I have decided to not get the Fortress and stick with my 3
Danforths with16' of 3/8'' chain.


Okay, but don't blame Sloco if a tug boat snares you and pulls up your
anchor!!!!


RB
35s5
NY

I have decided to not get the Fortress and stick with my 3
Danforths with16' of 3/8'' chain.

Scotty




"Jeff" wrote in message
...
Scotty wrote:
Anybody using one? Comments?

I used a FX-16 (10 lbs) on my Nonsuch 30, and now use a
FX-23 (23 lbs)
on the cat. In both cases I considered them lunch hooks
or second
anchors (primary is larger Delta), and would never, ever
leave the
boat unattended or try to sleep while relying solely on a
Fortress if
it was not set deeply in mud. The smaller one released
completely
several time when we thought it was well and truly set,
and failed to
reset because of debris caught in the flukes. We've had
better
experiences with the larger Fortress, but it also has been
fouled.

However, in New England we typically have hard, foul
bottoms, and
reversing currents, and Danforth style anchors are not the
best
choice. In the Chesapeake, we used the large Fortress
several times
and always found that it had set deeply in the soft mud,
where the
Delta would do the "slow drag." You can add mud palms set
the flukes
for a mud angle, and get increased holding power. You
should look on
the docks and ask folks that have them for their
experiences.


I have the opportunity to receive a free one, either 7
or 10
lb..
Does the old axiom of 'go one size bigger' apply to
these
lightweight anchors?

Even more so. Don't even consider the smaller F-11 (7
lbs). Even the
10 lb FX-16 is so light for its surface area that without
chain it has
trouble finding the bottom if there's any current. If you
really like
to sleep soundly, I'd say go up to the FX-23, which would
almost be a
storm anchor for your boat, and yet can be easily handled.

The selection charts don't even pretend to suggest the
proper anchor
for stronger winds; they are actually trying to show that
the
expensive anchors are competitively priced. The Fortress
chart, for
example, begins with the disclaimer: "Boat size
recommendations are
for boats of average windage and proportions in 30 knots
of wind,
average bottom conditions, and moderate protection from
open seas.
Remember that the loads in 42 knots of wind are twice as
much as in 30
knots."

Anyone who goes out for more than one night wants to know
that their
gear is rated for more the 30 knots since on any summer
night you can
get squalls with much stronger winds. This is a pet peeve
of mine,
since most of the anchor holding tests are based on the
charts, when a
better measure would be to compare anchors that are
equally easy to
handle and set.

BTW, tests by an anchor manufacturer showed that the stock
(the
cross-bar at the bottom) and thick chain actually inhibit
quick
setting in certain muds. The made a mud anchor without
the stock, but
it didn't look "nautical." When my Fortress stock got
bent by another
boat, I just cut off 6 inches and have been happy with the
result.
Also, since I use the Fortress primarily as a lunch
hook/second
anchor, I reduced the chain to about 12 feet for easy
handling. One
advantage of a lightly set up Fortress is that you can
fish for the
bottom and you know instantly when its set; you can't do
this with a
CQR and 50+ feet of chain!

Fair enough, but I'd bet if you replaced one of those with a FX-16
you'd get used to saving about 5 pounds every time you'd haul.


Scotty wrote:
I have decided to not get the Fortress and stick with my 3
Danforths with16' of 3/8'' chain.

Scotty

"Capt. Rob" wrote:

Boy are you ever slow on the uptake Marty

Boy is he. I don't even have a Danforth.

And that would be why you wrote ""Yep, got a nice new one on the
Beneteau 35s5 along with a SS chromed Danforth.", perhaps "Danforth" was
a typo?

Cheers
Marty

"Martin Baxter" wrote in message
...
"Capt. Rob" wrote:

Boy are you ever slow on the uptake Marty

Boy is he. I don't even have a Danforth.

And that would be why you wrote ""Yep, got a nice new one
on the
Beneteau 35s5 along with a SS chromed Danforth.", perhaps
"Danforth" was
a typo?


Marty, look up the terms; 'pathological liar', 'habitual
liar', 'chronic liar', 'big fat liar', 'sociopath, and
'loser'.

This should help answer your question.

Scotty

Scotty wrote:


Marty, look up the terms; 'pathological liar', 'habitual
liar', 'chronic liar', 'big fat liar', 'sociopath, and
'loser'.

This should help answer your question.

Ok, how come it says "see Bob****"?

Cheers
Marty

And that would be why you wrote ""Yep, got a nice new one on the
Beneteau 35s5 along with a SS chromed Danforth.", perhaps "Danforth"
was
a typo?


Yeah, it's called bull****, Martin. Some people, like you and Scotty
potty, don't know the differnence and are easily frustrated by even the
obvious trolls. Kill the light, Hyme.

RB
35s5
NY

"Capt. Rob" wrote:


Yeah, it's called bull****, Martin. Some people, like you and Scotty
potty, don't know the differnence and are easily frustrated by even the
obvious trolls. Kill the light, Hyme.

Frustrated? Oh dear me, no Booby, I am however enjoying watching you
sink to lower and more juvenile levels with every post.

Cheers
Marty

On Thu, 04 May 2006 10:51:20 -0400, Martin Baxter
wrote:


Frustrated? Oh dear me, no Booby, I am however enjoying watching you
sink to lower and more juvenile levels with every post.

Cheers
Marty

Sounds like quite a hobby. You must lead a fascinating life.

Oh dear me, no Booby, I am however enjoying watching you
sink to lower and more juvenile levels with every post.



Golly, Martin, where have you been. A little anchor fib is hardly
"more" juvelile for me! But, oh dear me and good heavens, you do sound
a trifle frustrated. Best you sit down and relax somewhere quiet.

RB
35s5
NY