hold my boat per say, at least locally, folks that have them, can not get them to set. My gut tells me, a semi buried Bruce/claw/spade or equal would hold me better than an equal chunk of metal not dug in from an initial standpoint, or at least something that will hold me if in a race, wind dies, current heads me towards some rocks, I need something to hold me until the wind pipes ups. Typically 2-3 knots of current at best.

My case, two anchors for different reasons shapes and forms.

marty


----------



## Mantus Anchors

johnnyandjebus said:


> So I have been following this thread for two reasons;
> 1 The topic of anchors interests me as I will be buying at some point in the near future.
> 2 The design incorporating bolts into the anchor is both interesting and worrying(in my un-informed mind) Greg, it appears, has cleared this up.
> 
> So a mistake was made by sailnet and Greg stood by, waiting for it to be cleared up, which it was, with a detailed explanation.
> 
> Two thumbs up to both the moderators and Greg for there response to this, It speaks well of both party's. Other anchor manufactures have not done so well with their online presence.
> 
> Greg I took a look at your website. I have a question around anchor size and your recommendations. I sail a Contessa 26, 5400 pounds, 26 feet in length. Your site recommends a 25 pound anchor for 20-30 ft boats < 5000 pounds. Given my boat is 26 feet but weights 5400 pounds would I go a size up in your opinion?
> 
> John


John,
Short answer: I would say that for coastal cruising and day excursions I think a 25 lbs anchor will be just fine, our recommendations are very conservative....
If you are planning a cruise to remote areas and are going to be leaving your boat unattended for a long period of time I would size up.

This topic is very contentious, mostly based on mariners experience/extrapolations. An anchor that holds great in firm bottoms will fail you in silt or won't set in kelp. Sizing up decreases the likelihood that you will drag in (silt) and increases the likelihood of setting in kelp/weeds etc.
So for best penetrating performance I can vouch for Mantus. Sizing? well the bigger the better!!! I know you heard that before... Its always a compromise between margin of safety vs ease of use and practicality.

Greg


----------



## MedSailor

Greg, of Mantus Anchors,

Thanks for "weighing in" here at Sailnet and welcome! I am pleased to see more and more anchors being designed and marketed and designs becoming closer to ideal.

Personally, I like the fact that your anchor has bolts and the fact that it can be disassembled for storage is a feature, not a flaw for me. I would like to see your company succeed though and I would like to offer this advice:

Have an independent company do destruction tests on your anchors. Once that's out of the way, you can point to the destruction tests and say "see, the bolts are not a problem." I fear that until you do this, and can show a certified piece of paper and photos of a twisted anchor, people will always be suspicious of your bolts.

For some reason, people trust steel (though if it is improperly made it can be soft enough to bend with you hands or brittle enough to shatter) and they trust welds (difficult to get the quality control here) but they don't always trust bolts. People seem to when they drive over an iron bridge, and trust then to hold their mast up (chain-plates) and their keel on (keel bolts) but when staring at a bolt, people are suspicious of it. They just are.

Destroy an anchor and put the proof front and center on your marketing materials so that you answer the inevitable "bolt-question" before it is even asked.

Good luck with your business. If it tests out well in the future I'll consider buying one.

MedSailor

PS What would happen if THIS bolt failed while you were driving across the bridge?


----------



## Mantus Anchors

MedSailor said:


> Greg, of Mantus Anchors,
> 
> Thanks for "weighing in" here at Sailnet and welcome! I am pleased to see more and more anchors being designed and marketed and designs becoming closer to ideal.
> 
> Personally, I like the fact that your anchor has bolts and the fact that it can be disassembled for storage is a feature, not a flaw for me. I would like to see your company succeed though and I would like to offer this advice:
> 
> Have an independent company do destruction tests on your anchors. Once that's out of the way, you can point to the destruction tests and say "see, the bolts are not a problem." I fear that until you do this, and can show a certified piece of paper and photos of a twisted anchor, people will always be suspicious of your bolts.
> 
> For some reason, people trust steel (though if it is improperly made it can be soft enough to bend with you hands or brittle enough to shatter) and they trust welds (difficult to get the quality control here) but they don't always trust bolts. People seem to when they drive over an iron bridge, and trust then to hold their mast up (chain-plates) and their keel on (keel bolts) but when staring at a bolt, people are suspicious of it. They just are.
> 
> Destroy an anchor and put the proof front and center on your marketing materials so that you answer the inevitable "bolt-question" before it is even asked.
> 
> Good luck with your business. If it tests out well in the future I'll consider buying one.
> 
> MedSailor
> 
> PS What would happen if THIS bolt failed while you were driving across the bridge?


Med Sailor, in response to your question regarding destructive testing we are in the process of getting Loyds Register Type Approval.

We expected that customers might question bolts on an anchor, simply bc it wasn't done before (i.e bolts used in the load path of an anchor) that's why we didn't just oversize bolts, we over sized them with such margin that no one could question the design. There may be we were a bit too confident... 

*The important thing is!:*
-This anchor is the safest piece of gear on the market, not because of strength of its construction or presence/absence of bolts but because in a rough, scary situation you can trust that it will set and set right away. It will set were Rocna or a Spade will not, in places Bruce/CQR/Delta will not set. These places exist and are real. People loose their boats everyday. Boats are rarely lost due to an anchor falling apart, but are often lost bc the anchor doesn't properly set or doesn't set at all. We find these places and test there. That's what you see on the videos... and we will continue to test and film bc this is the only I know of how to show the consumer that MANTUS is most reliable anchor you can buy. That is what the anchor was designed for....
I know this from pulling many anchors in different places hundreds of times... My job is to convince everyone else...
Greg


----------



## Mantus Anchors

This is a question to the SailNet community..
If you know of an area where its particularly difficult to set an anchor, please email us.
We will pick a few of the most treacherous spots we find and go there!
Greg


----------



## Maine Sail

Mantus Anchors said:


> *The important thing is!:*
> -This anchor is the safest piece of gear on the market, not because of strength of its construction or presence/absence of bolts but because in a rough, scary situation you can trust that it will set and set right away. *It will set were Rocna or a Spade will not, in places Bruce/CQR/Delta will not set. *These places exist and are real. People loose their boats everyday. Boats are rarely lost due to an anchor falling apart, but are often lost bc the anchor doesn't properly set or doesn't set at all. We find these places and test there. That's what you see on the videos... and we will continue to test and film bc this is the only I know of how to show the consumer that MANTUS is most reliable anchor you can buy. That is what the anchor was designed for....
> I know this from pulling many anchors in different places hundreds of times... My job is to convince everyone else...
> Greg


Greg,

Having also tested piles of anchors I am finding it tough to garner how or why your anchor, of such similar design to a Manson Supreme or Rocna, sets so much better? I currently own a Manson Supreme, Rocna, two Spades, two genuine CQR's, Fortress, genuine Bruce, Danforth and Supermax. I have also owned a Delta Fast Set so am not just some guy who's only ever owned a CQR.. All of these anchors have been thoroughly tested by me to determine which anchor will be placed on the bow of our boat. I also own a 5000 pound digital load cell which I use in my testing. This is a piece of gear that the other 99.95% of boaters don't own to use in making a truly educated decision about how to protect their family and vessel.

Can you please give us a detailed breakdown of "why" it can do this better and what you changed to make that so? I know why the others don't perform as well but I am having a tough time swallowing such a vast "improvement" over a Manson Supreme or Rocna?


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Maine Sail said:


> Greg,
> 
> Having also tested piles of anchors I am finding it tough to garner how or why your anchor, of such similar design to a Manson Supreme or Rocna, sets so much better? I currently own a Manson Supreme, Rocna, two Spades, two genuine CQR's, Fortress, genuine Bruce, Danforth and Supermax. I have also owned a Delta Fast Set so am not just some guy who's only ever owned a CQR.. All of these anchors have been thoroughly tested by me to determine which anchor will be placed on the bow of our boat. I also own a 5000 pound digital load cell which I use in my testing. This is a piece of gear that the other 99.95% of boaters don't own to use in making a truly educated decision about how to protect their family and vessel.
> 
> Can you please give us a detailed breakdown of "why" it can do this better and what you changed to make that so? I know why the others don't perform as well but I am having a tough time swallowing such a vast "improvement" over a Manson Supreme or Rocna?


Yes, of course:
The main change MANTUS has from Manson, Rocna duo is: we made the butt really wide so there is more weight on the nose as you drag the anchor. Of course there is much more such as the shape of the chisel, slick profile, shank length and position that work in concert to improve penetrating ability.
Other competitor are very different:
Spade is really bulky at the nose which causes problems in a really dense bottom
CQR/Delta/Fortress have very limited penetrating ability
Bruce sets very superficially in dense soils and resurfaces with increasing loads (actually really tricky bc it gives you a sensation of security)
Greg


----------



## tankersteve

I too am a future buyer who grew up reading about and working with Danforths and Deltas, so I am interested from a casual but interested perspective.

One area of interest from me is the consistent use of 10:1 scope in your tests. I see the shank of some of your competitors running through the mud when a 7:1 or 5:1 scope may have the initial set lifting the shank off the bottom.

I would be interested to see some tests with a 5:1 scope (in betwee the 'normally' recommended 7:1 and the 3:1 used by all chain rodes) and how your anchor performs. This is just one small area where your testing looks great but the conditions are perhaps not the norm.

Anyway, nice to see you on this site and ready to talk about a product that you believe in. 

Steve


----------



## hurricanesailor

Hey guys,
Sailnet newbie here. Just wanted to add my experience with the anchor since I bought one 2 months ago. So far it has been quite impressive. I could never get my Delta to set in this one spot in Galveston Bay. I saw these guys at the local Texas boat show and thought I would give them a try. So far A ++, I even tried setting in my back yard with thick grass and it still goes in...
I will keep you guys updated!


----------



## MedSailor

hurricanesailor said:


> Hey guys,
> Sailnet newbie here. Just wanted to add my experience with the anchor since I bought one 2 months ago. So far it has been quite impressive. I could never get my Delta to set in this one spot in Galveston Bay. I saw these guys at the local Texas boat show and thought I would give them a try. So far A ++, *I even tried setting in my back yard with thick grass and it still goes in...*
> I will keep you guys updated!


That would be a fun video to make, and for us to watch. Are you game to make a quick video?

MedSailor


----------



## MedSailor

Maine Sail said:


> Greg,
> 
> Having also tested piles of anchors I am finding it tough to garner how or why your anchor, of such similar design to a Manson Supreme or Rocna, sets so much better? I currently own a Manson Supreme, Rocna, two Spades, two genuine CQR's, Fortress, genuine Bruce, Danforth and Supermax. I have also owned a Delta Fast Set so am not just some guy who's only ever owned a CQR.. All of these anchors have been thoroughly tested by me to determine which anchor will be placed on the bow of our boat. I also own a 5000 pound digital load cell which I use in my testing. This is a piece of gear that the other 99.95% of boaters don't own to use in making a truly educated decision about how to protect their family and vessel.


Greg,

Allow me to suggest that you might want to send Main_Sail one of your anchors to test. He, and his opinions, are highly respected not only here on Sailnet but also on other forums. Main tests many pieces of gear with good scientific method, has the equipment to do it well and documents the experiments well. I also have no reason to believe that Main wouldn't give your anchor a fair test and an impartial write up as well.

I think that much of the marketing success that Rocna experiences today is from internet marketing on forums (though I didn't like how it was done) and I believe that these forums are a powerful place to get a foothold for your gear, so that they can start appearing on bows and get conversations started on docs.

I would like to add that I do not know Main Sail personally, have no affiliation with him, have never met him and I don't even know his real name. I know him from this forum, other fourms and his website. Assuming your product is good, I want your venture to succeed, which is my motivation for this suggestion. I think sending Main an anchor to test may be a good way to do just that. I would think that letting Main keep the anchor for his troubles would be a nice gesture also, but not if you (or Main) thought that would taint the impartiality of the test.

You can read through some of his old posts here and on other forums to get an idea for the type of posting he does and the level of respect he garners from the community. His website also has good examples of tests and write ups he has done, without compensation (that I know of) for the betterment of the boating community.

Main_Sail's website: Compass Marine's Photo Galleries at pbase.com

Best Regards,

MedSailor


----------



## Maine Sail

tankersteve said:


> One area of interest from me is the consistent use of 10:1 scope in your tests. I see the shank of some of your competitors running through the mud when a 7:1 or 5:1 scope may have the initial set lifting the shank off the bottom.
> 
> I would be interested to see some tests with a 5:1 scope (in betwee the 'normally' recommended 7:1 and the 3:1 used by all chain rodes) and how your anchor performs. This is just one small area where your testing looks great but the conditions are perhaps not the norm.
> 
> Anyway, nice to see you on this site and ready to talk about a product that you believe in.
> 
> Steve


Steve,

Until an anchor "bites" or resists on the bottom all anchors are essentially at infinite scope at the shank end, up to about 2:1 scope..

In this video the chain is at 2:1 and you can see that the shank barely bumps off infinite... If this CQR had "bit" then the 2:1 would have had a negative effect on the hook penetrating and remaining set but it really never left infinite scope enough to matter, even at just 2:1.


----------



## tankersteve

Maine Sail,

Thanks for the info. However, that brings the issue up of why some testers do their tests at multiple ratios. Is there truly no difference in how an anchor will set, regardless of the length?

While consistent through all their tests, the ratio that the Mantus uses in its tests is not one most folks would normally use. If ratio does in fact make a difference in how an anchor sets (especially in the water versus on the beach), then I would just like to see the testing done at more 'common' ratios. 

And to Mantus, I will admit to being impressed by your product, but definitely continue to find more areas for tests and hopefully some 3rd-party tests. It will add to the legitimacy of your claims.

Tankersteve


----------



## Jeff_H

Mantus Anchors said:


> This is a question to the SailNet community..
> If you know of an area where its particularly difficult to set an anchor, please email us.
> We will pick a few of the most treacherous spots we find and go there!
> Greg


Greg;
One of the most difficult anchoring conditions around here is in some of the shallower anchorages in the early spring. What happens is that layers of fall leaves coat the surface of the bottom. Anchors simply slide across the layers of leaves without cutting through into the hard clay/mud below.

In the more popular creeks, as the season wears on, the leaves are cut into the mud by the multitudes of anchors dropped over the course of a summer which in turn makes for very good holding.

While Danforths (and Fortresses) generally hold well in the muddy/sandy conditions on the Chesapeake Bay, and people who have them swear by their Rocna's around here, I have towed my Danforth backward across several spring anchorages, restting several times with every increasing scope, and I watched a fellow (and other folks with other types) tow a Rocna backwards and reset again and again across one of these spring anchorages.

The other local issue that has been mentioned to me on the Rocna was that they can hold a whole lot of mud when they come up; mud which sticks tenaciously the surface of the metal. Around here, you see a lot of people adding salt water washdowns on their boats, but I see the weight and mess of the sticking mud as a potential issue for us windlass-less, bucket and chuck-it kind of sailors.

Jeff


----------



## SVAuspicious

I'd like to see Mantus up here on the Chesapeake.

Grass is always a challenge. Two places in particular are on the west side of the outer harbor in Guana Cay Harbor, Great Guana Cay, Abaco Bahamas. I can usually get a Rocna to hold in there but other people see us anchored and engage at fruitless attempts to join us. Since the inner harbor is pretty shallow the idea of anchoring in deeper water is attractive. Similar bottom at Manchioneel Bay at Cooper Island BVI.


----------



## Jeff_H

_beware "cut and paste" sailors._

I like that, even if I did just cut and paste that....


----------



## SVAuspicious

Jeff_H said:


> _beware "cut and paste" sailors._
> 
> I like that, even if I did just cut and paste that....


Thanks. I added that a few years ago when I realized someone had posted a direct quote from Beth Leonard's _The Voyager's Handbook_ without citation, out of context, and inappropriately applied.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Maine Sail said:


> Steve,
> 
> Until an anchor "bites" or resists on the bottom all anchors are essentially at infinite scope at the shank end, up to about 2:1 scope..
> 
> In this video the chain is at 2:1 and you can see that the shank barely bumps off infinite... If this CQR had "bit" then the 2:1 would have had a negative effect on the hook penetrating and remaining set but it really never left infinite scope enough to matter, even at just 2:1.
> CQR Hard Sand Setting 2:1 Scope - YouTube


Maine Sail, if you are willing to take up Med Sailors suggestion, I would be happy to send you an anchor to test, just let us know what size you need, and yes after you are done playing with it its yours.
Greg


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Jeff_H said:


> Greg;
> One of the most difficult anchoring conditions around here is in some of the shallower anchorages in the early spring. What happens is that layers of fall leaves coat the surface of the bottom. Anchors simply slide across the layers of leaves without cutting through into the hard clay/mud below.
> 
> In the more popular creeks, as the season wears on, the leaves are cut into the mud by the multitudes of anchors dropped over the course of a summer which in turn makes for very good holding.
> 
> While Danforths (and Fortresses) generally hold well in the muddy/sandy conditions on the Chesapeake Bay, and people who have them swear by their Rocna's around here, I have towed my Danforth backward across several spring anchorages, restting several times with every increasing scope, and I watched a fellow (and other folks with other types) tow a Rocna backwards and reset again and again across one of these spring anchorages.
> 
> The other local issue that has been mentioned to me on the Rocna was that they can hold a whole lot of mud when they come up; mud which sticks tenaciously the surface of the metal. Around here, you see a lot of people adding salt water washdowns on their boats, but I see the weight and mess of the sticking mud as a potential issue for us windlass-less, bucket and chuck-it kind of sailors.
> 
> Jeff


Jeff, grease the anchor with thick grease, and mud problem should get better
If you want I can send you an anchor for cost, you test it there and tell us what you think.
Greg


----------



## MedSailor

Mantus Anchors said:


> Jeff, grease the anchor with thick grease, and mud problem should get better
> If you want I can send you an anchor for cost, you test it there and tell us what you think.
> Greg


Greg, thanks for this suggestion! My genuine 66lb Bruce will bring up some mud, but it's not too bad, especially since it's on a manual windlass. This is a bigger problem with my FX-37 I have on mixed chain/rope because it will bring up a big mud/grass ball and more-so because I have this anchor set up to be pulled up by hand. Last time I did pull it up I nearly blew a disk, not realizing that it had brought up half the bottom with it.

I've also read many Rocna anchors who "like" the fact that their anchor brings up half the bottom. They say it gives them confidence. Not me. I want my anchor to dig in, but also let it all go when needed. No need to stress the gear too much bringing it up. Great suggestion on the grease though! Another use for spray on lanolin!

As for anchorages that are difficult, I have to say that in the Salish Sea (Puget Sound up the inside passage of Vancouver Island) I've spent a few hundred nights at anchor and almost never found a problem getting a quick set. Mostly around here it's sand and sticky mud which makes for forgiving anchoring honestly. There is one spot though where a bunch of boats had gathered to avoid a forecast gale and I had to reset 3 times with my Bruce and never got a satisfactory set on my Fortress. Everyone else was dragging their gear around and one other boat came up to me and asked what my secret was after I finally got set. The place in question is the north side of James Island in the San Juan Islands. Everywhere else up the inside was pretty easy I found.

MedSailor


----------



## SloopJonB

Jeff_H said:


> The other local issue that has been mentioned to me on the Rocna was that they can hold a whole lot of mud when they come up; mud which sticks tenaciously the surface of the metal. Around here, you see a lot of people adding salt water washdowns on their boats, but I see the weight and mess of the sticking mud as a potential issue for us windlass-less, bucket and chuck-it kind of sailors. Jeff


I can confirm that - I have used a 20 Kilo Rocna a number of times and it always brings up a big load of mud. We have to raise it within reach of a brush (boathook sometimes) to get the worst off and then dunk the anchor 2 or 3 times to get it clean.

I'm always glad that boat has a windlass!

In its favour, that anchor sets first time, every time and never drags.


----------



## SloopJonB

Mantus Anchors said:


> Jeff, grease the anchor with thick grease, and mud problem should get better Greg


How about lanolin? There's another thread here about coating a prop with lanolin and it kept the critters off. Should stick better than grease but that may stick to the mud as well.


----------



## SVAuspicious

How about car wax?


----------



## blt2ski

With the comments about a Rocna, maybe I need a 7-10 lbs rocna for the "race" anchor, and up it for the cruise/overnight/hurrican anchor, or a bigger burce or equal...........hmmmmm

marty


----------



## Maine Sail

Mantus Anchors said:


> Maine Sail, if you are willing to take up Med Sailors suggestion, I would be happy to send you an anchor to test, just let us know what size you need, and yes after you are done playing with it its yours.
> Greg


Greg,

Thanks for the offer but I actually prefer to pay for my gear if it is a product I may write about in the future. That way if I don't find it to be what I expected I don't feel bad about being honest in a review of it. Course if I like it, and give it glowing reviews, then I'd wish I had not paid but it is the right way to go about it...

I am interested but I simply don't have time right now to do any testing. I wold like to put yours side by side with a Manson Supreme and Rocna. I will get in touch with you at some point.


----------



## MedSailor

Greg,

Since Main_Sail has passed on your offer for now, I'll offer up my services as a West Coast tester. I don't have the same equipment as Maine, but I'll promise that if you send me one, I'll hook it up to my 30,000lb 41ft ketch and take it to Jones Island in the San Juan islands where nothing likes to stick and let you know what I find. I'll also take it everywhere else and give it a go. I know some other areas of really soft mud for comparison as well. I like the concept and design and am keen to try it out in the field. 

I'll post my results here on this thread that I started 4 months and 4,000+ views ago!

MedSailor


----------



## Mantus Anchors

A Deal for Sailnet Memebers!
Ladies and Gentlemen, MANTUS ANCHORS just went live with our advertisement on Sailnet.
We wanted to offer a special promotion to Sailnet members, if you click on the MANTUS banner and get redirected to our website FROM Sailnet and buy an anchor we will give you an anchor for the price of the next smaller size. So go ahead and UP-SIZE for free!!
This offer is good for 4 weeks, starting today!
and Be SAFE out there....

Just email me us at [email protected] and tell us what size you need
and include this code: "SAFE ANCHOR" 
Greg


----------



## red.sky

SVAuspicious said:


> Grass is always a challenge.


Did you see video of testing in Isla Mujeres? I think it's similar grassy conditions. Unfortunately the grass significantly diminishes clarity making for challenging video conditions.

youtube post: 




or from website: Mantus Test Videos


----------



## MedSailor

MedSailor said:


> Greg,
> 
> Since Main_Sail has passed on your offer for now, I'll offer up my services as a West Coast tester. I don't have the same equipment as Maine, but I'll promise that if you send me one, I'll hook it up to my 30,000lb 41ft ketch and take it to Jones Island in the San Juan islands where nothing likes to stick and let you know what I find. I'll also take it everywhere else and give it a go. I know some other areas of really soft mud for comparison as well. I like the concept and design and am keen to try it out in the field.
> 
> I'll post my results here on this thread that I started 4 months and 4,000+ views ago!
> 
> MedSailor


Greg at Mantus Anchors has offered me a pro-deal of sorts. He is shipping me a 65lb anchor as we speak and I will do my best to put it through it's paces! He did give me a deep discount, which I will try not to allow to color my reviews. Greg, of course, did not ask for any favoritism in exchange for the discount. If something looks good, I'll say it's good, if something looks suspect, I'll call it out. Results will be posted here on Sailnet.

When it arrives, I'll do an out of the box review with photos and comment on it's design and quality as much as I can. Then, I'll take it out as much as possible and put her through through some tests. I might even be able to recruit a powerboat with monster engines to pull on the puppy. We'll see what we're able to do.

If anyone has any questions they would like me to address in my first, out of the box review, please let me know.

MedSailor


----------



## MedSailor

*Out of the Box Review...*

Greg shipped me the 65lb Mantus anchor as promised and it arrived a couple weeks ago. I haven't been able to get it put together and on the boat due to some unforeseen extra works shifts, but today I was able to put it all together. I haven't gotten it wet yet, but I can at least give you my impressions as it came out of the box.

Very first impression was the box itself. It was a standard cardboard box with very little tape holding it together and it was torn in several spots. There was very little bubble wrap inside and I'm pretty surprised that the anchor didn't escape from the box, but it didn't everything seemed to be in place. What I found absolutely hillarious though was the "fragile handle with care" stickers on the outisde of the box.  Really? I hope it isn't fragile!

Here she is ready to be assembled, with instructions. For an absolutely massive anchor it takes up very little space when disassembled. I consider this a pretty big plus. Also, since the weight is divided between parts, you could have an absolutely colossal storm anchor down below and bring it up in pieces that are still of manageable size when you were ready to assemble it for war.

















I know Brent Swain commented on the shaft thickness as looking thin. It is 5/8" thick. I didn't think to measure my Bruce for comparison though I did look for a Mansocna to compare it with but there were none on my dock.









For those who still fear bolts as a weak point, they measured out to 5/8" thick. According to the tables I found online that puts their breaking/shear strength at either 16,700lbs, 27,100lbs or 33,900lbs EACH (depending on the grade of steel). I "think" they are grade 5 which would put them at 27,100lbs of strength each. My boat, for comparison, weighs 32,000 all loaded out for a world cruise. So you couldn't quite hang my boat from one of the 4 bolts, but almost....

I have complete confidence in these bolts. There are 4 of them taking the load of the anchor as compared to the ONE shackle pin on my shackle that is only 1/2" diameter. The shackle (or 3/8 chain) will break long before the bolts do. 









Bolt Strengths By Grade:









As I started to assemble the anchor I was surprised to see that there was a lot of play in the bolt holes. Was I shipped undersized bolts? 









