I've seen a number of examples of Danforths or Fortresses fouled by a clump of
mud, a stone, weed, or a small piece of line. In softer mud they may be
trustworthy, but in clay, or a hard foul bottom I wouldn't leave one unattended.
The paradox is that they set very quickly in these bottoms (usually), giving a
false sense of security.

There's been a few comments such as "A Danforth held me in a 50 knot squall.
What's the problem?" The issue is not the holding power, but the frequency of
mishaps. An anchor that holds fine 90% of the time might be OK for someone that
anchors overnight once a year, and only in ideal conditions; but for those that
anchor 20 nights a year in challenging situations need something more reliable.

BTW, one minor issue I have with the Fortress is the sharp edges. It took me a
while to find a way to mount mine on deck that wasn't a hazard to kids playing.


"DSK" wrote in message
...
Martin Baxter wrote:
On a more serious note, I am beginning to detest the ubiquitous
Danforth. These anchors
may be great in sand and mud, but they are an abomination if the mud is
sprouting much
in the way of weeds, or if the mud is sticky clay. You may get the
anchor to set when
you first lower it, but if you swing and it upsets the chances of it
resetting is somewhere
between slim and none. The flukes become fouled with either mud and or
weeds and the thing just
skates across the bottom.

Actually, that's a popular misconception. The Danforth resets just fine
if you sharpen the flukes. Cuts through weeds better that way, too.



DSK