wrote in message
oups.com...


*JimH* wrote:
"Real Name" wrote in message
...
Has anyone else tried the Fortress anchor and been disappointed with
them?
I have found once the anchor bites in and is set, it is a great anchor.
The problem is if you are in a current, the anchor "sails" in the
water,
making it very difficult to set the hook.




We had a Fortress on our 32 footer (I believe it was an FX 16) with 5
feet
of chain rode....it held great in all types of seas in sand, mud and
rocky
bottoms. Light weight and good holding power.

A great anchor that never let us down.



Nowhere nearly enough chain, IMO. If it "never let you down" it may not
have been all that severely tested. I personally subscribe to theory
that places enormous importance on rode and scope, and a bit less on
the actual "weight" of the anchor. A goofily light weight anchor will
bounce along the bottom and not
catch a set- but for any hook with enough mass to get down and pres
against the bottom the design of the anchor is going to be more
important to the set and hold than the listed weight.

Old Bruce Danforth
Rode to town
Just to warn his daughter
"Don't wish and hope,
Use lots of scope
When hooking under water."

There is almost no such thing as too much chain. I have only 50-feet,
and consider that a pretty minimal amount of chain for my mixed rode.


Well it could have been 6 or 8 feet of chain rode.......my wife was the
wench as we did not have an electric windlass. We never made it a habit to
anchor in severe seas, so I guess it was never severely tested. Scope was
always at least 7:1 and I had the line marked every 10 feet.

This 'goofily light weight anchor' never bounced around the bottom for us.
It is designed to catch and hold, even with minimal chain rode.

Have you ever used a Fortress anchor Chuck?