I figured that this would be a perfect time to try calling the phone number on the instructions. It was 7:15PM PST and 9:15PM Texas time. I received a phone call back within 10 minutes and I was told that the holes are intentionally drilled slightly large to make it easy to assemble. He was alto able to have me verify the size of the bolts was correct while I was on the phone as I measured them again.

I would say that rates pretty high for technical support. As for the holes being slightly over-sized, I guess that could be a good thing as well if you're trying to assemble it under adverse conditions. In the end it went together very quickly. Galvanized lock washers are included also.









All put together:









One area of difficulty while assembling was the roll bar. It slants slightly towards the shackle end of the shank, OR away from it, depending on which way you bolt it on. The instructions don't tell you which is the correct way and since the photo included in the instructions is taken at an oblique angle you can't tell which way it is supposed to go. The instructions also say "assemble as per the diagram to the right" but there isn't a diagram. I could have (and should have) called again, but ended up just putting it together and taking my best guess. Did I get it right?









One area of interest to me was the holes at the ends of the main fluke where the roll bar attaches. The roll bar is hollow, and there are holes where it attaches that seem to be designed to allow water to flow into or out of the hollow center of the roll bar. It is obviously designed this way on purpose but I can't seem to decide if it's a good idea or not. For the function of the anchor it probably doesn't matter, but I just wondered why it was that way.









Here she is all ready to deploy. I was expecting to have to modify my roller but it looks like I won't have to. Score! I'll post more when I take her out and try her out for real. 









Questions? Comments? Want more specific photos?
MedSailor


----------



## Maine Sail

Med,

Looks good but the hoop is on backwards....


----------



## RickWestlake

_Very_ nice. MedSailor, your photos (and your bolt-strength chart) do a lot to convince me. The bolts don't look like a 'weak link' any more! I'm likely to come shopping for an oversized Mantus when I'm ready to sail away and it's time to get a good storm anchor.

There is an anchorage near my home marina where I like to hang out of an evening, across from Cadle Creek on the Rhode River (south of Annapolis - N38°52.5', W076°31.4) that was impossible holding for the 25-lb Delta that came with my Bristol. I tried my old Raya Tempest 800 there (an anchor much like the Spade but with a stock that locks through the fluke by a 'jam fit' receiver) and it held like a champ. I sold the Delta to a fellow who loved Deltas and had lost his same-size hook to a bad anchor shackle a couple of weeks before, and bought myself a 25-lb Manson Supreme. I'd have stuck with the Raya Tempest if its shank had fit my bow roller, but it has its place as a spare (and if I ever need to run a Bahamian moor).

I happen to be a confirmed believer in the 'shovel-fluke' anchors like the Spade, the Manson Supreme, the Raya, and now the Mantus. Those bolts worried me when I first saw them, but not any more.

(MedSailor, could they have put the 'Fragile' stickers on the package because the _box _was fragile?  )


----------



## Maine Sail

*Re: Out of the Box Review...*



MedSailor said:


> Very first impression was the box itself. It was a standard cardboard box with very little tape holding it together and it was torn in several spots. There was very little bubble wrap inside and I'm pretty surprised that the anchor didn't escape from the box, but it didn't everything seemed to be in place. What I found absolutely hillarious though was the "fragile handle with care" stickers on the outisde of the box.  Really? I hope it isn't fragile!


Interesting that my Mantus shipped in a cardboard covered plywood box. It was even painted..? So far VERY impressed with performance. Anchored on it as I type at 2.5:1 scope in pea soup fog.. More later...


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Med Sailor, thanks for the write up with all the pictures! The hoop is backwards, I will make sure to improve the assembly instructions!
Since the hoop is bolted on, you could decide weather you want to put it on or not.
We recommend you do, to accommodate a very rare event when an anchor can land upside down. The hoop is slanted back wards so that the drag on the hoop is not encountered until more of the anchor is dug in.
The holes on the side are drain holes,we didn't want for the water to pool inside on retrieval and promote corrosion. 
Greg


----------



## SloopJonB

*Re: Out of the Box Review...*



MedSailor said:


> Very first impression was the box itself. It was a standard cardboard box with very little tape holding it together and it was torn in several spots. There was very little bubble wrap inside and I'm pretty surprised that the anchor didn't escape from the box, but it didn't everything seemed to be in place. What I found absolutely hillarious though was the "fragile handle with care" stickers on the outisde of the box.  Really? I hope it isn't fragile!


Sounds like the labeling is for the box itself, not the contents.  I doubt that bubble wrap would have much effect on something that heavy.



> For those who still fear bolts as a weak point, they measured out to 5/8" thick. According to the tables I found online that puts their breaking/shear strength at either 16,700lbs, 27,100lbs or 33,900lbs EACH (depending on the grade of steel). I "think" they are grade 5 which would put them at 17,100lbs of strength each. MedSailor


You can tell at a glance what grade they are - Grade 5 have 3 hash marks on the head and grade 8 have 5 hash marks. From what I have been told, even the best S/S bolts don't exceed Grade 3

As to the drain holes - you can keep water IN but can't keep it OUT forever - I once cut apart an old stanchion that was sealed with good looking welds - old nasty "water" inside. Even a microscopic pinhole in a weld will allow water to enter over time.


----------



## MedSailor

Maine Sail said:


> Med,
> 
> Looks good but the hoop is on backwards....












Well the good news is that (after I turn the hoop around) it won't hit my bow pulpit stanchion anymore when I cinch it up tight against the roller....










While I wasn't able to use the anchor yet and review it's performance I was able to review the performance of the Mantus bottle opener that I was sent. I'd have to say it got the job done nicely!








NOTE: Usually I drink better beers, but it was 85deg (which is hot for around here) and a water/beer sounded pretty good.

MedSailor


----------



## chrisncate

They must have read where I complained about the welds, nice.

MANTUS - I like the bolts instead of the welds, I'll take ten of your largest anchors (in gold or clear if you have color choices).


----------



## blt2ski

Good show med, May have to try to figure out where you are in anacortes if and when the next time I am up there is. 

As far as bottle openers go......looks good. but from the looks standpoint, I like the delta version looks better. From an anchor, both look good. Maybe greg can go back to the drawing board and make the bottle opener look more like a mini anchor!

Will be interesting to see results from both med and maine as to how well it holds etc.

Marty


----------



## Mantus Anchors

blt2ski said:


> As far as bottle openers go......looks good. but from the looks standpoint, I like the delta version looks better. From an anchor, both look good. Maybe greg can go back to the drawing board and make the bottle opener look more like a mini anchor!
> 
> Will be interesting to see results from both med and maine as to how well it holds etc.
> 
> Marty


TRUE,
EXCEPT our bottle openers are FREE! 
greg


----------



## RickWestlake

Mantus Anchors said:


> Since the hoop is bolted on, you could decide weather you want to put it on or not. We recommend you do, to accommodate a very rare event when an anchor can land upside down. The hoop is slanted back wards so that the drag on the hoop is not encountered until more of the anchor is dug in.


I think the Spade (and the Raya, while it was being built) have that wide curve in the shank to make their anchors too unstable to stay upside-down if they land that way.


----------



## blt2ski

Greg, 

You have it ALL WRONG! the can opener is $99.99 plus shipping, and we throw in an anchor for free! So you need to upgrade the can opener if you are going to charge those kinds of funds!

Marty


----------



## Maine Sail

Mantus Initial Observations:

OK so only 8 anchorings on the Mantus over the weekend. The big problem for us is that our Rocna and Manson Supreme have perfect track records over hundreds & hundreds of sets.

The only time our Rocna failed to set was in waist high eel grass when it pulled up a root ball the size of Milwaukee...

So how do I put the Mantus through the ringer and see what she's made of...?? I know, we will only set it between 2:1 and 2.5:1 scope. So over 8 sets that is what we did.

On the first set, my buddy Jay, whom we've sailed with for 20+ years, was setting the hook. I asked him to play it out to 2:1 and snub it. He did, and while the boat was moving backwards at a pretty good clip. The anchor set not just quickly but instantaneously. We knew it was set because the bow of our 36' boat dipped a few inches as the boat was stopped dead in its tracks. I then, without waiting for it to "settle" into the bottom as you need to do with many old school anchors, backed down at full reverse throttle and held it there for a good while. On our boat this is about 600 - 800 pounds of reverse thrust. The anchor would not budge even in some very soft gooey mud. This is a 44HP four cylinder diesel spinning a three blade prop with the anchor at roughly 2:1 scope and wide open reverse throttle...

Over the weekend we repeated the 2:1 +/- sets and each time remained anchored at 2:1 +/-. The anchor set, as my buddy Jay puts it, "_Dude this thing is like a magnet for the bottom_."....

Having come from a Rocna this type of setting abuse, I felt, was going to be the only way to note any performance differences.

There was a noticeable difference in the speed the anchors sets at compared to the Rocna and Manson Supreme. This is not to say the Manson and Rocna do not set fast, they do, and always set within inches, but the Mantus feels as though it sets as soon as it touches down and immediately.

At this point it is too early to say whether this is luck or performance but if I had to shoot from the hip I would say it is performance. It will remain on my bow for our cruise Downeast and I will give it some more abuse.

So I would have to say that as of now my gut feeling is that this is an "evolutionary" improvement in setting over the Manson Supreme and the Rocna but not a "revolutionary" improvement. Evolutionary is good especially when going up against the tremendous performance of a Rocna or Manson Supreme

The performance was good enough this weekend that for now it is replacing my non-Chinese Rocna as our primary bow anchor..

As we were leaving our anchoring spot Sunday morning my buddy Jay had pre-shortened scope to about 1.1:1 and we then had breakfast. This is a trick we learned with the Manson Supreme an Rocna and it helps to gently un-set the anchor, as I bury them pretty well each time we "power-set" it. When we went to leave the anchor was still well set so I throttled forward and Jay felt it un-set. He then began to bring up the chain and the damn thing re-set, at about 1.1:1 almost yanking him off the bow.......

So far so good but I do still want to gain more experience with it before declaring it our new primary anchor......


----------



## NCC320

I just ordered a 35 lb. Mantus for my Catalina 320. And, I don't even anchor out very often. Here in eastern NC, we get hurricanes on a routine basis, and even then, I choose to stay at the pier (26 lines to 11 pilings though) as opposed to hauling out or anchoring out. So why did I do it? Well, it was the bolts in large part. 

My boat carries a 33 lb. Bruce as primary and Danforth (WM) as secondary. These are the anchors most often seen and used in this area (along with some CRQ plows and Deltas). Gradually we are seeing, the new generation anchors appear in the area, but mostly its those old ones. But if you look long and hard at the tests that have been run (almost all run by the anchor companies or magazines or equipment vendors) and the long term assessments of all the various anchors, you find that every anchor seems to do well in some bottoms but not in all. The new generation anchors, including Mantus, appear to fill a void where the tried and true Bruce, plows, Deltas, and Danforth types fail. And one generally doesn't really know the bottom where they will be anchoring until they actually try it. This is not a good time to find that your anchor doesn't work. But on my boat (and probably most), storing a third anchor, especially one that is not compact (like the Danforth or Fortress are) is a problem. Mantus use of bolts so that the anchor can be disassembled solves this problem. The anchor can be readily disassembled into three major, more or less, flat components which can be readily stored. Fortress has an extremely good reputation and can be disassembled also, plus it is light weight. But Fortress is, in my opinion, really a great refinement of the basic Danforth fluke design, and I already have a fluke type on board. The void that I have is in the area of new designs (Rocna, Manson, Mantus, Spade) where they appear in testing to work in bottoms where the older designs don't. With the Mantus, I will carry three different designs, and hopefully one will work wherever I choose to go. That's my strategy, and each of us will have a different strategy and many, if not most, will different from mine.

As to the strength of bolts, look around. They are used everywhere in more brutal and trying conditions. As to concern that nuts may back off in actual use, lock washers (split washers) solve this problem. (My boat trailer for example is bolted together and lock washers hold the assembly together despite all the bumps, rail crossings, and pot holes in the road). Still concerned about bolts working loose, then use the appropriate grade of Loctite on the bolts and they won't come apart. Strength is a matter of size, number, and type of bolts that are used, and if properly designed, strength of bolts becomes a non-issue.

There is another reason that I feel that I need one of the new generation anchors (Fortress, Rocna, Manson, Spade, Mantus). It's holding power that seems to be offered by these anchors in severe conditions like hurricanes. Hurricanes are different from straight line storms. You are going to get extremely high gusting winds that will veer around through at least 180 degrees. In my case, while I stay at the pier, a change in marina policy or other external influence could mean that I need to anchor out. Given the depth of creeks suitable for hurricane holes, I am somewhat limited to just a few creeks and these will be crowded with other boats. So the possibility of having to anchor out on short notice is real. To that end, I have a plan and the equipment that I hope will work. Many people do not check into the actual forces they will likely encounter and just double up on anchors.
The storms typically are 70-80 mph when they get to us, but 110 mph has occurred. Wind forces at the 70 mph range for my boat will likely be on the order of 3300+ lbs. In the tests, the older generation anchors didn't routinely hold forces this high, but the new generation anchors seemed to exceed this holding power. (Deep down, I think that the tried and true anchors are better than shown in the various tests by all the organizetions. It just that they were not tested where they excel). My hurricane anchoring plan is different from what is most often recommended and involves the Bruce and Danforth from the boat, and a 43 lb. Danforth (WM) in combination to reach the necessary holding force. I will use the new generation anchor (Mantus in my case) in the plan to gain additional holding capability.

Each of us has different ideas and experience, so we will all do something different in the area of anchor selection and use. And each should do what they feel best. Do I have some concerns, yes. Do I think is will be ok, I hope so. Otherwise, I wouldn't have bought it.


----------



## NCC320

Mantus Anchors said:


> grease the anchor


Mantus,

In your website, you indicate that a packet of grease is shipped as part of the package for the bolts that hold the parts together.

Why do you recommend grease on the bolts. Bolts work because of the friction forces between the nut and bolt threads. Putting on grease reduces the friction. Likewise with the lock washer, which keeps the nuts from working off. I could see that this might be done to reduce rusting of the bolts (they will rust before the rest of the anchor, because in tightening, the galvanized surface of the bolt threads is damaged. But galvanized bolts are cheap. Just replace them when they rust (don't wait until they crumble or sieze up because of the rust, however). Did I misread the web page or what am I missing?


----------



## SloopJonB

Maine Sail said:


> Mantus Initial Observations:
> 
> As we were leaving our anchoring spot Sunday morning my buddy Jay had pre-shortened scope to about 1.1:1 and we then had breakfast. This is a trick we learned with the Manson Supreme an Rocna and it helps to gently un-set the anchor, as I bury them pretty well each time we "power-set" it. When we went to leave the anchor was still well set so I throttled forward and Jay felt it un-set. He then began to bring up the chain and the damn thing re-set, at about 1.1:1 almost yanking him off the bow.......
> 
> So far so good but I do still want to gain more experience with it before declaring it our new primary anchor......


How much of the bottom did it bring up? I've found the Mansocnas bring up a LOT of gunk, especially mud.


----------



## SloopJonB

NCC320 said:


> As to the strength of bolts, look around. They are used everywhere in more brutal and trying conditions. As to concern that nuts may back off in actual use, lock washers (split washers) solve this problem. (My boat trailer for example is bolted together and lock washers hold the assembly together despite all the bumps, rail crossings, and pot holes in the road). Still concerned about bolts working loose, then use the appropriate grade of Loctite on the bolts and they won't come apart. Strength is a matter of size, number, and type of bolts that are used, and if properly designed, strength of bolts becomes a non-issue.


Absolutely right. I think the bolt/one piece "question" is purely psychological - one piece just "feels" stronger or more reliable.

As someone correctly pointed out - the shackle pin holding the rode to the shank is a fraction of the size of ONE of the bolts.

If one is nervous about nuts loosening, you could switch to same strength castellated nuts with pins or drill a small hole through nut and bolt shank and safety wire them like race car suspension parts.

Remember, your keel is probably held on with nuts & bolts.


----------



## LinekinBayCD

NCC320 said:


> Mantus,
> 
> In your website, you indicate that a packet of grease is shipped as part of the package for the bolts that hold the parts together.
> 
> Why do you recommend grease on the bolts. Bolts work because of the friction forces between the nut and bolt threads. Putting on grease reduces the friction. Likewise with the lock washer, which keeps the nuts from working off. I could see that this might be done to reduce rusting of the bolts (they will rust before the rest of the anchor, because in tightening, the galvanized surface of the bolt threads is damaged. But galvanized bolts are cheap. Just replace them when they rust (don't wait until they crumble or sieze up because of the rust, however). Did I misread the web page or what am I missing?


Not speaking for Mantus but my guess is that it makes it easier (or even possible) to disassemble the anchor. I would think that after even one season those bolts might be tough to get off. I'm wondering if it would be good idea to unbolt it on occasion or you might not be able to after a period of time.


----------



## LinekinBayCD

Maine Sail said:


> Mantus Initial Observations:
> 
> OK so only 8 anchorings on the Mantus over the weekend. The big problem for us is that our Rocna and Manson Supreme have perfect track records over hundreds & hundreds of sets.
> 
> The only time our Rocna failed to set was in waist high eel grass when it pulled up a root ball the size of Milwaukee...
> 
> So how do I put the Mantus through the ringer and see what she's made of...?? I know, we will only set it between 2:1 and 2.5:1 scope. So over 8 sets that is what we did.
> 
> On the first set, my buddy Jay, whom we've sailed with for 20+ years, was setting the hook. I asked him to play it out to 2:1 and snub it. He did, and while the boat was moving backwards at a pretty good clip. The anchor set not just quickly but instantaneously. We knew it was set because the bow of our 36' boat dipped a few inches as the boat was stopped dead in its tracks. I then, without waiting for it to "settle" into the bottom as you need to do with many old school anchors, backed down at full reverse throttle and held it there for a good while. On our boat this is about 600 - 800 pounds of reverse thrust. The anchor would not budge even in some very soft gooey mud. This is a 44HP four cylinder diesel spinning a three blade prop with the anchor at roughly 2:1 scope and wide open reverse throttle...
> 
> Over the weekend we repeated the 2:1 +/- sets and each time remained anchored at 2:1 +/-. The anchor set, as my buddy Jay puts it, "_Dude this thing is like a magnet for the bottom_."....
> 
> Having come from a Rocna this type of setting abuse, I felt, was going to be the only way to note any performance differences.
> 
> There was a noticeable difference in the speed the anchors sets at compared to the Rocna and Manson Supreme. This is not to say the Manson and Rocna do not set fast, they do, and always set within inches, but the Mantus feels as though it sets as soon as it touches down and immediately.
> 
> At this point it is too early to say whether this is luck or performance but if I had to shoot from the hip I would say it is performance. It will remain on my bow for our cruise Downeast and I will give it some more abuse.
> 
> So I would have to say that as of now my gut feeling is that this is an "evolutionary" improvement in setting over the Manson Supreme and the Rocna but not a "revolutionary" improvement. Evolutionary is good especially when going up against the tremendous performance of a Rocna or Manson Supreme
> 
> The performance was good enough this weekend that for now it is replacing my non-Chinese Rocna as our primary bow anchor..
> 
> As we were leaving our anchoring spot Sunday morning my buddy Jay had pre-shortened scope to about 1.1:1 and we then had breakfast. This is a trick we learned with the Manson Supreme an Rocna and it helps to gently un-set the anchor, as I bury them pretty well each time we "power-set" it. When we went to leave the anchor was still well set so I throttled forward and Jay felt it un-set. He then began to bring up the chain and the damn thing re-set, at about 1.1:1 almost yanking him off the bow.......
> 
> So far so good but I do still want to gain more experience with it before declaring it our new primary anchor......


Is the Mantus more or less concave than the Rocna's and Manson's? From the picture it looks like may have a little less of a cupped shape than the Rocna. I believe that the cupped shape (vs the plow shape) give a lot of the new generation anchors their edge in ultimate holding power. Maybe if West Marine starts to sell the Mantus I'll trade in my Chinese Rocna.


----------



## klem

NCC320 said:


> Mantus,
> 
> In your website, you indicate that a packet of grease is shipped as part of the package for the bolts that hold the parts together.
> 
> Why do you recommend grease on the bolts. Bolts work because of the friction forces between the nut and bolt threads. Putting on grease reduces the friction. Likewise with the lock washer, which keeps the nuts from working off. I could see that this might be done to reduce rusting of the bolts (they will rust before the rest of the anchor, because in tightening, the galvanized surface of the bolt threads is damaged. But galvanized bolts are cheap. Just replace them when they rust (don't wait until they crumble or sieze up because of the rust, however). Did I misread the web page or what am I missing?


You are correct that friction is what prevents a nut from backing off but the friction generated is essentially proportional to the torque put on the bolt and is effectively independent of the coefficient of friction. It typically takes around 70% of the tightening torque to break a bolt loose and this is the same regardless of the coefficient. Loctite is a bit different because it creates a mechanical bond after the tightening torque has been applied. If the parts are together for a long time and they corrode (less likely when greased), that will increase the loosening torque but I don't consider this to be a good thing. If everything galls when it goes together, that can also make it harder to take apart but this is really bad and shows a poorly designed or assembled joint.

What does change with the friction coefficient is the tension induced in the bolts. Contrary to what many people think, in most cases you get a stronger joint with a bolt torqued to ~70-80% of yield strength than with one torqued to a lower value. Fatigue is a large concern for bolts (anchors are likely to be low cycle fatigue not high cycle) and it can be effectively eliminated with proper design in many instances. When something that is stiffer than the bolt is being bolted, the bolt acts like a spring and stretches a bit when torqued. When a load smaller than the bolt tension is applied, the force between the things that the bolt is clamping goes down but the force on the bolt doesn't go up meaning that there is not fatigue loading. For anyone who is curious about this, wikipiedia actually has a decent article if you search for bolt fatigue. Along with eliminating fatigue in most circumstances, you greatly increase the friction between the things being clamped which is almost always beneficial.

People tend to ignore the importance of bolt torque and it really can be a big deal in certain applications. A properly torqued bolt will not back out in almost all applications (exceptions being where the torque spec is low due to a weak or flexible component). Most people tend to overtorque small bolts and undertorque big bolts.

Bottom line is that in this type of joint, greased threads and properly torqued nuts will be the best setup. For people looking for a truly permanent assembly, loctite can be substituted for grease but the torque is still very important.


----------



## NCC320

klem said:


> Contrary to what many people think, in most cases you get a stronger joint with a bolt torqued to ~70-80% of yield strength than with one torqued to a lower value.
> 
> People tend to ignore the importance of bolt torque and it really can be a big deal in certain applications. A properly torqued bolt will not back out in almost all applications (exceptions being where the torque spec is low due to a weak or flexible component). Most people tend to overtorque small bolts and undertorque big bolts.
> .


Basically, I agree with what you have said, assuming properly torqued bolts....i.e. 70-80% of yield strength. However, in the real world with this anchor application, I suspect most people will probably just tighten the bolts with a wrench, not to a particular torque setting and the preloading will not exist at the above levels. Holes are a little oversized and lubricant under the bolt head, washer, locking nut, and on the treads could, in the low torque situation, allow under extreme conditions some working of the joined components and gradually loosen the bolt. In my case, I plan to keep the anchor disassembled and stored below. I would prefer not to worry about getting grease on everything during assembly, storage, and handling, so I will probably not use the grease. Greasing the bolt does reduce friction and if torque values have been specified assuming a non-lubricated joint, torquing to 70-80% could conceivably overstress the bolt. I'll see what manufacturer specifies when I get the anchor, but I will leave off the grease.


----------



## MedSailor

SloopJonB said:


> How much of the bottom did it bring up? I've found the Mansocnas bring up a LOT of gunk, especially mud.


This is something that I hope the Mantus has improved upon over the Mansocnas of the world. I know that most people LIKE the big mud ball that the Mansocnas bring up because it lets them see that it was dug in, but personally I think it is a major design flaw. That mud might add 40# to what you're trying to bring up and currently I have a manual windlass. What if you are trying to bring it up by hand?

Another more theoretical problem of the mudball is that if your anchor does pull out (say in a shifting wind) and needs to reset, the mudball might keep it from being able to dig in again.

I know my anchor is set because I back down on it, and occasionally I SCUBA dive on it. I don't need to bring the bottom up for verification!

I'll let you know if mine brings up anything when I am able to test it.

As for the grease, don't worry about getting it all over everything. I'm like a cat when it comes to getting stuff like that on my paws. I hate it! The grease was pretty easy to work with and didn't stink. Put it on the threads and wipe off the rest. It cleaned up pretty well.

MedSailor


----------



## klem

NCC320, it is certainly true that most people are unlikely to use a torque wrench. Given the sloppy holes, it would be significantly better to use grease on the bolts than to install them dry because there would be much less chance of movement for the same torque setting due to the higher clamping force and resulting higher friction force between the two parts being bolted.

Out of curiosity, does Mantus specify a torque for the bolts? It would certainly be easy to look up based on the bolt grade and size but if they provide a torque, it might mean that they feel it is really important or it may give them some legal protection against people who only make them finger tight and then complain when they come loose.


----------



## red.sky

No Mantus Anchors does not specify an installation torque. From Assembly Instructions, "tighten the nuts with a wrench until the lock-washers are compressed".
As long as you use an appropriately sized wrench & grease & give it a good yank all will be good. 
It really wouldn't be prudent to specify a torque since there is way too much variability outside the control of the designer. Yes, calculating an optimum preload is straight forward. But in order to get a torque, you have to deal with a nasty bugger called nut factor which can vary greatly with operator, tool, surface prep, lube etc. Look at any Torque Table (there are many on web), they all have disclaimers of "general use only", "advisory use only", "user assumes all risk" etc etc.

And as stated by others, definitely use the grease/lanolin. It not only provides excellent corrosion protection but also reduces the nut factor, applying more preload into bolts & clamping force into joint. 
Additionally, as with any piece of safety equipment, always inspect before use.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Sorry for the delay on addressing the issue of torque and grease. Grease is in place to protect the bots against corrosion AND as anti-seize protection, so after a 2 years of use the bolts still can be taken off. We recommend Tef-gel or Lanolin for this application.
There are some anchors that we sent out that had the wrong grease and we will send a replacement grease packet to those customers, what should have come is a packet of lanolin. We recommend tightening the bolts until the lock washer is flat and compressed and do not have any specific torque recommendations. Incidentally a disclaimer, Red Sky is an engineer with Mantus Anchors. Nuts getting loose is not an issue if they were tightened using compression split washers. Once properly assembled Mantus Anchor is no different than any other "ONE PIECE" anchor, except that it gives you the most reliable set.
Greg


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Dear Sailnet Members,

Our initial special "Buy the next size up for the price of this one"
Expired. 
But don't worry, our goal is to get as many anchors out there so people can use them and find out for themselves what Mantus offers over competition and FINALLY spread the word. We are going to offer a new promotion 25% off any anchor you buy for the next month only for SAILNET members.
The code for the coupon is: SAILNET.
Offer ends Sept 16th
MANTUS ANCHORS


----------



## MedSailor

*Disclosures: I do not know Greg personally and have no affiliation or financial interest in his company or the success thereof. Greg of Mantus anchors did offer me the anchor which I bought at a "pro-deal" deep discount on the condition that I post my results, good or bad, here on sailnet. *

I had hoped to have the Mantus out for a true sea trial several times by now, but there is something about the birth of your first child that will slow down your boating season. Slow, I say, but not stop! We just got back from our first overnight boat trip (2 nights) with the 5 week old. For details about the kid part I'll be posting in the Cruising With Kids section of Sailnet here shortly.

Back to the anchor. Having read Maine_Sail's account of the Mantus grabbing on short scope, I thought I would try and replicate this with my experiment. The plan, with kiddo on board, was to go somewhere familiar which actually has very good holding. Since the holding is good and the wind forecast for only 10-15knots I figured we wouldn't be stressing the anchor so I might as well try the short scope thing.

Turns out I was wrong about not stressing the anchor.....

Here is our destination. Sucia island, which is my favorite boating destination. The "X" marks where we dropped the hook and (happily) where we found ourselves 2 days later. The circle is to help you find the "M" for "Mud" bottom type. The mud itself (for you connoisseurs of) is a pretty sticky and dark but not smelly. It is harder than "soft mud" and will stick to some anchors but it is not clay like and gravity will make it fall off the anchor usually. If you stick your finger in it leaves an impression and it is mixed with a few small shells.









It was a windless trip up but I was able to take some Mantus-eye-view photos from the bowsprit. This picture is a reflection of my boat as it is underway. (note the brown stuff around the anchor bolts is the manufacturer's supplied grease - not rust. Mantus has apparently already changed the color of the grease so that it doesn't look like rust! )









On the way to Sucia:









Now the details. We chose a spot where the depth sounder read 35ft. Mine is 2ft below the waterline and my roller is 8 feet above the waterline. That makes our depth (for the purposes of calculating scope) 45ft. I had attempted to hit a round number with regard to scope but ended up with 100ft out give or take a foot. We have 3/8 BBB chain of 280ft length and (later) I attached our 15ft (non-stretchy) bridle which is at the waterline.

So lets see.... 100ft of scope out devided by 45 = 2.22222:1 ratio, or in round numbers *2.2 : 1 scope*.









How's my math so far? Good?  Okay. We backed up much quicker than normal and low and behold it set as soon as the slack was taken up. I'd say it is likely it set right where we dropped it. We proceeded to back up to an engine RPM of 3200 which is about 35HP at the prop plus there was 10kts of wind helping add some force. This stretched the chain out to an angle that was pretty far.

I also refrained from raising the mizzen for a while and allowed the bow to get blown off in the wind. This presents the boat at about a 60deg angle broadside to the wind before snatching back and "tacking" to the other side. The Mantus held fine at this scope. We stood broadside in the 10-12kts tacking back and forth for about 20minutes on the short scope. The Mantus held fine.

After "testing" the anchor I put out 160ft of chain and attached my bridle (which is right at the waterline) for the night. I also raised out 150sqft mizzen.

My scope overnight would be as follows: 160 (ft of chain) devided by 37 (remember my transducer is mounted 2ft below the waterline and was reading 35) for a total scope of *4.3:1*. Now here's the part where I'm a bit embarrased. I made a mental math error when letting out the chain. I was actually shooting for my next chain mark which is 200ft and would have given me the 5:1 that I usually shoot for. Another reason that lots of scope is good I guess because it allows for math errors.

I had expected that this would be the only real test but I was to be proven wrong. We ended up having the windiest night we have ever experienced at Sucia! It is a very protected harbor but in the harbor my wind meter was reading sustained winds of 15-18 with gusts up into the high 20s. The wind was late at night and I wasn't awake or watching the wind gauge for many of the gusts but we both estimate they were right around 30knots and they varied in direction by about 90deg or so sometimes causing us to heel sharply.

Sure enough the Mantus held us firmly in place with 15kts gusting 30kts from varying wind angles with just over 4:1 scope on a good holding bottom. The second day and night had less than 10kts of wind and wasn't an issue.

Retrieval was not difficult. It was obvious when the chain was vertical and I had to use the low gear in the windlass to break it free, but it did break free. I was pleased to see that it didn't bring up half the bottom as many Rocnas have been shown to do. Some people like that their Rocna brings up half the bottom because if makes them feel confident that the anchor dug in well. For me, it's poor design. Staying put is proof that the anchor was dug in and the extra mud is extra weight and strain on gear to haul up. This is particularly bad if bringing it up by hand.

The mantus came up with mud forward of the attachment of the shank but all the mud "aft" of it was gone. I expect from the shape that this will usually be the case, meaning a moderate amount of mud will be attached. My fortress and Bruce also bring up some mud (but not loads of it) from this anchorage.



























The mud on the "ears" and hoop attachment bolts mean it was likely buried all the way in the mud. Of course holding my 30,000lb boat on 30kts would also imply this...










So far I'm impressed with the short scope setting ability. Holding power is either adequate or you're on the rocks. So far the holding power was adequate, especially considering the gusts to 30kts and the fact that my scope was shorter than expected.

I haven't yet tested one of its claimed features which is that it will set where others won't. When I get a chance to try it in a couple difficult anchorages I'll post those results here as well.

Questions?

MedSailor


----------



## skygazer

Med Sailor,

Very nice write up, and I enjoyed reading it. Informative and entertaining at the same time. When you showed a youngish Albert Einstein in the math section, were you aware that he flunked math at school? So don't worry about the scope error, Albert turned out OK in math. I like your conclusion that lots of scope makes up for errors in judgment.

I also enjoyed your detailed discussion of bottom mud, an underrated topic in my experience.


----------



## chef2sail

Good post. When you figure your scope your re using a depth from the depth finder, which may be as much as 8 feet from the bow roller. ( depending on your boats freeboard). It is a common mistake a lot of people make when anchoring. good that you reinforced that.

I am glad to see that the holding power equals what I would see with a Rocna or Manson Supreme which it obvious mimics and is basically a knockoff/ copy of their new generation designs. Expectations would be that it would have similar results in independent tests using controlled conditions like Practical Sailor does. 

I have a similar designed Rocna and noticed its difference in setting from the other type anchors I have as we'll as its ability to handle a variety of bottom compositions. I don't find that my Rocna brings up half the bottom as you mentioned, ( it really depends on the bottoms composition) and if you had placed a Ronca in the same type of mud you anchored in, I would make the assumption that it would look similarly as the Mantus did when you brought it up. I do not consider that part of your evalution scientific rather just an opinion. The anchors are so similarly shaped to see dramatic differences in holding abilities would really surprise me. Again is definitive test of all three anchors in similar substrate would be the real test and it would make sense they would be close together.

I based my decision of the Rocna not on its setting ability, but on its ability to reset. Many anchors can be set securely with proper technique and will survive winds like you mentioned. We have had our Ronca in winds far exceeding that and in gusting T storms on the Chessie to 55 knotts and in my coastal travels on the LISound and New England. Like you found when I first used a new generation anchor I was surprised at the ease and setting ability they display. In some of he conditiones I anchor in there are substantial reversing currents. The anchor is to be expected to turn and reset. It is this ability that the Manson, Rocna, and now the Mantus with their new designs excell in it appears. It is this which has made the new gen anchor the one I carry on my bow as a primary. I would like a secondary one similar. 

Thank you for your thorough post and report as well as you disclaimer. That is important in light of this manufacturers previous failures to disclose in previous postings by posters which now have now been addressed since discovered by a few Sailnet members.

I would like to purchase this as a secondary anchor not because I beleive it will have magical greater holding properties than any of the other new gen anchors, but because of its ability to be carried disassembled, which would give me a spare or second anchor as a storm anchor I could carry easily. I only need one of these new gen anchors on my bow which I have , but to have another as a backup plan would in fact give me greater security and if I was a long range cruiser which may be in my future seven greater sense of backup and security. 

I would really like to see an independent test of the bolts and their failure point. I certainly would be willing to do a user test as you have if Mantus would be willing to give me a "pro deal deep discount". Wonder if they re listing ( smile).

Thanks again for this report and I assume future ones for this anchor.

Dave


----------



## NCC320

chef2sail said:


> I am glad to see that the holding power equals what I would see with a Rocna or Manson Supreme which it obvious mimics and is basically a knockoff/ copy of their new generation designs.
> 
> I based my decision ..... not on its setting ability, but on its ability to reset. Many anchors can be set securely with proper technique and will survive winds like you mentioned... ..... The anchor is to be expected to turn and reset. It is this ability that the Manson, Rocna, and now the Mantus with their new designs excell in it appears. It is this which has made the new gen anchor the one I carry on my bow as a primary. I would like a secondary one similar.
> 
> .... this manufacturers previous failures to disclose in previous postings by posters which now have now been addressed since discovered by a few Sailnet members.
> 
> I would like to purchase this as a secondary anchor not because I beleive it will have magical greater holding properties than any of the other new gen anchors, but because of its ability to be carried disassembled, which would give me a spare or second anchor as a storm anchor I could carry easily.
> 
> I would really like to see an independent test of the bolts and their failure point.
> 
> Dave


Chef2Sail,

Just an opinion......You are not treating Mantus very well. Do you have an agenda adverse to Mantus? You have implied, not proven, that they have done or are doing underhanded things in promoting their anchor and you not only put them down, but you imply that somehow their anchor is inferior to your Rocna and to Manson. Prove it. Back it up with your own test data.

You say you want to buy one as a back-up/secondary anchor as I did. If so, go ahead and buy it and stop bashing it.

You fuss about not having an independent test, but if you were to test the bolts and their failure point, just how would you do it? Scientifically. Let's see your test.

Why am I posting this....well I just hate to see the new guy get unfairly beat up. It's the new guys that bring us new innovations, or maybe just refinements over the existing technology, but either way it's good. We need to support them, not try beat them back, unless somehow they are a threat to us in some way. Give the guy a break.

One final thought, discount....Mantus has offered all Sailnetters a discount. As for offering you a special deal beyond that, he could if he wanted and would be justified if you did as MedSailor has/is doing....running some tests that take time and effort, and maybe some expense. But, given how you treated Mantus, if I were him, I would not want you testing my product for the record after all your posts on the subject.

Misconduct: Let's see...thusfar, your charges are that his engineer did not identify herself as being associated with Mantus...that came to light when Mantus told you about it. Most of her posts were direct answers to questions that other posters asked. Secondly, Mantus said that he was offering a discount to Sailnetters only, but at some point, he offered a similar one to Cruisers group. Pretty damning stuff.....did you not ever misspeak, make a mistake, or change your mind or position? And posting a P.O. Box number as address. Nothing about product deficiencies or problems fulfiling the orders, because to date, none have arisen that I am aware of. Probably this product, like most, will not be perfect, and eventually, some may fail...but let's beat up people after the failures, if they ever occur, not before.


----------



## Maine Sail

chef2sail said:


> I would really like to see an independent test of the bolts and their failure point. I certainly would be willing to do a user test as you have if Mantus would be willing to give me a "pro deal deep discount". Wonder if they re listing ( smile).
> 
> Thanks again for this report and I assume future ones for this anchor.
> 
> Dave


Dave,

Consider this.

*1-* The 35 & 45 Mantus have four bolts of 1/2" diameter. This is larger than any bow cleat bolts I have seen on a boat sized for a 45 pound anchor let alone a 35 pound anchor. Why is it okay to have four weaker SS bolts of 1/4" or 5/16" or 3/8" for the deck cleat but when we have FOUR 1/2" bolts, with a strength of about 25,000 pounds each, on the anchor end we want to see test data? Where is the test data for the bow cleats? Apparently if the bolts on the Mantus are suspect then the "undersized" bolts on the hundreds of thousands of boats out there, with bolts far smaller and weaker than the four holding the fluke of the Mantus to the shank, should be suspect too?

Interestingly enough I just measured the single "pivot pin" on my 35 pound CQR. The pin, a wear item, is just slightly under 3/4" yet the meat on the shank, that pivots around on the 3/4" pin, is only 3/8" thick. So four 1/2" bolts to hold your vessel or one single 3/4" pin? I don't know of a single CQR having the pivot pin fail despite it technically being a wear item and the four 1/2" bolts on the Mantus are not "wear" items. More meat holding the Mantus than there is holding the fluke to shank on a CQR...

*2-* On the deck cleat end we have the potential for wet core and the potential for crevice corrosion of the bolts? How often do you know of boat owners replacing bow cleat bolts? How often do they attend to the wet core around those deck cleats? In my experience not often enough.. How often have you seen four 1/2" bolts holding on the deck cleats, which are at the OTHER END of the anchor rode. 
*
3-* Most rigging on boats sized for a 35 or 45 pound anchor are not 1/2" in diameter, and are made of weaker SS, and these rig sees tremendous loads day in day out. An anchor for a 35-37 footer might see brief peaks to 3000-5000 pounds, in a Hurricane, but a single 1/2" bolt could support the entire weight of a Tartan 37 and more yet the Mantus has FOUR.....

*4-* Let us not forget the chain and shackles connected to a Mantus anchor via the rode system. Most boaters using anchors of this size are using 1/4" or 5/16" chain because that is what their windlass gypsy takes. Some use 3/8". Just one single half inch bolt exceeds the breaking strength of the rode by over 10,000 pounds but as we know there are FOUR 1/2" bolts... For example a Crosby "red pin" anchor shackle in 3/8" has a WLL of 1 ton and a break strength of 12,000 pounds. One half inch bolt, according to Mantus, is roughly 25,000 pounds.

So far our Mantus has performed as expected and sets slightly faster than our Rocna or Manson. Course we are talking inches in difference but still when it hits the bottom it digs in instantaneously. Holding power is probably apples to apples and I did load test the Rocna against the Mantus and could not budge either with a 29' sport fishing boat. It was tough to get them out however.....

As for mud all three bring up fairly equal amounts of bottom....


----------



## cupper3

NCC320 said:


> Chef2Sail,
> 
> Just an opinion......You are not treating Mantus very well. Do you have an agenda adverse to Mantus? You have implied, not proven, that they have done or are doing underhanded things in promoting their anchor and you not only put them down, but you imply that somehow their anchor is inferior to your Rocna and to Manson. Prove it. Back it up with your own test data.
> 
> You say you want to buy one as a back-up/secondary anchor as I did. If so, go ahead and buy it and stop bashing it.
> 
> You fuss about not having an independent test, but if you were to test the bolts and their failure point, just how would you do it? Scientifically. Let's see your test.
> 
> Why am I posting this....well I just hate to see the new guy get unfairly beat up. It's the new guys that bring us new inovations, or maybe just refinements over the existing technology, but either way it's good. We need to support them, not try beat them back, unless somehow they are a threat to us in some way. Give the guy a break.


Good post.

I was one who was critical of Mantus in the way they first attempted to promote their anchor tests as 'proof' of their effectiveness. Others made similar comments.

Obviously it was an issue to them, so they undertook what you see to have various credible sailors to utilize the anchor in various test situations. Are those scientific? Nope, but they certainly are indicative, and contrary to the way Rocna specifically was marketed for many years. Good on Mantus. I also was skeptical of the break-down design... I'm changing my mind on that.

As far as the bolts are concerned, is has been discussed elsewhere on this forum by knowledgeable individuals that the bolts clearly are well in excess of what is required. Bolts are rated, the rating is on their heads.


----------



## blt2ski

If one really wants the test part of the bolts, if you can find out the manufacture of the bolts, when they were produced, ie via a batch number, a few have to be tested to show they meet the Grade spec. "IF" you know the above, you can get the actual test results that show they meet the spec. You can do the same for wire rigging, chain among other items.

As for Med's review, very good, I wish Sucia was a bit closer to me frankly! This anchor is showing promise as an alternate BIG anchor to an aluminum Fortress, or as a second big anchor stored below, to use the appropriate style in the appropriate soil condition that these two styles work best in.

Marty


----------



## chef2sail

Originally Posted by NCC320



> Just an opinion......You are not treating Mantus very well. Do you have an agenda adverse to Mantus?-NCC320


I have no agenda, If ou read more carefully I intend to purchase the anchor myself. I am enamoured and supportive of the idea that they have modified/ improved the new generation ide to have made it easier to carry. Stop reading into things. Challanging their claims does not mean I have an agenda.



> You have implied, not proven, that they have done or are doing underhanded things in promoting their anchor.NCC320


There is question about viloating the terms of posting on Sailnet. You were part of the thread where that happened. They had one of their enginieers/ designers join, post a thread like she was your average "joe sailor" like us without disclosing their relationship to Mantus. You are incorrect is was discovered my Mantus. It was discovered and pinted out by a fellow sailnetter It appeared to some to be deceptive. By the way you used the term misconduct..I never did. I really dont want to rehash this as it has been addressed.

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gear-maintenance/91772-spare-anchor.html



> You not only put them down, but you imply that somehow their anchor is inferior to your Rocna and to Manson. Prove it. Back it up with your own test data.-NCC320


Here is what I posted. How does that say they are inferior? I am clearly saying I expect it to be the equal of the other new generation anchors. Nothing more or less. Lets face reality here. the basically all look the same. They dont look like a fortress/ danforth, they dont look like a delta, they dont look like a fisherman, they dont look like a bruce and they dont look like a CQR. ( well kind of minus the swivel and roll bar). I am not making the claimms they hold better, in fact I am saying I would expect them to hold the same.



> I am glad to see that the holding power equals what I would see with a Rocna or Manson Supreme which it obvious mimics and is basically a knockoff/ copy of their new generation designs. Expectations would be that it would have similar results in independent tests using controlled conditions like Practical Sailor does.Chef2sail ( my post)





> You say you want to buy one as a back-up/secondary anchor as I did. If so, go ahead and buy it and stop bashing it.-NCC320


I have already done this, so let me asky you a question. When I get it and use it and come to the same conclusions...will you still incorrectly say I am bashing it, which I am not



> You fuss about not having an independent test, but if you were to test the bolts and their failure point, just how would you do it? Scientifically. Let's see your test. NCC320


It is not up o me to do a scientific test. They are making the claims. Medsailor whos posts I respect is reporting now. Mainsail who actually has done some really great testing on many types of epuipment including a really fascinating superior test on anchors ( his test actually got me to buy a Rocna or Manson Supreme). Practical sailor has done tests of these and expect they will do the Mantus.



> Why am I posting this....well I just hate to see the new guy get unfairly beat up. It's the new guys that bring us new inovations, or maybe just refinements over the existing technology, but either way it's good. We need to support them, not try beat them back, unless somehow they are a threat to us in some way. Give the guy a break.-NCC320


It is to be expected that someone who makes claims will receive scrutiny. This is a fact of life and not such a bad thing. I am not trying in any way to beat them back or I would have spent my hard earned money on it. We do not need to support them. We need to make sure their claims are valid, their posts reflect their affiliations, and their tests are valid..just like people have done with Rocna. Open your eyes. They didnt develop this for the good of all sailors and give it to us at cost ( most of us), they developed a product to make money which is fine also.

Maybe I am not as blindly trusting as you. You have said yourself previously that you have very little experience in anchoring. Go forth with your new anchor and gain the experience. I am sure you will rest easier on a new generation anchor as I did knowing its easier to set, and that it will reset more quickly.

Lastly remember no anchor is the " queeens bees" in all bottom conditions. So it you venture out of the Sound where you boat, or find yourself on a grass boittom creek with a layer of leaves you may want to consoider using a Fortress or Danforth. These are the bottoms where I have found so far that the new generation anchors did not set as easily and lot the first time you drop them like they do in other bottom conditions.

Stop taking my posts an over analyzing them about me and read what I really am truly saying.

Dave


----------



## chef2sail

Maine...good post

Actually after reading about vleats being ripped out in some of the noreeasters two years ago before thier rodes parted made me examine Haleakulas cleats. I dont even want to post what what I found, but needless to say when I saw the way our 35C&C MKIII was done ( an its a fairly well made boat) my first exclaimation was ( SH**).

Since the acess was easy through our more than generous anchor locker within two weeks I had replaced them, reglassed the area and have huge backing plates under them as well as the chocks. I used 3/4 inch bolts also,

You points are well take on the bolt strengths and pins for the CQR as well as the shackles. Most of us wont experience the stresses your boat does on the mooring all the time in the weather you experience.

Thanks for you post again.

Dave


----------



## SloopJonB

Maine Sail said:


> So far our Mantus has performed as expected and sets slightly faster than our Rocna or Manson. Course we are talking inches in difference but still when it hits the bottom it digs in instantaneously. Holding power is probably apples to apples and I did load test the Rocna against the Mantus and could not budge either with a 29' sport fishing boat. It was tough to get them out however.....
> 
> As for mud all three bring up fairly equal amounts of bottom....


Maine, Correct me if I'm wrong but from this I gather you have found, so far, that the Mantus is a very effective anchor, about equal to the Mansocnas in performance, but has the added advantage of being easily broken down for flat stowage.

Correct? Anything else to add?


----------



## Maine Sail

SloopJonB said:


> Maine, Correct me if I'm wrong but from this I gather you have found, so far, that the Mantus is a very effective anchor, about equal to the Mansocnas in performance, but has the added advantage of being easily broken down for flat stowage.
> 
> Correct? Anything else to add?


So far, so good. I even took it out with my brothers sport fishing boat and put it through the paces with twin screws and 450 HP !!!!! I was afraid to rip a cleat out of his boat so backed off a little. I pulled these things till the frothy water behind the twin screws looked like Niagara Falls.

I plan on using this as my primary through late November to get a real sense for it. I don't like to be premature in my findings. I will then go back to my Rocna as my primary because it fits better in the anchor locker and on the roller and the Mantus will be a reserve anchor with my Fortress.


----------



## NCC320

chef2sail said:


> I have already done this (buy a Mantus), so let me asky you a question. When I get it and use it and come to the same conclusions...will you still incorrectly say I am bashing it, which I am not
> 
> - I think you'll be happy with the anchor as a secondary/storm anchor to be stored below. What size did you get?
> 
> - Now that you own one, I think it will be entirely appropriate to report your findings, good or bad. That helps other sailors in making their decisions.
> 
> You have said yourself previously that you have very little experience in anchoring.
> 
> - Actually, I think that I said that I don't anchor out often. But I've been messing with sail and power boats for 42 years, so I've anchored quite a bit over time....I just don't do it frequently. I've used a Danforth for most of that. And a Bruce less often. (Even have a little experience with anchoring a ship from Navy days).
> 
> Lastly remember no anchor is the " queeens bees" in all bottom conditions. So it you venture out of the Sound where you boat, or find yourself on a grass boittom creek with a layer of leaves you may want to consoider using a Fortress or Danforth. These are the bottoms where I have found so far that the new generation anchors did not set as easily and lot the first time you drop them like they do in other bottom conditions.
> 
> - Thanks for the heads up. I carry a 33 lb. Bruce, 22 lb. Danforth, and now 35 lb. Mantus as storm anchor (disassembled/stored in cockpit locker).


I'll look forward to learning of your experience with this anchor.


----------



## chef2sail

When I get it I will use as my primary for a while to test it for me. I am primarily buying it as mentioned to have a new gen type anchor in reserve and it is attractive in that it can be broken down and stored in a smaller footpruint. Like Mainesail ,y intention is that I will go back to using my Rocna as my frimary with a fortress and the Mantus as reserves.

Dave


----------



## UncleJim

Mine 35# Mantus arrived today, and the box wasn't even torn up. I'll wait until the weekend to open it up as I won't have a chance to get it out to the boat until Sun at the earliest


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Guys thanks for your feed back, discussion good or bad!
Just wanted to let you, we are now in the SAILNET store... I am sure good things are coming for the SAILNETTERS!


----------



## Marcel D

I have one question when you guys are testing an anchor, does one ever get to use 1 to 10 scope? It seams all of the Mantus tests were using this method. Am I wrong I never get to use that kind of scope not even in clam bay. It is more like 4 to 1 and 5 to 1 and even then I seam to close to other boats.


----------



## MedSailor

Marcel D said:


> I have one question when you guys are testing an anchor, does one ever get to use 1 to 10 scope? It seams all of the Mantus tests were using this method. Am I wrong I never get to use that kind of scope not even in clam bay. It is more like 4 to 1 and 5 to 1 and even then I seam to close to other boats.


I think I've only had 10:1 out once. I was in, what my guidebook told me, was the busiest anchorage in all of Desolation Sound. I had it all to myself, and had been, for the last 4 months, anchoring on much less scope than I had wanted to on most nights. I dropped my 10:1 that night just for the heck of it and would wake up on the other side of the bay, still attached to my hook. (Fortress FX-16 on a different boat)

As to your question, I think that some of the videos used a 10:1 scope but both Maine_Sail and I have been using ours on VERY short scopes just to see what would happen. Just the other night I set my and backed down on it at just over 2:1 and spend the night with 15 gusting 30kt winds at just over 4:1.

Here is my write up of that trip: http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gear-maintenance/85093-another-next-generation-anchor-enters-market-12.html#post925673

Here is Maine_Sail's short scope test:http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gear-maintenance/85093-another-next-generation-anchor-enters-market-11.html#post905967

I haven't tried the Mantus on 10:1 yet myself. I figure if it'll hold on short scope, it'll hold on long scope too.

MedSailor


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Marcel D said:


> I have one question when you guys are testing an anchor, does one ever get to use 1 to 10 scope? It seams all of the Mantus tests were using this method. Am I wrong I never get to use that kind of scope not even in clam bay. It is more like 4 to 1 and 5 to 1 and even then I seam to close to other boats.


Marcel its a very good question, the reason we use 10:1 is simply because that's what we usually use around here due to poor holding. Now all anchors were tested in equal environment, we are about post some more test videos and will include shorter scope pulls. What we try to show in the videos is that Mantus has a fast and reliable set. In the 



 the bottom is so thick and viscouse that the Rocna and Manson Supreme don't set. So most people set out 10:1 to give it the best chance to bite.
Greg


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Hey S Netters! Just popping in to say... *Mantus Hooks* are finally here! 
Greg


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Guys! SAILNET store is offering a new promo deal on Mantus Anchors.
Greg


----------



## smallboatlover

i dont agree with that video at all. with those other anchors you should have chain thats what help set those anchors. just cause your doesn't require chain doesn't mean that the others dont need the chain. i think you guys should do a video testing with chain. Also maybe even do a power boat anchored and set the anchor and see if the powerboat can pull the anchor out. then id be sold on the anchor. even tho i might get the 2lbs mantus for my small sailboat.


----------



## SloopJonB

smallboatlover said:


> i dont agree with that video at all. with those other anchors you should have chain thats what help set those anchors. just cause your doesn't require chain doesn't mean that the others dont need the chain. i think you guys should do a video testing with chain. Also maybe even *do a power boat anchored and set the anchor and see if the powerboat can pull the anchor out.* then id be sold on the anchor. even tho i might get the 2lbs mantus for my small sailboat.


Read the whole thread - that was done.


----------



## smallboatlover

SloopJonB said:


> Read the whole thread - that was done.


o sorry didn't see it will look for it.


----------



## smallboatlover

Im still not really convinced. you could stick with the old and faithfull that you know workes or go for some thing else that shows to work but you can't trust cause it's new. has mantus bin tested in hurricane force winds? ive seen other people use danforths the right 1 size over recomended size for huricannes and they didn't move a inch. I'm just not sold on this new type of anchor i have a plow and danforth and never had one pull even in 40mph winds. i just don't see the up side to this mantus anchor yet. I don't see what so diffrent from other anchor then fast setting.


----------



## SloopJonB

smallboatlover said:


> Im still not really convinced. you could stick with the old and faithfull that you know workes or go for some thing else that shows to work but you can't trust cause it's new. has mantus bin tested in hurricane force winds? ive seen other people use danforths the right 1 size over recomended size for huricannes and they didn't move a inch. I'm just not sold on this new type of anchor i have a plow and danforth and never had one pull even in 40mph winds. i just don't see the up side to this mantus anchor yet. I don't see what so diffrent from other anchor then fast setting.


The new Mantsocnas are more than just different. I have some experience with a hefty Rocna (not in hurricanes. ) and it is a definite improvement over older anchors - sets instantly, every time so far, never drags, resets instantly when veered out from swinging etc, never fouls, stores well on the bow roller. The roll bar makes a great grab handle if it needs to be adjusted in the roller to set a locking pin. Only downside I've seen is that it brings up 1/2 the bottom when hooked in mud.

I haven't used the Mantus but I'm sure it's the same, with the added advantage of breaking down to be stored flat.

Try one, you'll like it.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

smallboatlover said:


> i dont agree with that video at all. with those other anchors you should have chain thats what help set those anchors. just cause your doesn't require chain doesn't mean that the others dont need the chain. i think you guys should do a video testing with chain. Also maybe even do a power boat anchored and set the anchor and see if the powerboat can pull the anchor out. then id be sold on the anchor. even tho i might get the 2lbs mantus for my small sailboat.


Huck the main reason we developed the Mantus, was in harder and or grassy bottoms traditional anchors often don't set or require extreme effort to set...

If in your neighbourhood your anchor sets all the time than there is no reason to switch. But bottoms vary and If you talk to cruisers that change ports frequently and never know what bottom they will encounter, an anchor that sets right away is paramount! In an emergency if you lose an engine and rocks are nearby than your anchor is the single line defence and needs to set immediately. So we optimized the Mantus for a quick and reliable set. This is what I am trying to relay in the video. You can use it with chain or no chain the point is, it will SET. 
Oh and if you want to store an extra one you can because it breaks down....
Greg


----------



## GaryC5551

Mantus Anchors said:


> Guys! SAILNET store is offering a new promo deal on Mantus Anchors.
> Greg


I'm not seeing the deal???


----------



## SloopJonB

GaryC5551 said:


> I'm not seeing the deal???


Then you ain't trying hard enough. 

Gal 45


----------



## GaryC5551

Aww said the blind man. Tks Jb


----------



## smallboatlover

Well around here and every were ive bin so far is usally mud and i was reading the chart on the video you had and danforth at a better for mud. so are mantus anchors good for all conditions? or is there places were the mantus won't hold as good as some other anchor would?


----------



## Maine Sail

smallboatlover said:


> Well around here and every were ive bin so far is usally mud and i was reading the chart on the video you had and danforth at a better for mud. so are mantus anchors good for all conditions? or is there places were the mantus won't hold as good as some other anchor would?


I own just about every anchor made, with the exception of just a few, and you could not pay me to go back to the old gen anchors like a Danforth or CQR... The new generation of anchors including the Spade, Rocna, Manson Supreme and Mantus are head and shoulders above the old stuff..

My experience is actual experience with my own anchors.

I currently own:
2 CQR's (genuine)
Bruce (genuine)
Fortress
Supermax
Oceanne/Sword
Spade's (1 aluminum & 1 steel)
Rocna
Manson Supreme
Mantus

I have owned:
Delta Fast Set
Danforth's (both high tensile and standard)

The new gen anchors are all they are cracked up to be.... I can use ANY anchor I want from the top list, I currently own them and they owe me nothing. After years of my own testing, for my own edification, I choose the Rocna, Manson Supreme or Mantus first then the Spade as second.

I am currently using the Mantus and it is a very, very good anchor. After this season is over I will go back to my Rocna but only because it fits my roller better. The Mantus will join my Spade as a back up/storm anchor as well as the Fortress s my dedicated stern anchor.

I find the Manson, Rocna and Mantus to be very similar in performance with the Mantus slightly edging out the Rocna and Manson in fast setting. Course when I say fast we are talking inches difference in set not feet...


----------



## SloopJonB

Maine Sail said:


> I own just about every anchor made, with the exception of just a few, and you could not pay me to go back to the old gen anchors like a Danforth or CQR... The new generation of anchors including the Spade, Rocna, Manson Supreme and Mantus are head and shoulders above the old stuff..
> 
> My experience is actual experience with my own anchors.
> 
> I currently own:
> 2 CQR's (genuine)
> Bruce (genuine)
> Fortress
> Supermax
> Oceanne/Sword
> Spade's (1 aluminum & 1 steel)
> Rocna
> Manson Supreme
> Mantus
> 
> I have owned:
> Delta Fast Set
> Danforth's (both high tensile and standard)


Maine - Bruce's are huge here - how do they compare to the new Mantsocnas?


----------



## Mantus Anchors

SloopJonB said:


> Maine - Bruce's are huge here - how do they compare to the new Mantsocnas?


This is the difference in a really dense hard soil....


----------



## UncleJim

GaryC5551 said:


> I'm not seeing the deal???


the price in the store is less then what their web price is now and what I paid for the 35#


----------



## SloopJonB

Mantus Anchors said:


> This is the difference in a really dense hard soil....
> 
> Anchor Wars - YouTube


Did I hear the guy say "*Aluminium* Bruce anchor"? I've never seen, or even heard of an aluminium Bruce.


----------



## MedSailor

SloopJonB said:


> Did I hear the guy say "*Aluminium* Bruce anchor"? I've never seen, or even heard of an aluminium Bruce.


I think he said "alewmar bruce". i.e. Lewmar's clone of the Bruce anchor known as the "claw". I have one for my dinghy and it seems to work less well than the crappy grapnel anchor that I had of approximately the same weight.

I also had a 30lb lewmar claw on my last boat but only used it twice.

MedSailor

PS Nice video. Cute kid.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Guys, just wanted to share with you that we were honoured by the Chuck Husick Marine Technology Award! by Ocean Navigator.... For contributions to advances in marine technology...
After the review of the Mantus Anchor...!
Greg


----------



## Mantus Anchors

This is an excerpt from the Blog of a cruiser who rode out SANDY while anchored on the Mantus Anchor

"The primary anchor, the Mantus, did very well. It didn't budge much at all, just enough for it to dig in so deep that the very top of the rollbar was 6 inches below the surface, which I believe was only about 2 feet of drag. The in tandum anchor chain still had its 10+ feet of slack so that means the Mantus never dragged. It did rotate when the winds rotated as it was pointing 120 degrees different direction from how it was set. All in all, it passed a very tough test. 70 knots gusting to 80 knots and it didn't drag but 2 feet....awesome! I just might have to see if I can get Captain to make this my primary anchor instead of the Bulwagga. I'm pretty sure the Bulwagga would have dragged a bit more under those conditions." For the full write up you could visit the blog Dreamboat and it's crazy Captain: Riding out Hurricane Sandy


----------



## SloopJonB

Mantus Anchors said:


> This is an excerpt from the Blog of a cruiser who rode out SANDY while anchored on the Mantus Anchor
> 
> Dreamboat and it's crazy Captain: Riding out Hurricane Sandy


That looks like high praise indeed. I'd like to know what the boat was as well as the size of the anchor used.

Edit: found the boat - Hunter 376 - at the beginning of the blog but nothing about the anchor size, only the chain & rode.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

We sold Franklin a 45 lb Mantus


----------



## FranklinGray

SloopJonB said:


> That looks like high praise indeed. I'd like to know what the boat was as well as the size of the anchor used.
> 
> Edit: found the boat - Hunter 376 - at the beginning of the blog but nothing about the anchor size, only the chain & rode.


Hello fellows.  Heard there was a question about my anchor over here. My first time on this site...seems like a pretty good site. Hard to keep up with which site is the not trend these days. Some may know me from my days on SailboatOwners site but it got old so I stopped posting...although I did learn a lot from that site and I thank all who have helped me.

Anyway, to the question of size, it's the 45 lb anchor. I remember when I was getting it before leaving Kemah and I thought I was getting the next size up as most anchor companies don't give a proper size...they say up to 30 knots. Well, most boats that really use an anchor are going to get more than 30 knots. Anyway, because of that I normally get the next size up and thought I was with the Mantus, but it turns out, according to their website, it's the "right" size for my boat, a Hunter 376 (37') with a displacement of 8 tons but maybe close to 8.5 or 9 with all my stuff on it. The anchor though is the same size as my Bulwagga and I remember that being a one size up. I do love my Bulwagga but I do believe the Mantus holds better and so far it's been perfect in it's setting ability.

I have to admit, I was really impressed by it this past weekend. I kept checking the compass headings during the storm and was amazed it wasn't changing. I knew I had the Bulwagga in tandum if it started to drag and with the two there should be no way I would have a problem, but for the Mantus to handle the worst part of the storm all by itself, all I can say is wow.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me by email. Those who know me, know I am very open and honest about everything, even making fun of my mistakes...and I do make a lot of mistakes 

Well, I'm off to getting the boat ready for sailing again. Heading to the Cays one last week before I head to Nassau and then George Town (it's getting a little cold here).


----------



## SloopJonB

That settles it - high praise indeed.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Sailnetters! Mantus Anchors will now offer sponsorships for: simply put "boys and girls doing cool stuff"
So if you are embarking on an adventure you can apply for Mantus Sponsorship. Just submit your story to [email protected] for review. We are in the process of formalizing this process so stay tuned for the link on the website.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Mantus Sponsorship link is now live on the website, just click "sponsorship" tab on the left and fill out the application.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Netters check this out! www.mantusanchors.comhttp://mantusanchors.com


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Netters, meet us at Miami International Boat Show!
Booth 4022
_We will be raffling off 2000$ worth of Mantus Products and offering big discounts...._


----------



## MedSailor

MedSailor said:


> Greg,
> 
> Since Main_Sail has passed on your offer for now, I'll offer up my services as a West Coast tester. I don't have the same equipment as Maine, but I'll promise that if you send me one, I'll hook it up to my 30,000lb 41ft ketch and take it to Jones Island in the San Juan islands where nothing likes to stick and let you know what I find. I'll also take it everywhere else and give it a go. I know some other areas of really soft mud for comparison as well. I like the concept and design and am keen to try it out in the field.
> 
> I'll post my results here on this thread that I started 4 months and 4,000+ views ago!
> 
> MedSailor


Well it took me nearly a year to the day to fulfill my original promise above (of taking the anchor to Jones island) for a test. And test it we did!

Backstory:

The holding ground in the Salish Sea is pretty good ground to get an anchor to stick and hold in. I spend 4.5 months cruising years ago on my smaller boat using a Fortress FX-16 all over the Salish Sea. It served its purpose and never came unstuck despite some serious blows. It was not quick or easy to set though. I often had to try several times and once on the THIRD time I pulled it up it was fouled with chain. Set on the fourth try....

My next boat came with a manual windlass, negating the need for a lightweight anchor. It also came with my preferred anchor, the Genuine Bruce. Ahh... how wonderful to have it set in a boat-length or less (usually less) ever time. I became a Disciple of The Bruce.

The north end of Jones Island in the San Juan Islands is the only place where I had to pull it up and try again to get a set. A couple years ago there were a bunch or boats looking for shelter from a forecast south gale (which never came). I drug it a few hundred yards the first time, and probably 50 yards the second time before it set. Another boat (with a danforth copy) came and asked me what I was using and how I set it. It set, but not where I wanted it. I was too close to another boat and had to set my fortress as as stern anchor to limit swinging. If the winds came up the stern anchor (set to the north) wouldn't be a player, but I needed it to limit swinging. No gale, but during the night with just minimal tidal swinging the fortress came unset.  Didn't hit the other boat though....

So that's the story of the tough holding ground at Jones. Now for the Mantus.


















I headed there on the 2nd of July and there wasn't any serious wind forecast. The anchorage was crowded when I got there, necessitating anchoring on the northwest side of the cove. 60ft of water was as close in as I could get.

I was worried that it might not set immediately and we would be backing up towards the NW cliff. I decided not to lay out too much chain and back up slowly for the initial set. I put out 160ft of chain and we started backing.

For those watching closely, here are the hard numbers. My depth sounder is mounted 2 ft low and my bowsprit is 8ft above the water. That makes the actual depth (for calculating scope) 70ft in this case. 
*160/70 = 2.3:1 scope.....*

And she set right where I dropped her and she held full throttle in reverse!









I had a little more room to the wall and I put out 210ft and put on the bridle which attaches at the stem at the waterline negating the 8ft of rise of the bow.

New math: 62ft of depth (60 + 2 for depth sounder) 
*210/62 = 3.4:1 scope*, which is what we went to bed with. Now I know that seems like very little scope, but I feel comfortable in certain circumstances going below 5:1. The deeper we are the better I feel about it because there is more total weight of chain for catenary. With 3/8 chain and my ridiculously large shackle that is over about 350lbs of weight in rode.

*Now the fun bit.  
*
I had worried that I was sleeping too deeply at anchor. Perhaps I was getting complacent. There was a rocky cliff only 100ft behind us.... I wondered if I could still wake up with that 6th sense when things "were't quite right." Yup, I can, and I did, because things weren't right.

At 5:30 am I woke up. I wasn't sure why I woke up but I had a nagging feeling something wasn't right. So I laid there and thought about it. The sound of the water woke me up, but it was the normal sound of lots of wavelets hitting the hull that you normally get with a strong wind.....

Oh wait, there is NO WIND. So why are the waves making that sound? I stood up in my bunk and looked out my window and there, was the cliff that was behind us, except we were facing it now, *with the boat moving SIDEWAYS at 4-5 knots.* 

I started the engine, woke up my wife, and took to the cockpit in my underwear. 








The tide was rushing in like in the Japanese Tsunami videos. There was actual white water and you could see that water higher as it filled in. 

We did snatch up and the end of the anchor and then started doing FAST 360s around it. Another boat on mostly rope rode was also doing 360s and I was pretty sure he was dragging. I figured that the odds of a collision between us were high. I also didn't like what I was going on and I wanted out of there fast. Unfortunately fast isn't a speed on my manual windlass.  Especially not when it's loaded. And loaded it was, with chain in deep water, and it was nearly impossible to motor to take any strain off, because we were doing figure eights.

I got in about 50ft of chain in 10 minutes (yeah I know ) *and as suddenly as it started, the current madness was over. * At this point, with the bridle not connected I was back to my 2.3:1 and still holding despite all the figure eights and 360s. I watched for a while and since my boat and the other boat's circles never overlapped we never hit. The anchor was clearly still holding us to the bottom. I watched for a half hour and went back to sleep.

What a crazy night! I did NOT like seeing cliff that was supposed to be 100ft behind us, be *in front* of us, with our boat doing 5 knots sideways!! I was REALLY glad that the anchor held through all that, in all directions and it came up easy in the morning.

After this, and my other recent anchoring adventures, I think I'm turning into a serious Mantus Fanboy. 

MedSailor


----------



## JomsViking

Interesting.. 

You say it came it came up easily in the morning? It didn't bring up an acre of seabed?

/Joms



MedSailor said:


> Well it took me nearly a year to the day to fulfill my original promise above (of taking the anchor to Jones island) for a test. And test it we did!
> 
> Backstory:
> 
> The holding ground in the Salish Sea is pretty good ground to get an anchor to stick and hold in. I spend 4.5 months cruising years ago on my smaller boat using a Fortress FX-16 all over the Salish Sea. It served its purpose and never came unstuck despite some serious blows. It was not quick or easy to set though. I often had to try several times and once on the THIRD time I pulled it up it was fouled with chain. Set on the fourth try....
> 
> My next boat came with a manual windlass, negating the need for a lightweight anchor. It also came with my preferred anchor, the Genuine Bruce. Ahh... how wonderful to have it set in a boat-length or less (usually less) ever time. I became a Disciple of The Bruce.
> 
> The north end of Jones Island in the San Juan Islands is the only place where I had to pull it up and try again to get a set. A couple years ago there were a bunch or boats looking for shelter from a forecast south gale (which never came). I drug it a few hundred yards the first time, and probably 50 yards the second time before it set. Another boat (with a danforth copy) came and asked me what I was using and how I set it. It set, but not where I wanted it. I was too close to another boat and had to set my fortress as as stern anchor to limit swinging. If the winds came up the stern anchor (set to the north) wouldn't be a player, but I needed it to limit swinging. No gale, but during the night with just minimal tidal swinging the fortress came unset.  Didn't hit the other boat though....
> 
> So that's the story of the tough holding ground at Jones. Now for the Mantus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I headed there on the 2nd of July and there wasn't any serious wind forecast. The anchorage was crowded when I got there, necessitating anchoring on the northwest side of the cove. 60ft of water was as close in as I could get.
> 
> I was worried that it might not set immediately and we would be backing up towards the NW cliff. I decided not to lay out too much chain and back up slowly for the initial set. I put out 160ft of chain and we started backing.
> 
> For those watching closely, here are the hard numbers. My depth sounder is mounted 2 ft low and my bowsprit is 8ft above the water. That makes the actual depth (for calculating scope) 70ft in this case.
> *160/70 = 2.3:1 scope.....*
> 
> And she set right where I dropped her and she held full throttle in reverse!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had a little more room to the wall and I put out 210ft and put on the bridle which attaches at the stem at the waterline negating the 8ft of rise of the bow.
> 
> New math: 62ft of depth (60 + 2 for depth sounder)
> *210/62 = 3.4:1 scope*, which is what we went to bed with. Now I know that seems like very little scope, but I feel comfortable in certain circumstances going below 5:1. The deeper we are the better I feel about it because there is more total weight of chain for catenary. With 3/8 chain and my ridiculously large shackle that is over about 350lbs of weight in rode.
> 
> *Now the fun bit.
> *
> I had worried that I was sleeping too deeply at anchor. Perhaps I was getting complacent. There was a rocky cliff only 100ft behind us.... I wondered if I could still wake up with that 6th sense when things "were't quite right." Yup, I can, and I did, because things weren't right.
> 
> At 5:30 am I woke up. I wasn't sure why I woke up but I had a nagging feeling something wasn't right. So I laid there and thought about it. The sound of the water woke me up, but it was the normal sound of lots of wavelets hitting the hull that you normally get with a strong wind.....
> 
> Oh wait, there is NO WIND. So why are the waves making that sound? I stood up in my bunk and looked out my window and there, was the cliff that was behind us, except we were facing it now, *with the boat moving SIDEWAYS at 4-5 knots.*
> 
> I started the engine, woke up my wife, and took to the cockpit in my underwear.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tide was rushing in like in the Japanese Tsunami videos. There was actual white water and you could see that water higher as it filled in.
> 
> We did snatch up and the end of the anchor and then started doing FAST 360s around it. Another boat on mostly rope rode was also doing 360s and I was pretty sure he was dragging. I figured that the odds of a collision between us were high. I also didn't like what I was going on and I wanted out of there fast. Unfortunately fast isn't a speed on my manual windlass.  Especially not when it's loaded. And loaded it was, with chain in deep water, and it was nearly impossible to motor to take any strain off, because we were doing figure eights.
> 
> I got in about 50ft of chain in 10 minutes (yeah I know ) *and as suddenly as it started, the current madness was over. * At this point, with the bridle not connected I was back to my 2.3:1 and still holding despite all the figure eights and 360s. I watched for a while and since my boat and the other boat's circles never overlapped we never hit. The anchor was clearly still holding us to the bottom. I watched for a half hour and went back to sleep.
> 
> What a crazy night! I did NOT like seeing cliff that was supposed to be 100ft behind us, be *in front* of us, with our boat doing 5 knots sideways!! I was REALLY glad that the anchor held through all that, in all directions and it came up easy in the morning.
> 
> After this, and my other recent anchoring adventures, I think I'm turning into a serious Mantus Fanboy.
> 
> MedSailor


----------



## blt2ski

So you obviously did not get hit by the 25-35 knot winds on the straights early last week! at least late in the day to evening hours! 6-8' swells crossing the straight in the am, with little to NO wind. Just remnants from the night before winds that I attempted to go out in from PT! Wife saw two really big waves crash over our wittle boat, gave me the turn around sign from below.......back to Port Hudson we went! That woulda been a wet trip across wed evening! 

Anyway, got to try my 9 lb fast set as my motor died coming out of Ludlow, It set pretty well and quick too! Would be interesting to see how a mantus of this size would work on my boat too........maybe someday! These newer styles along with the bruce all work better here in the salish sea than a danforth style! I've lost too many trying to hold race mark bouy's! much less a boat!

Marty


----------



## chef2sail

blt2ski said:


> So you obviously did not get hit by the 25-35 knot winds on the straights early last week! at least late in the day to evening hours! 6-8' swells crossing the straight in the am, with little to NO wind. Just remnants from the night before winds that I attempted to go out in from PT! Wife saw two really big waves crash over our wittle boat, gave me the turn around sign from below.......back to Port Hudson we went! That woulda been a wet trip across wed evening!
> 
> Anyway, got to try my 9 lb fast set as my motor died coming out of Ludlow, It set pretty well and quick too! Would be interesting to see how a mantus of this size would work on my boat too........maybe someday! These newer styles along with the bruce all work better here in the salish sea than a danforth style! I've lost too many trying to hold race mark bouy's! much less a boat!
> 
> Marty


Get a 15 or 20 kg Rocna or Manson Supreme,. They hold just as well. Same design. Rocna is the same price and you don't have to pay shipping.

While all the testimonials are great, none prove their is any appreciable difference in holding power or resetting ability between these three new generation anchors.


----------



## bwindrope

Great story MedSailor, and Jones is a second home for us as well and I can testify to the currents and iffy holding. I can also testify to my growing confidence in our Mantus, as compared to our now defunct CQR. We are just back from a trip taking Aeolus up to Campbell River on our way around Van Isle and we had a rough night at Mitlenatch Island in the Northern Straits. It had been blowing NW all week anyway, and on this night it was blowing 20 with gusts to 25 and the low island provides shelter from waves but not from wind. 

The anchorage in Camp Bay is tiny, with barely enough room to have 3:1 without a stern line. We set the Mantus and had about 25 feet off the stern to the steep rocky shore!! All night it howled, and I had set my anchor riding sail to smooth the bumps and our nylon anchor snubber to reduce shock loads. At 1am I woke as all captains do to some noise, and remained awake the rest of the morning from an overabundance of caution. I know for a fact that if we had been using our CQR that we would have been on the rocks before we knew it. We were too close to respond if the anchor had dragged. Yes, it is a very risky spot, but we've developed faith in the Mantus. Happy to say that darn thing did not so much as budge all night and morning. 

I'm sure the Rocna and whoever else uses this sort of design would give the same sort of experience. I can't believe the difference, and I really have to learn to trust it even more so I can sleep better and not remain on anchor watch unnecessarily.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

OK Netters this is a three part series, so be patient..... this is just the Part I
We went to Mexico..
We took with us Mantus, Rocna, Danforth, Lewmar Claw, Manson Supreme, Manson Boss and Delta
In this Video all anchors are pulled with 4:1 scope and there is 10 feet of chain at the end on the rode... All anchor are pulled with a Panga with two 115 hp outboards gradually increasing the throttle from idle (700) to 1200 rpm.
The Bottom here is Soft Sand so we came with the expectation that all anchors will work well......


----------



## blt2ski

Well,

Have not looked to see if any updates are up. But a local that has a mantus, had a 40 boats drift into him recently, and the mantus held both. He seems a bit happier than his first adventure with it. 

I'm beginning to think, some of th enewer design anchors are holding better than older versions personally!

marty


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Netters HERE is 
Part II Grass
Same Rules
Depth 25 feet
Scope 4:1
10 feet of chain and line for rode
Anchors Being pulled with a 33 foot Panga with two 115 hp outboards....


----------



## PaulinVictoria

In the last set of the Mantus, it looked almost exactly like the Supreme (i.e it started to dig in). With the Supreme, you then switched to a shot of it being towed along the surface - did the anchor break out again? What about the Mantus when you tried to pull it at the same speed?


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Holding here was horrible and you could easily pull out the 8lbs Mantus with two 115hp outboards (infect it only held to 900-1000 prm) what we try to show is the likely hood of a set....... Infect in this bottom once set they will be pretty similar in holding power....


----------



## smackdaddy

My boat speaks for what I personally think of the Mantus:


----------



## chef2sail

smackdaddy said:


> My boat speaks for what I personally think of the Mantus:


Steve,

What anchors have you used prior to Mantus? Are you planning to put a bale on the roller to keep the anchor from "popping" up in heavier seas?

Dave


----------



## Mantus Anchors




----------



## Mantus Anchors

Ok Guys Last One! I know we released a bunch of stuff at once...
But we get this question a lot..... Can I use the anchor without the Roll Bar...
It would be a very rare event that the Mantus Flips...
We tossed it 50 times and 50 times it lands right.....


----------



## Melrna

Practical Sailor has done a few test recently on shanks bending. Since this anchors sets deep I would be interested to see how much force it would take to bend the shank during just normal sailboats dancing (swinging) at anchor and 180 degree wind shift. 
Since I am in the market for a new anchor for my new sailboat to be delivered in a few months this is near and dear to my heart since I have bent a few shanks in my time.


----------



## smackdaddy

chef2sail said:


> Steve,
> 
> What anchors have you used prior to Mantus? Are you planning to put a bale on the roller to keep the anchor from "popping" up in heavier seas?
> 
> Dave


I've always used Danforth anchors. And I still have a large Danforth on this boat that came with it (don't know exactly what size it is).

And yes, I plan to put a bale on the roller for our upcoming BFSs.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Guys we got something new for you!
Mantus Universal Anchor Bracket!









Mantus Anchor Bracket -


----------



## copacabana

Greg, I watched your video of the Mantus anchor without the roll bar with more than a passing interest. If you recall, I bought a 45lb Mantus anchor from you more than a year ago and it's still sitting at home because I haven't yet modified my stainless steel sprit and anchor platform to accommodate the anchor. It will take major surgery to modify things to fit the anchor with the roll bar. Do you think, based on your tests, that the anchor will set and reset as well as without the roll bar? We had discussed this when I bought the anchor and you thought at the time it might not land and set properly without the bar. Needless to say, I'm anxious to get that Delta off the bow and start using my Mantus!....


----------



## erps

I've owned a Manson Supreme for six years now. I've sold quite a few on our dock with my testimonials and an offer to borrow it and try it yourself.

Well today I was walking down to the boat and I passed by a MaNson "Boss". Looked like a supreme with the roll bar removed. We've had some big rocks and logs get stuck in our roll bar. Anyone with an experience with the "Boss"?


----------



## UncleJim

Lost my Mantus 35# last month, no fault of the anchor but to a chain that snapped and the anchor did what anchors do best. it went to the bottom. I think the chain at or near the schackle broke. But it always grabbed quick and held first time. I'm picking up a new one at the Annapolis $how this week.


----------



## RickWestlake

erps said:


> I've owned a Manson Supreme for six years now. I've sold quite a few on our dock with my testimonials and an offer to borrow it and try it yourself.
> 
> Well today I was walking down to the boat and I passed by a MaNson "Boss". Looked like a supreme with the roll bar removed. We've had some big rocks and logs get stuck in our roll bar. Anyone with an experience with the "Boss"?


Not with the Boss, directly - but the high-looping shank reminds me of the Raya Tempest I got years ago for my old Mac 26X. (That shank was intended to make the Raya right itself, and I'm sure the Boss would be self-righting as well.)

The Raya Tempest is a tenacious anchor. I'd bet the Boss is, too - and if I didn't already have the Supreme, I'd want a Manson Boss for myself.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Netters we continue to test and these are un-edited results from Boca Del Toro, Panama
Anchors in the video were loaned by local cruisers....in the area
This is the reason why competitor list is not complete...


----------



## jimgo

Mantus, I'm curious about something. Based on your research and/or gut instincts, if you couldn't use one of your own anchors (it didn't fit on the bow for whatever reason, etc.), what 1 or 2 WOULD you consider as a general-purpose anchor (i.e., indeterminate/varying bottom types)?


----------



## Mantus Anchors

jimgo said:


> Mantus, I'm curious about something. Based on your research and/or gut instincts, if you couldn't use one of your own anchors (it didn't fit on the bow for whatever reason, etc.), what 1 or 2 WOULD you consider as a general-purpose anchor (i.e., indeterminate/varying bottom types)?


Sure, I think that the difference between all new generation is rarely experienced in a tangible way, bc the bottom conditions have to be really unique to bring out the difference... But setting of Bullwaga is really good though we never tested it in soft bottoms or look into holding power in different bottom types.
Rocna, Manson duo are good of course... Boss we had issues getting it to set in multiple locations.
Spade always performed good in medium viscosity bottom, but had worse performance in really dense bottoms, but still an excellent anchor that works 99% of the time... 
That's my gut


----------



## jimgo

Thanks for the reply. We have a bent shaft on our anchor. I'm not planning on extensive anchoring, so for now it is fine. But in the next 12 months or so I will probably be upgrading to something new. FWIW, your candor in that response made me much more likely to buy a Mantus.


----------



## smackdaddy

jimgo said:


> Thanks for the reply. We have a bent shaft on our anchor. I'm not planning on extensive anchoring, so for now it is fine. But in the next 12 months or so I will probably be upgrading to something new. FWIW, your candor in that response made me much more likely to buy a Mantus.


There's only one anchor for my bow:










Mantus Rocks!


----------



## PCP

Mantus Anchors said:


> Netters we continue to test and these are un-edited results from Boca Del Toro, Panama
> Anchors in the video were loaned by local cruisers....in the area
> This is the reason why competitor list is not complete...


This type of testing organized by an interested party makes not sense and to my view does not bring credibility to the brand that organizes them. There are plenty of good sailing magazines that test regularly anchors. They are impartial, test in several bottoms and use similar methodologies that give max holding power and dragging power on each type of ground. I hope to see the Mantus being part of one of those extensive tests and I will be very curious about the results.

Regarding this testing that seems to be on an uncharacteristic hard bottom (it is not normal that all the other anchors have failed) says only that the Mantus is specially adapted to that particular and uncharacteristic bottom nothing about comparative holding powers in the type of bottoms more usual for anchoring: Sand and Mud.

Regarding the methodology of the test, it makes no sense to compare an Aluminium spade with steel anchors. It is well known that aluminium anchors have particular difficulty in setting in hard bottoms. Also we can see that while the Mantus is pulled very slowly the Spade is pulled three times faster.

I would say that even on that particular and unusual bottom that test without the two anchors that have come on the top of all the comparative tests, the Steel Rocna and the Steel Spade does not provide enough confirmation to consider the Mantus better on that particular bottom.

Has I have said previously, this test is really a bad idea. No impartiality can be warranted when the test is performed by an interested party. I hope to see the Mantus in comparative tests organized by more credible yacht magazines.

Merry Christmas to you and to all.

Paulo


----------



## barefootnavigator

Funny they didn't test the Rocna the worlds best anchor PERIOD! 

http://logofthe.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/img_1680.jpg


----------



## erps

> Mantus Rocks!


Smacky, what were your previous anchors for your comparisons?

Mantus, I think your youtube videos have been great. I especially appreciated seeing side by side setting comparisons between two anchors on a pivoting arm. If I were in your shoes, I would use that rig a lot. That's instant visible feedback. My question, how does removing the roll bar affect the anchor's performance? Are there circumstances where a boater might want to remove the roll bar for a better configuration? The reason I ask is that in another thread, someone thought the roll bar on the Manson Supreme might actually hinder its ability to bury. I hadn't considered that before until we got a rock caught in the roll bar of our Manson Supreme.


----------



## FranklinGray

PCP said:


> This type of testing organized by an interested party...
> 
> Regarding this testing that seems to be on an uncharacteristic hard bottom (it is not normal that all the other anchors have failed)...
> 
> ... Also we can see that while the Mantus is pulled very slowly the Spade is pulled three times faster.
> 
> Paulo


Paulo:

First of, I am the one who requested for the test to be done here in Bocas and it was my boat with me as the captain. I took the approach of this test as it was my responsibility to make sure the anchor set. I attempted to set each anchor the same way I set my anchor (more on that later). So NO, it was not an interested party. I have no vested interest how the Mantus performs but I do have a vested interest, as a cruiser, to know and inform others of what is the best anchor...aka...the reason for my request to test here as my primary anchor, the Bulwagga would "set" and hold like always but after diving on it I saw it didn't dig in like I am used to. I sent Greg a picture and asked if he thought his could do better.

Yes, I own a Mantus as a backup primary anchor but it is normally disassembled and stored. My Bulwagga is my primary because I really like it and I can't store it. That is, until Greg brought me a bracket to put it on.

Second, it may be uncharacteristic bottom for you, but not for people down here. Seems you fall into the trap many do like I used to in thinking everybody else's environment is like yours. Not so. I have been amazed at the different environments at each stop I make in my cruising.

Third, Each anchor was worked about the same as we could get. The process was: drop all anchors in the same spot...a few feet apart so they had a clean pull. Greg, the video guy would attach the chain and then let me know it was time to set it. If the wind was blowing hard enough at that time, I would instruct the helmsman to drift. If not, then I instructed to put in reverse at idle. Once the chain got tight, then I instructed the helmsman to start increasing the rpm slowly up to 2600 and then hold for 10 seconds or when I said to let off. In the case of the Spade, just like the Fortress (one of my anchors), we never got out of idle. I could tell when an anchor was dragging by the feel on the chain. I never gave the order to increase RPMs on those two.

It is true that it is not fair to test an aluminum Spade against a steal Mantus in setting but that's all we had to work with. We put out a request on the morning net and that is all we got.

The Mantus and Bulwagga performed about equal but because you can't buy a Bulwagga anymore, it is understandable that it's not part of the video. I know that the Mantus holds better due to me riding out a hurricane on each one, but I have to admit I was really impressed with the Mantus's setting ability in this stuff. I am still torn on what I think works better here in this hard stuff but one thing I am sure of, I can't go wrong with either one here or anyplace else.

Now if you doubt I am a real cruiser then you can just look up Bocas Del Toro on facebook and ask anybody on there if we did the test here and if Franklin on Dreamboat is really here. I'm not normally part of your web forum crew but I get on here to support the Mantus because I really wish everybody had a Mantus. In fact, one of the anchors we tested with I gave to another boat here so he would stop dragging. We had a small blow today and he didn't 

Summary: Greg just hooked up the chain and video taped it while I tried to set it. I used the same scope, same boat, same chain and same process for every anchor. As a matter of fact, I didn't even know which anchor he was hooking up for each pull. I only found out after the pull. *So no, you are wrong, it was an unbiased test.*


----------



## FranklinGray

erps said:


> Smacky, what were your previous anchors for your comparisons?
> 
> Mantus, I think your youtube videos have been great. I especially appreciated seeing side by side setting comparisons between two anchors on a pivoting arm. If I were in your shoes, I would use that rig a lot. That's instant visible feedback. My question, how does removing the roll bar affect the anchor's performance? Are there circumstances where a boater might want to remove the roll bar for a better configuration? The reason I ask is that in another thread, someone thought the roll bar on the Manson Supreme might actually hinder its ability to bury. I hadn't considered that before until we got a rock caught in the roll bar of our Manson Supreme.


I know Greg has been very hopeful that the Mantus would work good enough without the rollbar but considering that is what we tested here the first day, I feel I am qualified to say do not even consider it. Now I am pretty sure Greg will not like me saying that but the fact is, it is easy to set the Mantus without it, but if the Mantus has to reset itself for some reason it can not be trusted to set correctly without the rollbar. Do not leave your boat on a Mantus without a rollbar and nobody on board.

Now there is consideration on changes to the anchor that will allow it to work but for now, without a rollbar and the anchor gets upside down, nothing will make it get back on the right side.

As for the bar preventing it digging in, not a chance. I rode out the first half of Sandy on only the Mantus and after the storm, the rollbar was 6 inches below the surface and it didn't drag but a foot to dig in deeper. So don't sweat the bar but change the bow sprit if you have to.


----------



## chef2sail

FranklinGray said:


> Paulo:
> 
> First of, I am the one who requested for the test to be done here in Bocas and it was my boat with me as the captain. I took the approach of this test as it was my responsibility to make sure the anchor set. I attempted to set each anchor the same way I set my anchor (more on that later). So NO, it was not an interested party. I have no vested interest how the Mantus performs but I do have a vested interest, as a cruiser, to know and inform others of what is the best anchor...aka...the reason for my request to test here as my primary anchor, the Bulwagga would "set" and hold like always but after diving on it I saw it didn't dig in like I am used to. I sent Greg a picture and asked if he thought his could do better.
> 
> Yes, I own a Mantus as a backup primary anchor but it is normally disassembled and stored. My Bulwagga is my primary because I really like it and I can't store it. That is, until Greg brought me a bracket to put it on.
> 
> Second, it may be uncharacteristic bottom for you, but not for people down here. Seems you fall into the trap many do like I used to in thinking everybody else's environment is like yours. Not so. I have been amazed at the different environments at each stop I make in my cruising.
> 
> Third, Each anchor was worked about the same as we could get. The process was: drop all anchors in the same spot...a few feet apart so they had a clean pull. Greg, the video guy would attach the chain and then let me know it was time to set it. If the wind was blowing hard enough at that time, I would instruct the helmsman to drift. If not, then I instructed to put in reverse at idle. Once the chain got tight, then I instructed the helmsman to start increasing the rpm slowly up to 2600 and then hold for 10 seconds or when I said to let off. In the case of the Spade, just like the Fortress (one of my anchors), we never got out of idle. I could tell when an anchor was dragging by the feel on the chain. I never gave the order to increase RPMs on those two.
> 
> It is true that it is not fair to test an aluminum Spade against a steal Mantus in setting but that's all we had to work with. We put out a request on the morning net and that is all we got.
> 
> The Mantus and Bulwagga performed about equal but because you can't buy a Bulwagga anymore, it is understandable that it's not part of the video. I know that the Mantus holds better due to me riding out a hurricane on each one, but I have to admit I was really impressed with the Mantus's setting ability in this stuff. I am still torn on what I think works better here in this hard stuff but one thing I am sure of, I can't go wrong with either one here or anyplace else.
> 
> Now if you doubt I am a real cruiser then you can just look up Bocas Del Toro on facebook and ask anybody on there if we did the test here and if Franklin on Dreamboat is really here. I'm not normally part of your web forum crew but I get on here to support the Mantus because I really wish everybody had a Mantus. In fact, one of the anchors we tested with I gave to another boat here so he would stop dragging. We had a small blow today and he didn't
> 
> Summary: Greg just hooked up the chain and video taped it while I tried to set it. I used the same scope, same boat, same chain and same process for every anchor. As a matter of fact, I didn't even know which anchor he was hooking up for each pull. I only found out after the pull. *So no, you are wrong, it was an unbiased test.*


Another shill from Mantus now appears. Actually we are quite used to Mantus commng up with their tedtimonials monthly on here to keep the anchor in the forefront. They are allowed after all as they are a financial supporter of Sailnet. Who will forget their first testimonial on here who never disclosed they were in actuality a member of the company.

Paulo is correct is saying your testimonial has as much weight as anoone elses who has an opinion and shouldnt be looked at with any more authority, Hihs point which I support that until these tests are done by an independent organization without any finanicial gain in an environement where the test is conducted and certified that all factors are controlled and equal to all the anchors, the videos are nothing more than sales propaganda for Manus.

In actuallity Mantus is a good achor I am sure with lines and build like the other two prominent new generation achors Manson Supreme and Rocna. It really is not a newly developed anchor as the design was tried and true before with Manson/ Rocna and I would expect the results when done independently will show NEGLIGABLE difference between the 3 anchors.

I dont know many sailors who have one of the two original anchors( Manson/ Rocna) scrapping them and rushing out buying a Mantus. I do see the usefullness of carrying a backup anchor, dissassembled like the Mantus to save space with the same design as the Rocna/ Manson.

I have had a ROCNA for 6 years now and stick by it as my primary with a Mantus in the anchor compartment dissassempled for use if necessary.


----------



## smackdaddy

chef2sail said:


> Another shill from Mantus now appears. Actually we are quite used to Mantus commng up with their tedtimonials monthly on here to keep the anchor in the forefront. They are allowed after all as they are a financial supporter of Sailnet. Who will forget their first testimonial on here who never disclosed they were in actuality a member of the company.


"Shill"? Dude, a little heavy on the conspiracy theories.



erps said:


> Smacky, what were your previous anchors for your comparisons?


I've only used the Danforth-styles in the past. But I've followed the anchor threads pretty closely over time - and had planned to go straight to a new gen anchor like the Mantus, Rocna, or MS when the time came. Rocna dropped off the list pretty quickly with their integrity meltdown. And I liked how Mantus was showing the videos of their tests. I was satisfied with them.

Then I saw MaineSail's evaluation of the "top three" - and his positive take on the Mantus.

That was good enough for me. I ordered one through SN.

THEN I received just about the best customer service on the planet. Since my arm was busted up from our accident, Greg himself delivered our new Mantus to the boat. Who does that these days?

So, despite Chef's aspersions above - I've got nothing but praise for Mantus. I think it would be very hard to go wrong with these guys the their gear.


----------



## Donna_F

Gentlemen, I know anchors are a hot topic right up there with politics and religion, but please keep civil. 

One thing I don't understand and Paulo maybe you can help me. You said that you didn't understand why Mantus performed tests on their anchor since they are an "interested" party. I'm unclear as to whether you have a problem with them testing the anchor or the methods that they used. If it's the fact that they tested it, I'm really confused because why wouldn't any manufacture test their own product and continue to test to make sure that it behaves as it should? Otherwise, there'd be a heck of a lot of disbanded QA departments. If it's the location with that particular bottom that is the problem, I would hope that Mantus has done other tests in other circumstances and that this is but one of them. Since the Mantus posts says "we continue to test" than I'm going to assume they do.

I just want to be clear on your argument against it. Thanks!


----------



## Faster

chef2sail said:


> Another shill from Mantus now appears.


Unless you have proof, Dave, I think that statement's gotta go....


----------



## Maine Sail

chef2sail said:


> Another shill from Mantus now appears.


Wow, kind of rude...


----------



## Donna_F

chef2sail said:


> Another shill from Mantus now appears. ...


This is a rather unfair assertion.



chef2sail said:


> ...
> 
> Actually we are quite used to Mantus commng up with their tedtimonials monthly on here to keep the anchor in the forefront. They are allowed after all as they are a financial supporter of Sailnet. Who will forget their first testimonial on here who never disclosed they were in actuality a member of the company.
> ...


Yes, Mantus does post about their product. It's one of the benefits of supporting the site. Judging by the huge ad at the top of my page I think they still do support the site. I think, too, that members have benefited from the access to the company when they have questions and concerns as well as the periodic discounts Mantus extends to SailNet members.

I don't have a Mantus and for now, see no need to change my current two anchors. I do think that this type of communication on this site with other companies that our community uses would be a fine thing indeed.

So much happens in this forum and I don't remember anyone misrepresenting themselves. If I was interested in a new anchor, I'd probably be more clear on it as things like that I tend to remember if I'm interested in the company or its products. If that is the case, well, I think Mantus's open involvement and willingness to be an engaged member of our site since should be enough to let that incident remain in the past.


----------



## blt2ski

Not sure if they are deleted, but a person from Fortress has posted a time or two also. What I ahve noticed to a degree about both fortress and mantus, is they do point out the good, to a degree admit the bad.......all products have both good an dbad frankly. I have yet to trust, nor have I found something that is BEST ALL THE TIME! somewhere a condition arrives such that the thing, be it an anchor, truck, bobcat, lawn mower, shovel, rake....shoes.....anyway, it will not be the best!

Marty


----------



## chef2sail

smackdaddy said:


> "Shill"? Dude, a little heavy on the conspiracy theories.
> 
> I've only used the Danforth-styles in the past. But I've followed the anchor threads pretty closely over time - and had planned to go straight to a new gen anchor like the Mantus, Rocna, or MS when the time came. Rocna dropped off the list pretty quickly with their integrity meltdown. And I liked how Mantus was showing the videos of their tests. I was satisfied with them.
> 
> Then I saw MaineSail's evaluation of the "top three" - and his positive take on the Mantus.
> 
> That was good enough for me. I ordered one through SN.
> 
> THEN I received just about the best customer service on the planet. Since my arm was busted up from our accident, Greg himself delivered our new Mantus to the boat. Who does that these days?
> 
> So, despite Chef's aspersions above - I've got nothing but praise for Mantus. I think it would be very hard to go wrong with these guys the their gear.


Give me a break. a Difference of opinoin is now an aspersion???No asperations here...I purchased a Mantus long before you did...and yes I dont think they are the best thing since sliced bread...and yes my ROCNA from NZ still holds the promenent place at the end of my anchor roller while the Mantus sits dissassembled in the anchor locker to use if necessary.

I saw Mainesails evaluation and through it dont see where it determined that it was essentially anything better or different than a ROCNA or Manson.

So whats the problem mates.....anyone who disagree with Mantus boasts on here is not allowed to have an opinion or post it as strong as the people who shill for them? Even if you have bought their product like I did you cant have an opinion negative to them?

And oh yes Donna...you should return to the archives....when Mantus first posted here on of the posters did a piece extolling the vitrues of the anchor like she was this first time cruiser. Then it was determined she was in fact an employee of the company. I cant help that fact, but it is a fact and it soured me a little on the way the company did business. Maybe it is why I am so suspicious of their marketing or videos.

In spite of that I still purchased one. I guess that qualifies me to be able to speak about them more than someone who just reads about them and defends them blindly. But of course I would expect them to be defended as they are a SAILNET sponser. Its a shame ROCNA isnt.


----------



## chef2sail

DRFerron said:


> This is a rather unfair assertion.
> 
> Yes, Mantus does post about their product. It's one of the benefits of supporting the site. Judging by the huge ad at the top of my page I think they still do support the site. I think, too, that members have benefited from the access to the company when they have questions and concerns as well as the periodic discounts Mantus extends to SailNet members.
> 
> I don't have a Mantus and for now, see no need to change my current two anchors. I do think that this type of communication on this site with other companies that our community uses would be a fine thing indeed.
> 
> So much happens in this forum and I don't remember anyone misrepresenting themselves. If I was interested in a new anchor, I'd probably be more clear on it as things like that I tend to remember if I'm interested in the company or its products. If that is the case, well, I think Mantus's open involvement and willingness to be an engaged member of our site since should be enough to let that incident remain in the past.


Yes so true. Go marketing scheme...Willing to spend money...willing to support the site...open invilvement and willingness to be engaged member.

Almost makes you think they are our friends here. They are here to make money...thats they reason they are so engaged. Bully for that...they are doing a good job at that.

*Again I bought one...*not because they were my friend...were engaged here...i bought it because i saw it the EQUAL of a Manson or ROCNA with the advantage that it could be carried dissassembled.

Nothing here has convinced me it is superior to the two original designs mentioned. Had I to the money to be only one, it would be the Manson or Rocna.


----------



## bljones

SWMBO is working this evening, and I was feeling kinda melancholy about not being able to have a the traditional big family Christmas dinner until tomorrow...
..then I caught up on this thread. THIS feels like Christmas dinner! I'm just waiting for someone to throw down his napkin and stomp outside for a smoke.
"Mom always did like Mantus better!"


----------



## FranklinGray

Maine Sail said:


> Wow, kind of rude...


Yeah, I didn't quite like it myself. In fact, it got me really, well, lets just say I didn't respond on purpose. Glad to see I'm not the only one who felt it was wrong to say. Thanks MainSail. BTW: I am sure you remember me...I was one of the newbie sailors 9 years ago asking stupid questions on another forum. I learned a lot back then about sailing but also about people and the main reason I don't come to these sites anymore...stuff like this happens.


----------



## FranklinGray

Chef:

If you do actually own both the Rocna and Mantus and can't understand why the Mantus sets better than the Rocna, do yourself a favor, and us too, and take a picture of both anchors setting on a table on their side (how they actually set). If you can't see why one sets better than the other from that picture, post the picture here and I bet many who understand Physics will point out the differences and what they mean.

To claim the Mantus is just a copy of the Rocna is pure non-sense to be kindly about it. Not sure why I am being kind though considering you have already started calling me names.


----------



## SVAuspicious

> A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization.


 See Shill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia or shill - definition of shill by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia. .

Hard to say that someone who credibly defines their relationship with the vender in question is a shill.

In my personal experience the difference between the spoon-shaped anchors from Rocna, Manson Supreme, Spade, Mantus, and the late, lamented Raya are trivial. I don't have the side-by-side comparison that Maine Sail does but I sure have a lot of time on the hook with different anchors on different boats. I'm not a big fan of aluminum Spades but the steel ones and all the others I listed are so far head and shoulders above older designs that differentiating is splitting hairs. What fits on your bow roller and what kind of price can you get make the most difference. I have some ethical issues with Manson and of course Raya is out of business. I wouldn't hesitate to buy an anchor from Rocna, Spade (steel), or Mantus if I didn't have plenty of good (mostly) anchors already.

For the record I have two Rocna 25 anchors (55#, one a prototype collapsible version that didn't make it to market), a mid-sized Breeze (an EU Bruce knock-off I'm not crazy about), a Fortress, and assorted dinghy and float anchors. I got a good deal on the collapsible Rocna to participate in testing; I was offered a similar deal from Mantus (the same one ultimately offered to all of SailNet) that I did not accept since I have no room for more anchors.

Opinion: sell your CQRs now while there is still a market for them. They are starting to show up as mailbox stands around Annapolis. *grin*


----------



## zeehag

i will kindly accept all reject original bruce anchors over 25 kg......


----------



## chef2sail

FranklinGray said:


> Chef:
> 
> If you do actually own both the Rocna and Mantus and can't understand why the Mantus sets better than the Rocna, do yourself a favor, and us too, and take a picture of both anchors setting on a table on their side (how they actually set). If you can't see why one sets better than the other from that picture, post the picture here and I bet many who understand Physics will point out the differences and what they mean.
> 
> To claim the Mantus is just a copy of the Rocna is pure non-sense to be kindly about it. Not sure why I am being kind though considering you have already started calling me names.


Questioning whether I own both is a more politically correct way of stating what my friend. You are so much the better person.

I have stated long before in this thread when I purchased my Mantus. I also stated the reason was that I was happy to see that there was a way of achieving an emergency/ second anchor with the abilities of the Rocna/ Manson new generation type anchors. Having utilized a number of times after I received it I am confident that it will. See I dont have to perform some silly test of putting them side by side on a table and letting some ametuer explain the physics of the anchor. Even us amatuers can descern from 20 ft away that the build is basically the same.

It is a copycat anchor with a few differences ( obvious again or it couldnt be patented), and the fact that it came along after Rocna/ Manson doesnt mean it isnt as effective, nor does it mean it is more so. In fact most of us ( by the way do you have a Rocna/ Manson to compare it with...maybe youd like to put them on a table and take a picture) who have used both shown NEGLIABLE differences in the setting holding abilities. That makes sense as there is very negliable differences in the the designs.

I am sure when someday a reputable non biased organization like PS includes it in one of their tests. I think this is what Paulo was driving at. The results will reflect that. We wont have to be dependent on relying on amateur U Tube tests which show only the successfull stories and obviously have no baseline of equality a real test would. Till then we will have to listen to testimonials from purchasers and company spokesmen, even those who before have posed as just interested members (Redsky).

Listening to a user of a Mantus is tantamount to listening to the user of as ROCNA. Most Rocna owners have effused confidence and only positives about their anchors. The real negative was the president of the companies boasts/ attutide and their misrepresenting later produced Chinese Rocnas of different metalurgy which has been corrected.

To me the new generation anchors (Manson, Rocna, and now mantus) designs are similar and represent a step forward in anchor designs of an anchor which does well in most varied applications. To find one which can be carried as a spare broken apart for space considerations is what drove me to buy the Mantus. I was never worried about the bolts or quality of it as it appears to be well made.


----------



## chef2sail

SVAuspicious said:


> See Shill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia or shill - definition of shill by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia. .
> 
> Hard to say that someone who credibly defines their relationship with the vender in question is a shill.
> 
> My apologies to Mr Franklin for putting him in the category of the correct terminology which the poster "redsky" was when Mantus first came aboard and posed as just another interested sailor in this forum.


----------



## PCP

DRFerron said:


> Gentlemen, I know anchors are a hot topic right up there with politics and religion, but please keep civil.
> 
> One thing I don't understand and Paulo maybe you can help me. You said that you didn't understand why Mantus performed tests on their anchor since they are an "interested" party. I'm unclear as to whether you have a problem with them testing the anchor or the methods that they used. If it's the fact that they tested it, I'm really confused because why wouldn't any manufacture test their own product and continue to test to make sure that it behaves as it should? Otherwise, there'd be a heck of a lot of disbanded QA departments. If it's the location with that particular bottom that is the problem, I would hope that Mantus has done other tests in other circumstances and that this is but one of them. Since the Mantus posts says "we continue to test" than I'm going to assume they do.
> 
> I just want to be clear on your argument against it. Thanks!


Sorry, I am a bit full of this anchor war thing, with manufacturers that make unsubstantiated claims and I did only saw your request for clarification now. All this thread is a sign of it, with its title, implying that Mantus is a "next generation" anchor and not a new generation anchor with performances comparable with the other new generation anchors, but so far better that we should be talking about a "next" generation anchor.

Of course all serious manufacturers test their anchors against the best anchors on the market as part of their development process but they don't make their results public and wait for independent testers, on sail magazines, to do independent testing. Any public testing sponsored by an anchor brand should be looked as suspicious since they are an interested party.

I said that serious brands should test their anchors as part of the development process with the best anchors on the market and even regarding that I found the test posted rather odd because they did not include the two best anchors on the market, the ones that had performed better in all serious tests, the Steel Spade and the Steel Rocna. They tested an aluminium Spade that has no comparison in what regards a Steel Spade particularly in what regards setting on hard ground and that's just the only type of ground the anchors where tested, a particularly bad bottom.

Besides I have to say that all this is really naive, as if the setting of a given anchor on a hard and difficult bottom was the ultimate test for the best anchor. of course, I want an anchor that sets well, and many do that, including the Mantus, the Rocna, the Spade, the Delta, the Kobra, the Mansom among others. What really matters to me is after being stetted in a decent bottom (mud or sand) is the holding power. If I am protected from the waves can I hold on and stay there safely with a 40k wind? 50K? That's were the anchors that I mentioned have very different performances, being by far the best the Spade and the Rocna.

I want to know that I will have plenty of advise before dragging and that I will only drag well after most of the other boat on anchorage start to drag

The other point as important as the holding power (assuming a good setting) is how the anchor reacts against a complete change in wind direction and again the Rocna and the Spade comes out among the best.

Regarding these points, that are fundamental and are tested in any serious anchor test, regarding several bottoms, nothing was said on that test and notwithstanding it is presented as a definitive proof that the Mantus is a better anchor than any other

Let me just add that I anchor over a hundred times a year, sometimes waiting strong winds to go away, and I know by know what I should look at on an anchor regarding its performance and setting well is just a point and one that is done properly by many different brands of anchors

Regards

Paulo


----------



## chef2sail

PCP said:


> Sorry, I am a bit full of this anchor war thing, with manufacturers that make unsubstantiated claims and I did only saw your request for clarification now. All this thread is a sign of it, with its title, implying that Mantus is a "next generation" anchor and not a new generation anchor with performances comparable with the other new generation anchors, but so far better that we should be talking about a "next" generation anchor.
> 
> Of course all serious manufacturers test their anchors against the best anchors on the market as part of their development process but they don't make their results public and wait for independent testers, on sail magazines, to do independent testing. Any public testing sponsored by an anchor brand should be looked as suspicious since they are an interested party.
> 
> I said that serious brands should test their anchors as part of the development process with the best anchors on the market and even regarding that I found the test posted rather odd because they did not include the two best anchors on the market, the ones that had performed better in all serious tests, the Steel Spade and the Steel Rocna. They tested an aluminium Spade that has no comparison in what regards a Steel Spade particularly in what regards setting on hard ground and that's just the only type of ground the anchors where tested, a particularly bad bottom.
> 
> Besides I have to say that all this is really naive, as if the setting of a given anchor on a hard and difficult bottom was the ultimate test for the best anchor. of course, I want an anchor that sets well, and many do that, including the Mantus, the Rocna, the Spade, the Delta, the Kobra, the Mansom among others. What really matters to me is after being stetted in a decent bottom (mud or sand) is the holding power. If I am protected from the waves can I hold on and stay there safely with a 40k wind? 50K? That's were the anchors that I mentioned have very different performances, being by far the best the Spade and the Rocna.
> 
> I want to know that I will have plenty of advise before dragging and that I will only drag well after most of the other boat on anchorage start to drag
> 
> The other point as important as the holding power (assuming a good setting) is how the anchor reacts against a complete change in wind direction and again the Rocna and the Spade comes out among the best.
> 
> Regarding these points, that are fundamental and are tested in any serious anchor test, regarding several bottoms, nothing was said on that test and notwithstanding it is presented as a definitive proof that the Mantus is a better anchor than any other
> 
> Let me just add that I anchor over a hundred times a year, sometimes waiting strong winds to go away, and I know by know what I should look at on an anchor regarding its performance and setting well is just a point and one that is done properly by many different brands of anchors
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paulo


Well put.

Another factor I would add as well as holding pwer is the ability to reset after being pulled. In many places with major changing currents and tidal directional changes this is a critical issue.


----------



## RickWestlake

When I got my first "scoop-type" anchor, I was sailing a MacGregor 26X and I wanted something that would store flat in the anchor locker up in the bow. It was here that I found the Raya Tempest, and I still have that anchor as a back-up on my Bristol 29.9. (The prime anchor is a 25-lb Manson Supreme, bought right during the Rocna crisis. And it does a beautiful job - digs right into the Chesapeake mud.)

But it's just enough anchor for the Bristol, according to the charts that João had on his old Ancora Latina web-site (a 30-foot boat weighing 4.5 tonnes). If I move up to a bigger boat, which I'll do if I choose to Sail Beyond The Sunset, I'm going to want a similar break-down 'scoop' back-up anchor, and nowadays, that means Mantus. 

In fact, if I'm not satisfied with the next boat's existing anchor, it's likely to mean a matched pair of Mantus anchors, one assembled on the bowsprit, one disassembled in the bilge.


----------



## Maine Sail

RickWestlake said:


> When I got my first "scoop-type" anchor, I was sailing a MacGregor 26X and I wanted something that would store flat in the anchor locker up in the bow. It was here that I found the Raya Tempest, and I still have that anchor as a back-up on my Bristol 29.9. (The prime anchor is a 25-lb Manson Supreme, bought right during the Rocna crisis. And it does a beautiful job - digs right into the Chesapeake mud.)
> 
> But it's just enough anchor for the Bristol, according to the charts that João had on his old Ancora Latina web-site (a 30-foot boat weighing 4.5 tonnes). If I move up to a bigger boat, which I'll do if I choose to Sail Beyond The Sunset, I'm going to want a similar break-down 'scoop' back-up anchor, and nowadays, that means Mantus.
> 
> In fact, if I'm not satisfied with the next boat's existing anchor, it's likely to mean a matched pair of Mantus anchors, one assembled on the bowsprit, one disassembled in the bilge.


The Manson Supreme 25 is more than enough anchor for a Bristol 29.9 unless you plan on anchoring in hurricane force winds..

Be aware that "João" was really Alain Poiraud pulling a fast one on every body.. He hid behind this moniker because he had sold Spade, and rumor/word on the street was that he had "taken" some proprietary designs that were supposedly sold with the Spade transaction. So he started a new company and hid himself from it as the real owner instead using João who incidentally wrote and responded nearly word for word verbatim the way Alain did for so many years....

I own one of Alain's Oceanne/Sword anchors plus two Spade's.. I actually caught Alain in his little scam (long story that could create an entire thread) during some email conversations.

Funny enough that João & Raya disappeared at EXACTLY the same time that Alain Poiraud passed away.... Go figure....  I do believe there was a guy named João that worked for him but the email responses and many of the internet postings were that of Alain posing as João.

Alain had a huge hatred for everything Rocna and Manson so take what he said with a grain of salt. Sadly he never could build a better anchor than the Spade, despite multiple attempts. He was a great anchor designer though...

The whole anchor underworld can get pretty sleazy. Just enter *www dot ancoralatina dot com* (the old web address of Alain's company that made the Raya) into your address bar and see what pops up?????

That's right the minute Alain Poiraud passed away, and his web domain lapsed for a split second, the Smith's of Rocna fame jumped in and picked it up redirecting all Ancora Latina traffic to the Peter Smith / Rocna page.... Peter Smith apparently had no love lost for Alain either so much so that he found it perfectly ethical to pilfer a dead mans web site......


----------



## miatapaul

Maine Sail said:


> The Manson Supreme 25 is more than enough anchor for a Bristol 29.9 unless you plan on anchoring in hurricane force winds..
> 
> Be aware that "João" was really Alain Poiraud pulling a fast one on every body.. He hid behind this moniker because he had sold Spade, and rumor/word on the street was that he had "taken" some proprietary designs that were supposedly sold with the Spade transaction. So he started a new company and hid himself from it as the real owner instead using João who incidentally wrote and responded nearly word for word verbatim the way Alain did for so many years....
> 
> I own one of Alain's Oceanne/Sword anchors plus two Spade's.. I actually caught Alain in his little scam (long story that could create an entire thread) during some email conversations.
> 
> Funny enough that João & Raya disappeared at EXACTLY the same time that Alain Poiraud passed away.... Go figure....  I do believe there was a guy named João that worked for him but the email responses and many of the internet postings were that of Alain posing as João.
> 
> Alain had a huge hatred for everything Rocna and Manson so take what he said with a grain of salt. Sadly he never could build a better anchor than the Spade, despite multiple attempts. He was a great anchor designer though...
> 
> The whole anchor underworld can get pretty sleazy. Just enter *www dot ancoralatina dot com* (the old web address of Alain's company that made the Raya) into your address bar and see what pops up?????
> 
> That's right the minute Alain Poiraud passed away, and his web domain lapsed for a split second, the Smith's of Rocna fame jumped in and picked it up redirecting all Ancora Latina traffic to the Peter Smith / Rocna page.... Peter Smith apparently had no love lost for Alain either so much so that he found it perfectly ethical to pilfer a dead mans web site......


Why is it that they all act like bottom feeders?


----------



## PCP

Maine Sail said:


> ...
> 
> Be aware that "João" was really Alain Poiraud pulling a fast one on every body.. He hid behind this moniker because he had sold Spade, and rumor/word on the street was that he had "taken" some proprietary designs that were supposedly sold with the Spade transaction. So he started a new company and hid himself from it as the real owner instead using João who incidentally wrote and responded nearly word for word verbatim the way Alain did for so many years....
> 
> I own one of Alain's Oceanne/Sword anchors plus two Spade's.. I actually caught Alain in his little scam (long story that could create an entire thread) during some email conversations.
> 
> Funny enough that João & Raya disappeared at EXACTLY the same time that Alain Poiraud passed away.... Go figure....  I do believe there was a guy named João that worked for him but the email responses and many of the internet postings were that of Alain posing as João.
> 
> Alain had a huge hatred for everything Rocna and Manson so take what he said with a grain of salt. Sadly he never could build a better anchor than the Spade, despite multiple attempts. He was a great anchor designer though...
> 
> The whole anchor underworld can get pretty sleazy. Just enter *www dot ancoralatina dot com* (the old web address of Alain's company that made the Raya) into your address bar and see what pops up?????
> 
> That's right the minute Alain Poiraud passed away, and his web domain lapsed for a split second, the Smith's of Rocna fame jumped in and picked it up redirecting all Ancora Latina traffic to the Peter Smith / Rocna page.... Peter Smith apparently had no love lost for Alain either so much so that he found it perfectly ethical to pilfer a dead mans web site......


Probably you are right but João is a Portuguese/Brazilian name and there was a Brazilian firm in S. Paulo that manufactured those anchors and yes, the design was very similar to the one Spade manufactured from some time ant that they called Oceane so I guess we can conclude it was the same designer. Even so the design was different particularly in what regards its shank.

I don't think the objective was to produce a better anchor than the Spade but a less complicated to build, a much less expensive anchor, but a good anchor nevertheless.

I have heard many flattering comments about the Raya anchor by his users and the question that remains is how better was the Raya regarding the Oceane since for what I have heard that was not very good, not even in its posterior development (Sword). I don't believe I had saw an anchor test with a Raya, or maybe I have and didn't notice. Do you have tried a Raya?

The Oceane:



The Raya:



The Raya disappeard mysteriously in 2009 but then it appeared the Boss from Mason that it is much similar to the Oceane one:



that they announce it as:

Our new anchor (your ultimate safety device) has been designed to operate in all seabeds, a truly multipurpose anchor. .. The patented features, design and robust construction make it set immediately and hold during the worst of conditions. Use a Manson Boss to sleep easy ...*Ensure the fastest set in even the most demanding seabed conditions... Raising the holding power by forcing the flukes downwards* *creating a minimum of 28% deeper setting than other new-generation anchors*.

So we would think that an anchor that sets 28% deeper than other new-generation anchors would be a better anchor...but they say about other of their anchors, the Supreme:

*The design brief given was to create the highest holding - fastest setting - fixed shank anchor in the world. ..*

I had saw some brands saying that they have the best anchor, the one with more holding power but having the same brand calming about two different models that each one claims the title for the best anchor and the best holding power, it is a kind of a must!!!!

Regards

Paulo


----------



## RickWestlake

Paulo, yes, I have a Raya; what I have is a Raya Tempest 800, a two-piece anchor with a demountable shank. The shank pulls up through a sturdy collar built onto the top of the fluke, and it's held in place by an interference fit. It stored flat in the shallow anchor locker of my MacGregor 26X, _Bossa Nova_; it assembles with no tools (well, a shackle-wrench to attach the rode), and that shank is _not_ coming out of the fluke short of tearing the fluke apart.

When I got my Bristol 29.9, _Halcyon_, it came with a 25-lb Delta, a fixed-shank plow that simply didn't hold the first night I spent on the hook in the new boat. I still had the MacGregor, and with it, the Raya - which held perfectly and tenaciously in the same place where the Delta had failed me. If the Raya had fit below my roller-furler drum on my anchor roller, I might be using it now as my primary anchor; as it is, I've stowed it below-decks and I have it ready to use as a back-up to the 25-lb Manson Supreme that replaces the Delta.

I am certainly not going to say "the Raya is best, or better," than other scoop anchors; only that it suited my needs on _Bossa Nova_, and it suits me as a good backup on _Halcyon_.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

chef2sail said:


> Questioning whether I own both is a more politically correct way of stating what my friend. You are so much the better person.
> 
> I have stated long before in this thread when I purchased my Mantus. I also stated the reason was that I was happy to see that there was a way of achieving an emergency/ second anchor with the abilities of the Rocna/ Manson new generation type anchors. Having utilized a number of times after I received it I am confident that it will. See I dont have to perform some silly test of putting them side by side on a table and letting some ametuer explain the physics of the anchor. Even us amatuers can descern from 20 ft away that the build is basically the same.
> 
> It is a copycat anchor with a few differences ( obvious again or it couldnt be patented), and the fact that it came along after Rocna/ Manson doesnt mean it isnt as effective, nor does it mean it is more so. In fact most of us ( by the way do you have a Rocna/ Manson to compare it with...maybe youd like to put them on a table and take a picture) who have used both shown NEGLIABLE differences in the setting holding abilities. That makes sense as there is very negliable differences in the the designs.
> 
> I am sure when someday a reputable non biased organization like PS includes it in one of their tests. I think this is what Paulo was driving at. The results will reflect that. We wont have to be dependent on relying on amateur U Tube tests which show only the successfull stories and obviously have no baseline of equality a real test would. Till then we will have to listen to testimonials from purchasers and company spokesmen, even those who before have posed as just interested members (Redsky).
> 
> Listening to a user of a Mantus is tantamount to listening to the user of as ROCNA. Most Rocna owners have effused confidence and only positives about their anchors. The real negative was the president of the companies boasts/ attutide and their misrepresenting later produced Chinese Rocnas of different metalurgy which has been corrected.
> 
> To me the new generation anchors (Manson, Rocna, and now mantus) designs are similar and represent a step forward in anchor designs of an anchor which does well in most varied applications. To find one which can be carried as a spare broken apart for space considerations is what drove me to buy the Mantus. I was never worried about the bolts or quality of it as it appears to be well made.


Chef2sail 
Take it out of the BOX and give it a shot, you might even like it....
Holding Power Difference examined:






by the way, any one can do this at home 
Happy New Year Netters!!!!


----------



## Mantus Anchors

chef2sail said:


> Questioning whether I own both is a more politically correct way of stating what my friend. You are so much the better person.
> 
> I have stated long before in this thread when I purchased my Mantus. I also stated the reason was that I was happy to see that there was a way of achieving an emergency/ second anchor with the abilities of the Rocna/ Manson new generation type anchors. Having utilized a number of times after I received it I am confident that it will. See I dont have to perform some silly test of putting them side by side on a table and letting some ametuer explain the physics of the anchor. Even us amatuers can descern from 20 ft away that the build is basically the same.
> 
> It is a copycat anchor with a few differences ( obvious again or it couldnt be patented), and the fact that it came along after Rocna/ Manson doesnt mean it isnt as effective, nor does it mean it is more so. In fact most of us ( by the way do you have a Rocna/ Manson to compare it with...maybe youd like to put them on a table and take a picture) who have used both shown NEGLIABLE differences in the setting holding abilities. That makes sense as there is very negliable differences in the the designs.
> 
> I am sure when someday a reputable non biased organization like PS includes it in one of their tests. I think this is what Paulo was driving at. The results will reflect that. We wont have to be dependent on relying on amateur U Tube tests which show only the successfull stories and obviously have no baseline of equality a real test would. Till then we will have to listen to testimonials from purchasers and company spokesmen, even those who before have posed as just interested members (Redsky).
> 
> Listening to a user of a Mantus is tantamount to listening to the user of as ROCNA. Most Rocna owners have effused confidence and only positives about their anchors. The real negative was the president of the companies boasts/ attutide and their misrepresenting later produced Chinese Rocnas of different metalurgy which has been corrected.
> 
> To me the new generation anchors (Manson, Rocna, and now mantus) designs are similar and represent a step forward in anchor designs of an anchor which does well in most varied applications. To find one which can be carried as a spare broken apart for space considerations is what drove me to buy the Mantus. I was never worried about the bolts or quality of it as it appears to be well made.


Setting ability explored on a hard clay bottom:


----------



## PCP

Hummmm!!! you cannot see that the chain on the Mason is shorter and that will have predictable effects?

Even if you have a god anchor (I wait for serious testing to see the results) do you think this kind of "tests" will give you credibility and help to sell your anchors?


----------



## Mantus Anchors

PCP said:


> Hummmm!!! you cannot see that the chain on the Mason is shorter and that will have predictable effects?
> 
> Even if you have a god anchor (I wait for serious testing to see the results) do you think this kind of "tests" will give you credibility and help to sell your anchors?


Its called foreshortening :
Perspective (graphical) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
you can count the links you will see they are all there 
WE CAN ONLY TRY TO BE HONEST, THE TRUST WE HAVE TO EARN

We would love nothing more than an independent assessment, unfortunately by the virtue that they are independent tests we do not control who and when does them.... Further to test the setting ability of an anchor, a magazine would have to go to different locations known to be difficult and test there. To date no one has been willing to pony up the money to do that... so do not expect it anytime soon..... 
So as sad as this is what you have is cruisers testimonials and Yes our "demo" videos to go on... HOWEVER WE WANT TO HAVE YOUR RESPECT, SO IF THERE IS ANYTHING YOU WANT US TO DO IN THE FUTURE OR A PLACE TO VISIT, OR TO BE DIRECTLY INVOLVED.... WE ARE THERE!!!


----------



## PCP

Mantus Anchors said:


> Its called foreshortening :
> Perspective (graphical) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> ...


Sure...I was a teacher of that, I mean perspective and I can tell you that one is shorter than the other.

For having your anchor seriously tested is pretty easy: you have just to send a letter to the main sail magazines that make anchor testing regularly and say that you would like to have your anchor tested on the next group of anchor testing. That you are available to send them an anchor with the right dimensions for the effect and that you are, at the same time asking them to notify you regarding the convenient date. Not dificult

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Mantus Anchors

PCP said:


> Sure...I was a teacher of that, I mean perspective and I can tell you that one is shorter than the other.
> 
> For having your anchor seriously tested is pretty easy: you have just to send a letter to the main sail magazines that make anchor testing regularly and say that you would like to have your anchor tested on the next group of anchor testing. That you are available to send them an anchor with the right dimensions for the effect and that you are, at the same time asking them to notify you regarding the convenient date. Not dificult
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paulo


Paulo we have done that with every major publication.... and have not been able to generated interest to date..... any assistance is welcome.... if you watch the video carefully i think you can convince yourself that the chain is the same length... 
PS I was not kidding the video is in HD, count the links....


----------



## zeehag

funny how real time testing, ie, in an actual anchorage under windy and choppy and currents flowing conditions yields different results than most of the alleged anchor tests in contained situations. 
why not just go out and use the anchor to see if it works..
i will again offer to accept all unwanted bruce anchors. i want 3 more. 25kg and up in weight, as appropriate for my boat.


----------



## christian.hess

ill take some down here...too!!! if you stop by el salvador, and anchor in estero de jaltepeque drop whatever trash you think you have and unload it on boat 

"la bebi"
islander 36

ps. about anchors I thought about "making" a massive stainless one like the new ones since welding and stainless is cheap down here...however I thought about weight and design and stopped

we dont have anchors for sale down here and shipping is ridiculous form the states

I would love a nice anchor though and any of the new generation ones would be lovely in my book

look at the positive and not the negative I guess...


----------



## smackdaddy

SVAuspicious said:


> I have some ethical issues with Manson and of course Raya is out of business. I wouldn't hesitate to buy an anchor from Rocna, Spade (steel), or Mantus if I didn't have plenty of good (mostly) anchors already.


You don't have any "ethical issues" with Rocna? Really?

Wow.


----------



## miatapaul

smackdaddy said:


> You don't have any "ethical issues" with Rocna? Really?
> 
> Wow.


I was thinking that, but let is slide. Seems all of the anchor vendors have there issues to some extent or anther, but they are bottom dwellers by nature right?!?!


----------



## JonEisberg

zeehag said:


> funny how real time testing, ie, in an actual anchorage under windy and choppy and currents flowing conditions yields different results than most of the alleged anchor tests in contained situations.
> *why not just go out and use the anchor to see if it works..*
> i will again offer to accept all unwanted bruce anchors. i want 3 more. 25kg and up in weight, as appropriate for my boat.


I think that's probably what most folks pretty much wind up doing, in the end...

Steve Dashew, for instance... He's someone who knows a fair bit about anchoring. For a long time, he was a staunch and vigorous advocate of his belief that your Bruce was the world's finest all-around anchor...

Until, he tried a 'New Generation' Rocna, that is... And, he's never looked back, since...


----------



## smackdaddy

Mantus Anchors said:


> you can count the links you will see they are all there
> WE CAN ONLY TRY TO BE HONEST, THE TRUST WE HAVE TO EARN
> 
> We would love nothing more than an independent assessment, unfortunately by the virtue that they are independent tests we do not control who and when does them.... Further to test the setting ability of an anchor, a magazine would have to go to different locations known to be difficult and test there. To date no one has been willing to pony up the money to do that... so do not expect it anytime soon.....
> 
> So as sad as this is what you have is cruisers testimonials and Yes our "demo" videos to go on... HOWEVER WE WANT TO HAVE YOUR RESPECT, SO IF THERE IS ANYTHING YOU WANT US TO DO IN THE FUTURE OR A PLACE TO VISIT, OR TO BE DIRECTLY INVOLVED.... WE ARE THERE!!!


This is why I like these guys. They simply believe in their product and are willing to do anything to PROVE its worth to us normal dudes - with direct comparisons in as many different ways as they can show them.

This is FAR better than just repeatedly claiming crap on forums and/or trashing competitors.

I say, "Go Mantus."


----------



## SVAuspicious

miatapaul said:


> I was thinking that, but let is slide. Seems all of the anchor vendors have there issues to some extent or anther, but they are bottom dwellers by nature right?!?!


There were no quality issues at Rocna during the time the Smiths operated the company. To my knowledge there are no issues under Canada Metal. There certainly were issues during the intermediate ownership.

One can certainly make a case that Craig Smith did not work and play well with others. *grin*

Set the Manson Supreme aside and look at Manson's entire line of anchors. Copies. Every last one of them. Copies. Now I suppose it is possible that in a fit of creativity they designed the new Manson Supreme anchor completely independently of the ongoing manufacturing discussions they had with Rocna that just happened to look strikingly like the Rocna for which they had drawings and specifications. Right.

Intellectual property is what paid for my boat so I feel strongly about it. Taking someone else's ideas and calling them your own is wrong. It's one thing to be derivative and add value. It's something else to copy.

That's my issue with Manson.


----------



## zeehag

look guys..i am serious about your discarded and useless bruce anchors.... please send them to me. they are cute on my boat. i need more. please.


----------



## Vasco

I'm neutral. 
That's a claw, no more real Bruces which I swore by for years. But I still have two genuine Bruces at home, one 15kg and a little wee (5kg?) one.


----------



## zeehag

Vasco said:


> I'm neutral.
> That's a claw, no more real Bruces which I swore by for years. But I still have two genuine Bruces at home, one 15kg and a little wee (5kg?) one.


i do not want imitation, only genuine bruce.. and i know they are obsolete and useless to yáll now, so i will take them off your hands 
is why i placed this offer to those of you feeling in this manner....send me your useless genuine bruce anchors. i want 3 more. they look so cute on my boat. 25 kg and up to 33 kg.


----------



## Maine Sail

SVAuspicious said:


> There were no quality issues at Rocna during the time the Smiths operated the company. To my knowledge there are no issues under Canada Metal. There certainly were issues during the intermediate ownership.
> 
> One can certainly make a case that Craig Smith did not work and play well with others. *grin*
> 
> Set the Manson Supreme aside and look at Manson's entire line of anchors. Copies. Every last one of them. Copies. Now I suppose it is possible that in a fit of creativity they designed the new Manson Supreme anchor completely independently of the ongoing manufacturing discussions they had with Rocna that just happened to look strikingly like the Rocna for which they had drawings and specifications. Right.
> 
> Intellectual property is what paid for my boat so I feel strongly about it. *Taking someone else's ideas and calling them your own is wrong. *It's one thing to be derivative and add value. It's something else to copy.
> 
> That's my issue with Manson.


Hmmmm....

Everything about the Rocna came from someone else's designs.

The Bügelanker or Wasi (circa 1997) was first or second of the "hoops" if you count Rex Francis Sarca (circa 1996) as a hoop anchor.

If the Manson Supreme is a "copy" of a Rocna than the Rocna is a copy of the Bügel/Wasi.

Peter Smith himself admitted to _borrowing_ the shank design from a Delta Fast Set and the Spade shape from Alain Poiraud's Spade, hmmm copy....? He stole the hoop from Bügel/Wasi (1997), Rex Francis (1996) or Peter Bruce (US Patent 3,777,695) depending on how far back you want to go...

Rex Francis at Anchor Right has been using hoops since 1996 on his designs and Peter Bruce was the first to show a patent on the hoop US Patent 3,777,695.....

Rex Francis also invented the "Rock Slot". This idea was stolen by not only Manson but also by ROCNA!!! Craig Smith then BLATANTLY lied and said that they had never stolen the rock slot when a boater posted a picture of a Rocna with a Rock Slot. Craig even went so far as to claim the guy photo shopped the picture basically publicly insinuating the guy was a liar.....

*Oh look a Rock Slot on a ROCNA stolen from Rex Francis/Anchor Right:*

*Rocna Anchor*

Let's be realistic here, the Rocna anchor IS ALSO A COPY.

To give Peter Smith or Craig Smith a pass and blame it all on the Bambury brothers makes me sick to my stomach.. Come on Dave, you can do better..... Craig Smith was right in there with the BLATANT lies and deceit while Peter tried to stay out of the limelight so he could perhaps wipe his hands of it.. As far as I am concerned it was all part of Peter's clever marketing ploy.

Peter and Craig Smith will NEVER get a pass from me and until Peter Smith is 100% removed from Rocna licensing, royalties etc.. They will never get another red cent from me for their dispicable lies, deceit and behavior..

Sorry to Canada Metals, they are a good company, but when you jump in bed with people like that you get what you get.

Rocna was a tad late in the copying game to call the Manson a "copy"... The two anchors are as widely different in shape angles and design as the Wasi and Sarca are....... They only "look" similar as they do to the Bügel/Wasi, Manson Supreme, Rocna, Mantus etc......

If you want to protect intellectual property perhaps an Anchor Right or a Wasi product is in your future because the Rocna employs LOTS of copying........

The only reason anyone believes the Manson Supreme is a knock off is because, like most anything Rocna did, they told some mis-truths, some BLATANT LIES, and had IMHO a very cleaver _internet bully_ marketing scheme.....

I mean seriously how could we forget the Smith's publicly bashing the "rock slot" on the Manson Supreme (invented by Anchor Right). They then turned around and COPY the slot themselves..... Hello pot....

When you spend your efforts in hundreds of posts over 4-5 years disparaging the Manson Supreme and calling it a *knock off,* then say things like this:



Craig Smith said:


> Anyway, Alain, really we can be friends. Like you so eloquently put it, *we also think slotted shanks are a terrible concept.  We have never made a Rocna with a slot, and suspect the owner of this anchor has. Or was it Mr Photoshop?*


That comment was a bash on a guy who was at a boat show and took a photo of a Rocna with a slot and Craig Smith, an employee of Rocna and the son of the inventor called him a liar and accused him of using Photoshop...

Terrible idea to copy another product? Or is it just a terrible idea???

Craig Smiths Response to Alain Poiraud Regarding Rock Slots

These were the days hypocrisy & dishonesty at its best, by the Rocna team, WHICH INCLUDED THE SMITHS!!!


----------



## smackdaddy

Maine Sail said:


> Hmmmm....
> 
> Everything about the Rocna came from someone else's designs.
> 
> The Bügelanker or Wasi (circa 1997) was first or second of the "hoops" if you count Rex Francis Sarca (circa 1996) as a hoop anchor.
> 
> If the Manson Supreme is a "copy" of a Rocna than the Rocna is a copy of the Bügel/Wasi.
> 
> Peter Smith himself admitted to _borrowing_ the shank design from a Delta Fast Set and the Spade shape from Alain Poiraud's Spade, hmmm copy....? He stole the hoop from Bügel/Wasi (1997), Rex Francis (1996) or Peter Bruce (US Patent 3,777,695) depending on how far back you want to go...
> 
> Rex Francis at Anchor Right has been using hoops since 1996 on his designs and Peter Bruce was the first to show a patent on the hoop US Patent 3,777,695.....
> 
> Rex Francis also invented the "Rock Slot". This idea was stolen by not only Manson but also by ROCNA!!! Craig Smith then BLATANTLY lied and said that they had never stolen the rock slot when a boater posted a picture of a Rocna with a Rock Slot. Craig even went so far as to claim the guy photo shopped the picture basically publicly insinuating the guy was a liar.....
> 
> *Oh look a Rock Slot on a ROCNA stolen from Rex Francis/Anchor Right:*
> 
> *Rocna Anchor*
> 
> Let's be realistic here, the Rocna anchor IS ALSO A COPY.
> 
> To give Peter Smith or Craig Smith a pass and blame it all on the Bambury brothers makes me sick to my stomach.. Come on Dave, you can do better..... Craig Smith was right in there with the BLATANT lies and deceit while Peter tried to stay out of the limelight so he could perhaps wipe his hands of it.. As far as I am concerned it was all part of Peter's clever marketing ploy.
> 
> Peter and Craig Smith will NEVER get a pass from me and until Peter Smith is 100% removed from Rocna licensing, royalties etc.. They will never get another red cent from me for their dispicable lies, deceit and behavior..
> 
> Sorry to Canada Metals, they are a good company, but when you jump in bed with people like that you get what you get.
> 
> Rocna was a tad late in the copying game to call the Manson a "copy"... The two anchors are as widely different in shape angles and design as the Wasi and Sarca are....... They only "look" similar as they do to the Bügel/Wasi, Manson Supreme, Rocna, Mantus etc......
> 
> If you want to protect intellectual property perhaps an Anchor Right or a Wasi product is in your future because the Rocna employs LOTS of copying........
> 
> The only reason anyone believes the Manson Supreme is a knock off is because, like most anything Rocna did, they told some mis-truths, some BLATANT LIES, and had IMHO a very cleaver _internet bully_ marketing scheme.....
> 
> I mean seriously how could we forget the Smith's publicly bashing the "rock slot" on the Manson Supreme (invented by Anchor Right). They then turned around and COPY the slot themselves..... Hello pot....
> 
> When you spend your efforts in hundreds of posts over 4-5 years disparaging the Manson Supreme and calling it a *knock off,* then say things like this:
> 
> That comment was a bash on a guy who was at a boat show and took a photo of a Rocna with a slot and Craig Smith, an employee of Rocna and the son of the inventor called him a liar and accused him of using Photoshop...
> 
> Terrible idea to copy another product? Or is it just a terrible idea???
> 
> Craig Smiths Response to Alain Poiraud Regarding Rock Slots
> 
> These were the days hypocrisy & dishonesty at its best, by the Rocna team, WHICH INCLUDED THE SMITHS!!!


+1000.

Unfortunately, you just disagreed with Ausp. Say hello to his ignore list.


----------



## Maine Sail

smackdaddy said:


> +1000.
> 
> Unfortunately, you just disagreed with Ausp. Say hello to his ignore list.


Dave is a pretty reasonable guy, IMHO, so I doubt that will happen. I am just surprised by his take on all this, especially his take on Rocna _not _copying.. I would expect that sort of support from others I know, but did not expect if from Dave...

*Disclaimer:* I own & use a Rocna but still to this day find their (The Smith's & Bambury's) behavior & ethics sickening & despicable. Some of the worst I have seen in this industry. Sadly it has become a real black eye on the anchor industry as a whole and thanks to them it is likely no one will ever trust what any anchor manufacturer says..


----------



## smackdaddy

Maine Sail said:


> Dave is a pretty reasonable guy, IMHO, so I doubt that will happen. I am just surprised by his take on all this, especially his take on Rocna _not _copying.. I would expect that sort of support from others I know, but did not expect if from Dave...
> 
> *Disclaimer:* I own & use a Rocna but still to this day find their (The Smith's & Bambury's) behavior & ethics sickening & despicable. Some of the worst I have seen in this industry. Sadly it has become a real black eye on the anchor industry as a whole and thanks to them it is likely no one will ever trust what any anchor manufacturer says..


Yeah, I think you're pretty safe on staying off his naughty list. Heh-heh.

I agree though that it's pretty hard to stomach ANYONE defending Rocna in ANY way - especially someone like Ausp who's been around here for a while and had to have seen a lot of this play out.

At the end of the day, as I said, I like what Mantus is doing. I actually thought the holding power test rig was pretty smart. It very clearly illustrated the performance of each anchor in that particular condition. Sure, it wasn't precise, but it was compelling.

That said, I wouldn't mind seeing some "scientific" testing on holding power for the Mantus vs. the others. I wish the mags would pick this up (per Mantus' requests) and do some testing. There are interested readers out there.

As for the question above regarding what the anchor would do in a big wind shift...doesn't that come down again to setting ability? In other words, if you get a 180 degree shift and the anchor twists out, it's the ability to quickly set again that is the primary factor?

If so, Mantus seems to be a very good choice. I don't know, I'm just having a hard time seeing the downsides here.


----------



## christian.hess

out of curiosity what steel(I see they are hot dipped galvanised now) are these new generation anchors using? I really need to start thinking about having a decent anchor down here.

I want to make one! yay

PLUS like zeehag I havent seen any stuff dropped by my boat 

sooooooooooooooooooo...

3/8ths 304 stainless work?


----------



## Maine Sail

smackdaddy said:


> Yeah, I think you're pretty safe on staying off his naughty list. Heh-heh.
> 
> I agree though that it's pretty hard to stomach ANYONE defending Rocna in ANY way - especially someone like Ausp who's been around here for a while.
> 
> At the end of the day, as I said, I like what Mantus is doing. I actually thought the holding power test rig was pretty smart. It very clearly illustrated the performance of each anchor in that particular condition. Sure, it wasn't precise, but it was compelling.
> 
> That said, I wouldn't mind seeing some "scientific" testing on holding power for the Mantus vs. the others. I wish the mags would pick this up (per Mantus' requests) and do some testing. There are interested readers out there.
> 
> As for the question above regarding what the anchor would do in a big wind shift...doesn't that come down again to setting ability? In other words, if you get a 180 degree shift and the anchor twists out, it's the ability to quickly set again that is the primary factor?
> 
> If so, Mantus seems to be a very good choice. I don't know, I'm just having a hard time seeing the downsides here.


Don't hold your breath on mags doing tests. Their tests are very often as badly reported as a manufacturers test data is.

I have the entire data set, the data behind the data (multiple Excel spread sheets worth of raw data) for the Sail Magazine tests from a number of years ago. (Don't ask where I got it that is classified)

Suffice it to say the way that data was presented was a GROSS misrepresentation of the facts contained within the data!! Rocna then took that data and twisted it even more to the point where Sail magazine made them pull a "glossy" they had that used the Sail Mag logo on.. The Sail mag data was poor and then Rocna "extrapolated" it to be utter rubbish. All this and they really had NO REASON TO DO THAT, their data looked pretty impressive.....

If you want testing data do as I do and do your own!

That said there are some good guys in the industry. Greg of Mantus has been brutally honest and up front with me. I like that. He told me up front that my shank was made of mild steel with no BS about it.. Greg IMHO is beginning to get a little carried away with the "slick" marketing and I worry about that as I don't want him to become another CS. He is genuinely a very nice and honest guy who is very passionate about his product. I strongly disagree with Greg's "hoopless" path and think it is a mistake but its not my company. Franklin Gray they guy who did the pulls on that last video also disagrees with Greg on this.

Brian from Fortress has also been a very straight shooter and Ned Wood of Manson has also been a very straight shooter with me (despite that they knock everything off)

The guys from Ultra _seem good_ but upon close examination of their mini test anchors you drag through the mud at shows, it is clear to see they too are being a tad misleading. (at the Maine Boat Builders Show I was able to take some critical measurements off their mini's and transfer them to my own larger versions, not very accurate at all). The geometries they use on some of those _mini anchors_ are not properly scaled which could certainly lead to a "misrepresentation" of performance...

Keep in mind that the "balance beam" testing jig was invented by Rex of Anchor Right. It was not Greg's idea but it is a good way to demonstrate holding comparisons. Rex has been doing this for years...

I have piles of my own data that I will NEVER publish because it is for ME, MYSELF and I. I use it to choose the best performing anchor for my cruising waters (5000 pound digital load cell, high HP pull boat and LOTS of anchors to play with).. I will not publish it because I don't want to have to deal with "anchor threads" simply not worth my time......

I can tell you from testing my own anchors for years and years that it is NOT easy work and takes considerable time if you want to be fair and equal. I want to be fair and equal because I physically OWN all my anchors and only want the best on my bow I have no ulterior motives to have one test better than the other. My motive is to keep my family off the granite coastline of the NE....

Two anchors I would love to try are the Ultra and Sarca Excel.. I suspect both would out perform my hoops in deep set holding power......

All I will say about my hoops is they all perform very similarly. The Mantus does have a slight edge in initial set, as in nearly immediate under most all conditions, but once set I can't really tell the difference, and the Manson & Rocna both set EXTREMELY well and reliably too. If my Mantus fit my bow better it would be my primary..


----------



## christian.hess

can I get a quote for shipping to el salvador? just curious

well no mantus for me anytime soon

$400 for shipping bummer

any guys coming down soon, season is in full swing! come on down to el salvador please!


----------



## SVAuspicious

Maine Sail said:


> Everything about the Rocna came from someone else's designs.


That's what I meant about derivative works. "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." (Isaac Newton) Integrated circuits would not have been invented without the foundational work on transistors.

The Delta anchor design owes something to CQR - it's just better. As you note the Rocna owes a good bit to previous designs including the Bugel. I seem to recall Peter Smith saying as much.



Maine Sail said:


> Peter Smith himself admitted to _borrowing_ the shank design from a Delta Fast Set and the Spade shape from Alain Poiraud's Spade, hmmm copy....? He stole the hoop from Bügel/Wasi (1997), Rex Francis (1996) or Peter Bruce (US Patent 3,777,695) depending on how far back you want to go...


Sure. That's all within the realm of accepted derivational work. Patent law even provides for limited royalties to the originator in some cases.



Maine Sail said:


> Let's be realistic here, the Rocna anchor IS ALSO A COPY.


To me it's a derivation. To take the best of previous art and put it together is considered creativity in patent law (as I understand it - IANAL).



Maine Sail said:


> To give Peter Smith or Craig Smith a pass and blame it all on the Bambury brothers makes me sick to my stomach.. Come on Dave, you can do better..... Craig Smith was right in there with the BLATANT lies and deceit while Peter tried to stay out of the limelight so he could perhaps wipe his hands of it.. As far as I am concerned it was all part of Peter's clever marketing ploy.


A reasonable conclusion, true or not. I'm less sure. A lot depends on just when the material changes happened and who knew what and when. We'll probably never know.



Maine Sail said:


> Rocna was a tad late in the copying game to call the Manson a "copy"... The two anchors are as widely different in shape angles and design as the Wasi and Sarca are....... They only "look" similar as they do to the Bügel/Wasi, Manson Supreme, Rocna, Mantus etc......


I take you at your word. I have looked at Supremes and Rocnas side-by-side but have not measured the angles or lined the shaft angles up.

So perhaps I should have ethical issues with both Manson and Rocna. *grin*

Now I have to dig out a protractor and tape measure and head for West Marine.


----------



## miatapaul

smackdaddy said:


> Yeah, I think you're pretty safe on staying off his naughty list. Heh-heh.
> 
> I agree though that it's pretty hard to stomach ANYONE defending Rocna in ANY way - especially someone like Ausp who's been around here for a while and had to have seen a lot of this play out.
> 
> At the end of the day, as I said, I like what Mantus is doing. I actually thought the holding power test rig was pretty smart. It very clearly illustrated the performance of each anchor in that particular condition. Sure, it wasn't precise, but it was compelling.
> 
> That said, I wouldn't mind seeing some "scientific" testing on holding power for the Mantus vs. the others. I wish the mags would pick this up (per Mantus' requests) and do some testing. There are interested readers out there.
> 
> As for the question above regarding what the anchor would do in a big wind shift...doesn't that come down again to setting ability? In other words, if you get a 180 degree shift and the anchor twists out, it's the ability to quickly set again that is the primary factor?
> 
> If so, Mantus seems to be a very good choice. I don't know, I'm just having a hard time seeing the downsides here.


The problem with "scientific testing" is that there are too many variables to do a truly scientific test. Just like the beach videos, too much variability in the sand, just a few inches can be a big difference in density of sand, and therefore holding. You can perhaps just happen to hit a rock or something in the sand and kick it out. I don't think they meant it to be deceptive, but I see issues with there tests not really looking to be unbiased. You would have to sift out the sand, then pack it to a consistent bed, and it would only test one bed type. How can you get a consistent rock or weed bed to test? It seems to me most importantly that the "new style" anchors seem to work better from all accounts. I don't think there is that huge of a difference between the major players. As long as you feel the manufacturer will stand behind the product and uses quality materials then I think you will get a good product. All of the "new" anchors seem to be close enough in design I doubt you would really see a difference in real world use. It is not like in the days of truly different designs between CRQ, Bruce, Danforth. Just find one that fits your bow roller and you are likely to be happy.


----------



## Maine Sail

miatapaul said:


> The problem with "scientific testing" is that there are too many variables to do a truly scientific test. Just like the beach videos, too much variability in the sand, just a few inches can be a big difference in density of sand, and therefore holding. You can perhaps just happen to hit a rock or something in the sand and kick it out. I don't think they meant it to be deceptive, but I see issues with there tests not really looking to be unbiased. You would have to sift out the sand, then pack it to a consistent bed, and it would only test one bed type. How can you get a consistent rock or weed bed to test? It seems to me most importantly that the "new style" anchors seem to work better from all accounts. I don't think there is that huge of a difference between the major players. As long as you feel the manufacturer will stand behind the product and uses quality materials then I think you will get a good product. All of the "new" anchors seem to be close enough in design I doubt you would really see a difference in real world use. It is not like in the days of truly different designs between CRQ, Bruce, Danforth. Just find one that fits your bow roller and you are likely to be happy.


The ultimate "fair" and more scientific test for holding power would be a massive test tank, 80' long X 10' wide by 6' deep or so, with known consistent sifted media & water in it.

The machine would be on a vibrating base, like a soil tamper, and vibrate the media/water back to the same consistency after each drag. Drags and loading would all be computer controlled so as to impart no variations in testing.. Then and only then can truly fair holding capacity comparisons take place with a known consistent media...

With a test like this we can then A/B holding power for that particular media & anchor which could be loosely extrapolated to "general" holding power ratings across other mediums...


----------



## dabnis

Maine Sail said:


> The ultimate "fair" and more scientific test for holding power would be a massive test tank, 80' long X 10' wide by 6' deep or so, with known consistent sifted media & water in it.
> 
> The machine would be on a vibrating base, like a soil tamper, and vibrate the media/water back to the same consistency after each drag. Drags and loading would all be computer controlled so as to impart no variations in testing.. Then and only then can truly fair holding capacity comparisons take place with a known consistent media...
> 
> With a test like this we can then A/B holding power for that particular media & anchor which could be loosely extrapolated to "general" holding power ratings across other mediums...


Curious if you did any testing on a Northill anchor? I had one, since given to my son in law. It never dragged and always set easily. The only drawback might be if you swung 180 degrees the line could possibly wrap around the fluke sticking up?

I used to see lots of them, some "home made", on commercial boats here on the west coast.

Paul T


----------



## SVAuspicious

Maine Sail said:


> The ultimate "fair" and more scientific test for holding power would be a massive test tank, 80' long X 10' wide by 6' deep or so, with known consistent sifted media & water in it.


I've been talking to the SNAME Small Craft Committee for several years on the concept of a repeatable test protocol. It's a lot of work. The goal is a set of guidelines to allow apples to apples comparison of tests over time and location. I'm still short a civil engineer with experience in saturated soils. We're heading towards publication in a peer reviewed journal.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Hey Netters Come and join us at Miami International Boat Show....
Booth 3698 Big Tent Outside the Convention Center....
and yes of course you tell us you are a hard time Netter and we will give you something...
Greg


----------



## SVCarolena

Will you be offering any discounts on your website during the show? Just curious for those of us that can't make it.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Unfortunately, to get this discount you have to be at the show in person.
But we will have something special for the online Netters very soon
Greg


----------



## argalax

Two things I don't like about the anchor (pictured in the original post of the thread):
1). Bolt assembly makes me nervous too - bolts may/WILL go loose at some point, when you least expect it. Hence it is not useful as primary anchor.
2). Stowing disassembled option - can't really be used in emergency (try bolting it together in rough seas while being blown toward lee shore). Hence not useful as secondary anchor either.
So, no use for me.


----------



## NCC320

argalax said:


> Two things I don't like about the anchor (pictured in the original post of the thread):
> 1). Bolt assembly makes me nervous too - bolts may/WILL go loose at some point, when you least expect it. Hence it is not useful as primary anchor.
> 2). Stowing disassembled option - can't really be used in emergency (try bolting it together in rough seas while being blown toward lee shore). Hence not useful as secondary anchor either.
> So, no use for me.


1) The wheels on your car are bolted on and they don't come off, despite thousands of rotations/loadings and unloadings. Anchors are used comparatively little, experience limited movement, and generally are in a static, none moving situation (either on the boat or in the bottom). The bolts are not likely to come undone if you have tightened them with the lock washer.

2) It seems to me that having the anchor as a secondary, or better, a storm anchor is a real feature of this anchor. You will know when conditions are picking up and that you might need to deploy this anchor in advance of actually using it. A prudent captain would assemble this secondary anchor and have it ready to deploy when he needed it, before he needed it. And if it were a storm anchor and he was aware of the situation by monitoring the weather forecasts, he might chose to have deployed this anchor before the storm arrived.
There are 6 bolts that go together quickly. Four to five minutes is sufficient. The Mantus, when disassembled into 3 parts (plus bolts) stores well. Just my opinion....I have one disassembled in my boat's locker, just in case that I should need it some day.


----------



## erps

We were looking for Mantus at the Seattle Boat show. I see a 65 pounder in our future. The bolts concerned me at first but the side by side anchoring video with a Manson Supreme and the stowability of the Mantus sold me.


----------



## christian.hess

id love one! waiting for that netter surprise! yay

afraid of bolts, geeze...then dont ride a car, bike, motorcycle, anything mechanical, be wary of your door, dont open stuff, not even the fridge cause you know bolts are scary

man!


----------



## chef2sail

Do the bent anchor shafts mentioned in Practical Sailor bother you? How about the steel quality the bolts are made of ? I have one and so no reason tp find the claims its better than its predacessors Rocna or Manson.



erps said:


> We were looking for Mantus at the Seattle Boat show. I see a 65 pounder in our future. The bolts concerned me at first but the side by side anchoring video with a Manson Supreme and the stowability of the Mantus sold me.


----------



## erps

I haven't heard about the bent anchor shafts. I've seen the pictures of the bent anchor shafts with the new Rocna's and that would concern me so I'll look into that. Thanks for the heads up. 

I have a 45 lb Manson Supreme and I love it, but there have been times that even it had a hard time setting. I really like the idea of having a BFA that sets well and that also stores well. When we switched to the Mason from previously using a Bruce and a CQR, the Manson's setting ability was immediately apparent to us the very first time we set it. So to see this Mantus set even faster than a darn good anchor like the Manson Supreme made a very good impression. I couldn 't imagine storing a 65 lb Mason Supreme in a locker somewhere, but I can see being able to do that with the Mantus.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Netters thank you for your support!
wanted to share this blog post with you...

s/v Perry: Nightmare Anchorage in Lizard TownTalking anchors is a bit like talking religion and people have strong opinions. After spending almost every night at anchor over the last year and surviving strong winds and rough anchorages with all kinds of bottoms without dragging, I'm ready to jump into the fray with a plug (uncompensated and with no hidden agenda) for our Mantus anchor. We love it. Yeah, we love it so much maybe we WILL marry it..........


----------



## JonEisberg

Mantus Anchors said:


> Netters thank you for your support!
> wanted to share this blog post with you...





> s/v Perry: Nightmare Anchorage in Lizard Town
> 
> We met one couple in the boatyard in Beaufort, North Carolina that had sold everything to move aboard their boat and then less than a year later decided it wasn't for them and threw in the towel. The main reason they gave was that they were never able to sleep well while at anchor due to worry.


I'm sure many of us have heard similar stories, as well ... Never ceases to amaze, wouldn't you think people would figure out that they're Nervous Nellies about anchoring _BEFORE_ selling everything they own, and embarking upon the glossy magazine 'Cruising Lifestyle' ?

Or, that after a year or more, they simply hadn't learned enough about anchoring to be able to do so with confidence?

UFB...


----------



## Faster

JonEisberg said:


> I'm sure many of us have heard similar stories, as well ... Never ceases to amaze, wouldn't you think people would figure out that they're Nervous Nellies about anchoring _BEFORE_ selling everything they own, and embarking upon the glossy magazine 'Cruising Lifestyle' ?
> 
> Or, that after a year or more, they simply hadn't learned enough about anchoring to be able to do so with confidence?
> 
> UFB...


We had members in our sailing club who felt the same.. For 30 YEARS!!

They seemed to make it a point of pride that they'd never anchored in all that time. They only ever attended our rendezvous' if we went to a marina...


----------



## Mantus Anchors

chef2sail said:


> Do the bent anchor shafts mentioned in Practical Sailor bother you? How about the steel quality the bolts are made of ? I have one and so no reason tp find the claims its better than its predacessors Rocna or Manson.


Chef2sail, Practical Sailor has never reported a bent Mantus Shank, as you state in your post. 
However, shanks of any design can bend and where we stand with our shanks is clearly explained in this write up.... Anchor Shank Strength for Lateral Applied Loads

We also have a life time warranty on our anchors and ship replacement parts at our expense.

As far as the bolts go, 
Even though we currently use Grade 5 bolts the anchor was designed and sized for use with Grade 2 bolts.

For example a Mantus 35-lbs anchor has FOUR 1/2-in bolts at the shank joint. Each 1/2-in Grade 5 (120 ksi) bolt has ultimate tensile strength (UTS) of 24,000-lbs. Compare that to the 5/16-in High Tensile (HT) chain which has UTS = 11,700-lbs. 
Each bolt is twice as strong as the chain & there are four bolts, so the Mantus joint is 8x as strong as the chain.
Simple math gives you - Mantus shank joint UTS = 96,000 lbs
5/16" HT chain - UTS = 11,700 lbs.

For Grade 2 (74 ksi) bolts the UTS =14,800-lbs. A single 1/2" Grade 2 bolt is still stronger than the HT chain. And the Mantus shank joint with four Grade 2 bolts has UTS = 59,200-lbs and is 5x as strong as the 5/16" HT chain.

reference bolt strength data

Greg
Happy Mardi Gras!


----------



## smurphny

The shear strength of the Mantus bolts is massively higher than any load you'd ever encounter. It's simply not an issue. As far as bolts loosening, as long as they are sufficiently torqued, it should never be an issue and even if ONE were to loosen, it would be immediately obvious. Just not an issue. 

I would like to hear from folks who have been using the Mantus for a while now as per any rusting, bending, wear and tear issues. Looking at all the anchor options, I believe a 65# Mantus will be my next main anchor.


----------



## IStream

Mantus Anchors said:


> Unfortunately, to get this discount you have to be at the show in person.
> But we will have something special for the online Netters very soon
> Greg


Greg, 
It's been about four months since your "stay tuned" post. The season's getting started up here in Seattle and I'm anchor shopping. Any Netter deals available?


----------



## Faster

smurphny said:


> ........
> I would like to hear from folks who have been using the Mantus for a while now as per any rusting, bending, wear and tear issues. Looking at all the anchor options, I believe a 65# Mantus will be my next main anchor.


65#er for a 35 footer seems overkill to me?? We've got a 35# Mantus on our (albeit lighter) 35 footer - replacing a same weight CQR.

Early days for us but last year we plowed enough furrows in a bay with our CQR to plant corn.. early this year, same bay, same place, single drop and solid stop with Mantus. We'll have more to say at the end of this coming summer.


----------



## MedSailor

smurphny said:


> I would like to hear from folks who have been using the Mantus for a while now as per any rusting, bending, wear and tear issues. Looking at all the anchor options, I believe a 65# Mantus will be my next main anchor.


I was one of the early adopters and I've been using mine for 2 years now and have really put her through her paces. I really like this anchor. I will preface this with the statement that I'm comparing it to my experience with the Fortress and genuine Bruce and I've never used a Mansocna.

She grabs quick and hard and sets right where you drop her. A Bruce is a fast setting anchor, but the power of the grab is immediately apparent with the Mantus. I once set her while in a strong current and my bowsprit dipped down over a foot as she grabbed.

I've had no rust or other issues with mine and the supplied lock washers have kept the bolts from working loose. I disassembled my anchor when I put my boat up for sale and she came apart just fine (I used the supplied grease when I first put her together) after 2 years of use.

I convinced my dad to join the cult and he's currently on the way to the Broughton Islands with his new Mantus. He's planning on posting his thoughts on the trawler forum when he gets back. He's used his once so far, where he had a 40ft sailboat and a 40ft trawler rafted to his 52ft pilothouse boat. All were hanging on the Mantus and the wind did pick up. No dragging and you can see from this photo I took afterwords how deep she dug in the sand. The entire fluke was buried. BTW, the anchor in the picture is the 105lb Mantus.










MedSailor


----------



## SVAuspicious

smurphny said:


> I would like to hear from folks who have been using the Mantus for a while now as per any rusting, bending, wear and tear issues. Looking at all the anchor options, I believe a 65# Mantus will be my next main anchor.


That seems a pretty big anchor for an Alberg 35.


----------



## JonEisberg

SVAuspicious said:


> Originally Posted by smurphny View Post
> 
> I would like to hear from folks who have been using the Mantus for a while now as per any rusting, bending, wear and tear issues. Looking at all the anchor options, I believe a 65# Mantus will be my next main anchor.
> 
> 
> 
> That seems a pretty big anchor for an Alberg 35.
Click to expand...

Wow, I'll say... Especially on a design with such long overhangs, and so little tolerance for placing additional weight at the ends of the boat...

Says me, who carries a 45 lb Manson and a 33 lb Bruce on the bow of a 30-footer


----------



## smurphny

As I have posted any number of times, I believe that an oversized anchor is important. Plugging the boat data into the Mantus selection page, I come up with the 45# but I always go one size larger than recommended. I can say truthfully that I have never had an anchor slip once set and would like it to stay that way. I've been anchored through tropical storms and big blows and have never had a problem, even with my antique CQR But the consensus is that these new generation anchors are much better so I'll bite but would not give up on pure, basic MASS as an important element.


----------



## Noelex

smurphny said:


> I would like to hear from folks who have been using the Mantus for a while now as per any rusting, bending, wear and tear issues. Looking at all the anchor options, I believe a 65# Mantus will be my next main anchor.


Mantus have sent me an anchor to test. It is still early days with about 50 nights at anchor so far.

I dive and inspect my anchor underwater quite carefully (and did the same with my previous Rocna, which I had for five years). The Mantus so far has been very impressive. Its stability when rotating around to a new wind direction and performance at short scope has been particularly excellent.

It you are concerned about bending, it is worth looking at the warranty anchor manufacturers offer. Most companies proudly state a lifetime warranty, but exclude deformation.
Mantus, Fortress, Rocna, Ultra and Anchor Right are the only manufacturers that cover you if you get your anchor stuck under a rock and bend it. Mantus go a bit further and include free shipping.


----------



## smurphny

Great info., thanks for posting that!


----------



## IStream

noelex77 said:


> It you are concerned about bending, it is worth looking at the warranty anchor manufacturers offer. Most companies proudly state a lifetime warranty, but exclude deformation.
> Mantus, Fortress, Rocna, Ultra and Anchor Right are the only manufacturers that cover you if you get your anchor stuck under a rock and bend it. Mantus go a bit further and include free shipping.


It's also important to keep in mind that a "lifetime warranty" should be thought of in terms of the lifetime of the company, not you. Not to pick on Mantus, but they're only two years old. I appreciate their warranty terms but only time will tell if they're around to back it up when necessary. Same goes for the others.


----------



## zeehag

wot!? ye mean a 5 gal bucket of water wont work anymore??? damn.....


----------



## Mantus Anchors

ONLY 3 DAYS LEFT
MANTUS ANCHORS GIVE AWAY









ENTER TO WIN


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Hey Netters, check out our new Mantus Dinghy Anchor....
Greg


----------



## alctel

I think I'm going to pick up a Mantus 45 to replace the (rusty, undersized) Danforth that came with my 1980 36' Hunter.

Now if only I could find somewhere in Canada to pick one up from, ordering from the US comes to over 250 bucks just for S+H :<


----------



## chef2sail

alctel said:


> I think I'm going to pick up a Mantus 45 to replace the (rusty, undersized) Danforth that came with my 1980 36' Hunter.
> 
> Now if only I could find somewhere in Canada to pick one up from, ordering from the US comes to over 250 bucks just for S+H :<


See if you can find a Rocna or Manson they probably are cheaper and hold just as well. I have a Rocna and Manson and cant tell any difference


----------



## smackdaddy

chef2sail said:


> See if you can find a Rocna or Manson they probably are cheaper and hold just as well. I have a Rocna and Manson and cant tell any difference


Naaa. Go with the Mantus, alc.

As Chef says, if there's no difference in holding power, etc (which I'm not sure is totally correct), you'd be much better served by Mantus. They are a great company and have a great product.


----------



## chef2sail

smackdaddy said:


> Naaa. Go with the Mantus, alc.
> 
> As Chef says, if there's no difference in holding power, etc (which I'm not sure is totally correct), you'd be much better served by Mantus. They are a great company and have a great product.


No one disputes they have copied or mimicked a great product. No real proof they have improved it. All are good new gen anchors. Like I said I have both and have first hand knowledge that they are almost identical. The mantis stows apart as my spare with the original new gen the Rocna on my bow.

If I only had one, I would by whichever of then three were the cheapest. All have claims as being better than the other. All unproven except in the advertising of the particular company who is making the statement.

I'm sure Smackdaddy isn't encouraging you to spend more money on the same product the claim really is you would be better served by a Mantus is specious.

Of course Mantus supports and funds Sailnet so you can figure it will get more play here.

Go with the one which you can get at the best price and don't succumb to the hyped language. They are all very similar


----------



## smackdaddy

chef2sail said:


> No one disputes they have copied or mimicked a great product. No real proof they have improved it. All are good new gen anchors. Like I said I have both and have first hand knowledge that they are almost identical. The mantis stows apart as my spare with the original new gen the Rocna on my bow.
> 
> If I only had one, I would by whichever of then three were the cheapest. All have claims as being better than the other. All unproven except in the advertising of the particular company who is making the statement.
> 
> *I'm sure Smackdaddy isn't encouraging you to spend more money on the same product the claim really is you would be better served by a Mantus is specious.
> 
> Of course Mantus supports and funds Sailnet so you can figure it will get more play here.*
> 
> Go with the one which you can get at the best price and don't succumb to the hyped language. They are all very similar


Oh good gravy. Chef, do a little research bro.

Here...I'll help you...prices of each of the anchors you've listed - for the ~45lb/Glavanized version:

*Mantus 45lb: $337* (Source: Our own Sailnet store where I bought mine)
*Rocna 44lb: $429* (Source: *Defender*)
*Manson Supreme 45lb: $475* (Source: *Defender*)

So - no - I'm not encouraging alc to spend more money at all. In fact, I'm encouraging him to _*save*_ $100+ and get a really great anchor from a really great company.

So, alc, as Chef says:



chef2sail said:


> Go with the one which you can get at the best price and don't succumb to the hyped language. They are all very similar


----------



## capta

I haven't anything good or bad to say about Mantus or Mason anchors, because I haven't used them. I couldn't care less how many times I am shown "test" videos in various bottoms. I don't care who was first, last or somewhere in between, in the development of my anchor.
I care about my boat staying where I anchored it, with as little fuss as possible, no matter what the bottom is, in any weather I encounter.
It has been 2 years now, that our Rocna has done just that. So far, maximum gust has been 65 mph. How many times have we done doughnuts as the wind shifts after a squall? I don't know, but the Rocna has not moved more than it's own length, as far as we can tell. I'm talking about over 700 days/nights at anchor, in that time. In sand, hard mud, loose mud, on flat coral covered by a few inches of sand, in weed and I really don't know what else.
I'm not trying to sell Rocna anchors here, but folks these things do exactly what they are supposed to do, very, very well. The galvanizing hasn't come off at all (unlike my 8 month old, US made hot dip galvanized chain), nor has it bent and our boat weighs something like 77 thousand pounds. I don't have to back down on it and I never have to reset it.
I am overjoyed that those with Mansons and Masons are happy with them, but really, I think the Rocna is just fine, too.


----------



## Mantus Anchors

alctel said:


> I think I'm going to pick up a Mantus 45 to replace the (rusty, undersized) Danforth that came with my 1980 36' Hunter.
> 
> Now if only I could find somewhere in Canada to pick one up from, ordering from the US comes to over 250 bucks just for S+H :<


No Worries... we have a presence in Canada
Check out Ancres


----------



## chef2sail

smackdaddy said:


> Oh good gravy. Chef, do a little research bro.
> 
> Here...I'll help you...prices of each of the anchors you've listed - for the ~45lb/Glavanized version:
> 
> *Mantus 45lb: $337* (Source: Our own Sailnet store where I bought mine)
> *Rocna 44lb: $429* (Source: *Defender*)
> *Manson Supreme 45lb: $475* (Source: *Defender*)
> 
> So - no - I'm not encouraging alc to spend more money at all. In fact, I'm encouraging him to _*save*_ $100+ and get a really great anchor from a really great company.
> 
> So, alc, as Chef says:


I think I'm going to pick up a Mantus 45 to replace the (rusty, undersized) Danforth that came with my 1980 36' Hunter.

Now if only I could find somewhere in Canada to pick one up from, ordering from the US comes to over 250 bucks just for S+H :< posted by alcttel,

It pays to read thoroughly what people write Smacky so by the newer math with s&h that brings the cost to $562 for the Mantus for this particular poster. Beside Defender often has 20% off sales with free shipping which makes both the Rocna and Mason cheaper by a lot.

Again nothing wrong with a Mantus, I have one and think it us similar to the originals Rocna and Manson. Buy the one you can get the cheapest.

Just as a side Smacky....how long have you owned your Mantus and did you ever have a new gen anchor before?


----------



## smackdaddy

Chef - Mantus squared alc away above on the Canada thing - so it's all good.

Oh, and I've followed this subject for years. Coupled with that, I've owned my Mantus long enough to know it's about as good as it gets...

Less expensive, incredible setting and holding power, a straight-shooting company with awesome customer service and warranty...and one that's not afraid to show how their anchor performs side-by-side with the competitors (about the only company I've seen that dares to do that). What's not to like?


----------



## chef2sail

smackdaddy said:


> Chef - Mantus squared alc away above on the Canada thing - so it's all good.
> 
> Oh, and I've followed this subject for years. Coupled with that, I've owned my Mantus long enough to know it's about as good as it gets...
> 
> Less expensive, incredible setting and holding power, a straight-shooting company with awesome customer service and warranty...and one that's not afraid to show how their anchor performs side-by-side with the competitors (about the only company I've seen that dares to do that). What's not to like?


Lack of direct answer would indicate you've owned it 6 months. Probably used it maybe 10 times. Also lack of direct answer leads to beleive it's the only new generation anchor you ever owned so you of course it's the best thing compared to sliced bread. That how many of us felt years ago when the Rocna and Manson came out with the New gen anchors which is now being replicated because its design is great for a good all round anchor.

I too not only have followed this for years. Go down the docks. Ask the Rocna owners if the like their anchors and I'll bet almost every one will say its good. The Rocnas and Manson can be had at the same price with free shipping when defender west marine have their sales. Mantus has taken its place next to the two originals, but is no worse or better.

Like I said I own one. I also have their chain hook which is top notch.

My experience with Rocna...I have aNZ one has been A1 . Actually gave had really no reason to call them except for measurements. You just don't like the arrogant owner/ designer.

You of course will need to have the last word as the expert on all so suffice it to say there are other good choices out there and beware of the superior marketing claims of one over another.


----------



## smurphny

capta said:


> I haven't anything good or bad to say about Mantus or Mason anchors, because I haven't used them. I couldn't care less how many times I am shown "test" videos in various bottoms. I don't care who was first, last or somewhere in between, in the development of my anchor.
> I care about my boat staying where I anchored it, with as little fuss as possible, no matter what the bottom is, in any weather I encounter.
> It has been 2 years now, that our Rocna has done just that. So far, maximum gust has been 65 mph. How many times have we done doughnuts as the wind shifts after a squall? I don't know, but the Rocna has not moved more than it's own length, as far as we can tell. I'm talking about over 700 days/nights at anchor, in that time. In sand, hard mud, loose mud, on flat coral covered by a few inches of sand, in weed and I really don't know what else.
> I'm not trying to sell Rocna anchors here, but folks these things do exactly what they are supposed to do, very, very well. The galvanizing hasn't come off at all (unlike my 8 month old, US made hot dip galvanized chain), nor has it bent and our boat weighs something like 77 thousand pounds. I don't have to back down on it and I never have to reset it.
> I am overjoyed that those with Mansons and Masons are happy with them, but really, I think the Rocna is just fine, too.


Now there's a valuable testimony, Nothing like evidence from actual heavy, repeated use. Great post.


----------



## Minnewaska

I am absolutely certain that all new-gen anchors are equally effective. Can I prove it? Nope. I don't even have experience with them all. However, the lack of third party evidence to the contrary is very telling. 

How about splitting the tie this way. All new-gen anchors are ugly, imo. Rocna is the least ugly, Mantus is the most ugly.


----------



## alctel

Thanks everyone for the perspectives. The reason I chose Mantus was that it appears to set a little better than the others (though I'm sure its not by much), the fact it comes in pieces so shipping will be easier, and that it's cheaper than the other ones.

Also, I like the look of it!

If I found a Mason or a Rocna for cheaper though, I'd probably grab one of them, but as it stands Mantus wins out for now.


----------



## chef2sail

alctel said:


> Thanks everyone for the perspectives. The reason I chose Mantus was that it appears to set a little better than the others (though I'm sure its not by much), the fact it comes in pieces so shipping will be easier, and that it's cheaper than the other ones.
> 
> Also, I like the look of it!
> 
> If I found a Mason or a Rocna for cheaper though, I'd probably grab one of them, but as it stands Mantus wins out for now.


That great....They all set the same really.....all superior. Glad you got it as the cheapest price and didnt have to deal with the $ 250 shipping.

You will sleep soundly


----------



## chef2sail

Minnewaska said:


> I am absolutely certain that all new-gen anchors are equally effective. Can I prove it? Nope. I don't even have experience with them all. However, the lack of third party evidence to the contrary is very telling.
> 
> How about splitting the tie this way. All new-gen anchors are ugly, imo. Rocna is the least ugly, Mantus is the most ugly.


Ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. I have two ugly anchors then. hidden by them benieath the water where the beauty really lies......


----------



## Mantus Anchors

Fellow Netters we really put the Mantus Dinghy Anchor, through the ropes in here..


----------



## SailRedemption

Mantus Anchors said:


> Fellow Netters we really put the Mantus Dinghy Anchor, through the ropes in here..


Impressive. Does it disassemble? Looked like you just pop the fluke in and slide it down similar to putting together a bed frame?


----------



## alctel

Just ordered the 45lb anchor for just 10 bucks shipping. Yeah!

I'm gonna stick that on 50' of 5/16" G4 chain and I'll feel pretty safe )


----------



## alctel

Just got told they have no more stock left for the year. Great.

If anyone knows any other Canadian supplier please let me know


----------



## alctel

Update - Philip from Mantus Anchors contacted me directly, and we managed to sort something out. Excellent customer service, and I'm looking forward to receiving the new anchor


----------



## smackdaddy

alctel said:


> Update - Philip from Mantus Anchors contacted me directly, and we managed to sort something out. Excellent customer service, and I'm looking forward to receiving the new anchor


That's exactly what I found with Mantus - incredible customer service. Good on 'em.


----------



## MedSailor

This weekend we went out on my parents powerboat and anchored with his new 105lb Mantus. The holding is superb (thick mud/sand mix) where we anchored and he dropped the anchor while moving forward at 1.5knots. Once he had 1.9:1 scope out (less than 2:1) he backed up and it immediately set. He then let out more chain for a total of 5:1 for the night.

I continue to be impressed at the short scope setting abilities of this anchor. It makes me want one for a stern anchor as when I do use them, I never seem to have enough scope on them. 

MedSailor (becoming a Mantus Fanboy more each day  )


----------



## northoceanbeach

I want one. That will help pimp my dinghy.


----------



## TakeFive

northoceanbeach said:


> I want one. That will help pimp my dinghy.


It is an inflatable? It may help you pop your dinghy. :laugher


----------

