I've read through all the reviews and replies. I'm going to put a
Spade on my wish list of stuff to buy for that cruise to Newfoundland.
In the meantime I think a CQR, which the boat is already set up for,
is probably my best choice.

Is there any significant difference between the genuine CQR (which is
still more than I want to spend in the same year we paid for the boat)
and the Kingston or Sascot versions?

--

Roger Long

You might want to take a look at item #4524695234 on Ebay!



"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
I've read through all the reviews and replies. I'm going to put a Spade
on my wish list of stuff to buy for that cruise to Newfoundland. In the
meantime I think a CQR, which the boat is already set up for, is probably
my best choice.

Is there any significant difference between the genuine CQR (which is
still more than I want to spend in the same year we paid for the boat) and
the Kingston or Sascot versions?

--

Roger Long

On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 07:04:38 -0600, "just me"
wrote:

You might want to take a look at item #4524695234 on Ebay!



It is either not a CQR or it is not 316 stainless steel. Stainless
steel anchors that look like a CQR are very expensive anchors.

Yes, they are. It's not a CQR (brand) but it is 316 stainless

--

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 07:04:38 -0600, "just me"
wrote:

You might want to take a look at item #4524695234 on Ebay!



It is either not a CQR or it is not 316 stainless steel. Stainless
steel anchors that look like a CQR are very expensive anchors.

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 03:13:32 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:

I've read through all the reviews and replies. I'm going to put a
Spade on my wish list of stuff to buy for that cruise to Newfoundland.
In the meantime I think a CQR, which the boat is already set up for,
is probably my best choice.

Is there any significant difference between the genuine CQR (which is
still more than I want to spend in the same year we paid for the boat)
and the Kingston or Sascot versions?

I have not heard anything bad about these new versions. Whatever
anchor you get, get oversize and use plenty of chain. Do not use
connecting links in your chain. Most chain failures are due to a "weak
link" from using a connecting link. Use only a shackle rated at least
as strong as your chain.
Remember that your ground tackle is the system that lets you sleep
in comfort. It's not your mattress or your heater that really gives
you comfort during the night; it's your anchor and rode.

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 03:13:32 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:

I've read through all the reviews and replies. I'm going to put a
Spade on my wish list of stuff to buy for that cruise to Newfoundland.
In the meantime I think a CQR, which the boat is already set up for,
is probably my best choice.

Is there any significant difference between the genuine CQR (which is
still more than I want to spend in the same year we paid for the boat)
and the Kingston or Sascot versions?

I have not heard anything bad about these new versions. Whatever
anchor you get, get oversize and use plenty of chain. Do not use
connecting links in your chain. Most chain failures are due to a "weak
link" from using a connecting link. Use only a shackle rated at least
as strong as your chain.
Remember that your ground tackle is the system that lets you sleep
in comfort. It's not your mattress or your heater that really gives
you comfort during the night; it's your anchor and rode.

Remember that your ground tackle is the system that lets you sleep
in comfort.

Well this prompts me to put in a plug for the Bruce. Every test I've read
shows that the Bruce anchor resets itself 100% of the time and quickly. If
the wind swings around 180 degrees while you are sleeping this could be
rather important. The only downside on the Bruce is the modest holding
power. In the real world I'm not sure how important this is. If you are
going to ride out a gale you will probably want to set an second anchor .

I'm swinging (no pun) to the Delta. I read a review (sorry, forgot to
save the link) by someone who compared it to the CQR over a long trip.
As a designer, I found one point (again, no pun) compelling. The
hinge isolates much of the anchor weight of the CQR from pressing the
tip down. It also makes the anchor more of a pain to handle.

The very experienced builders of these boats

http://home.maine.rr.com/rlma/Challenger_Class.HTM

love the Bruce and we put one on the last one.

I'll probably get a Spade when I finally head off for Newfoundland but
money is flying out the door right now equipping this boat and the
Delta looks like a good compromise. I'm one of those people who take
a lot of care setting my anchors so the easy set of the Bruce isn't as
compelling.

--

Roger Long

Here's the review:

http://www.multihullsmag.com/magazin...cles/delta.htm

I just got back from the marine supply store where I put a CQR and a
Delta of the same weight side by side. It is very convincing. All
the weight of the Delta is digging it in whereas the hinged shank of
the CQR is actually relieving the weight on the tip. Furthermore,
handling both, I realized what a pain it would be to have the head of
the CQR flopping around.

There was also an aluminum Spade of the same size but quite a bit
lighter, of course. It had about the same fluke area. I'm sorry
Glen, I really like your web site but it just doesn't feel like an
anchor to me. I probably would like the steel version better. If I
had a weight sensitive boat, it would be the way to go. The Delta
feels enormously reassuring just to pick up and hold. The Bruce's
just didn't grab me although I'm sure they can grab other things.

--

Roger Long



"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
I'm swinging (no pun) to the Delta. I read a review (sorry, forgot
to save the link) by someone who compared it to the CQR over a long
trip. As a designer, I found one point (again, no pun) compelling.
The hinge isolates much of the anchor weight of the CQR from
pressing the tip down. It also makes the anchor more of a pain to
handle.

The very experienced builders of these boats

http://home.maine.rr.com/rlma/Challenger_Class.HTM

love the Bruce and we put one on the last one.

I'll probably get a Spade when I finally head off for Newfoundland
but money is flying out the door right now equipping this boat and
the Delta looks like a good compromise. I'm one of those people who
take a lot of care setting my anchors so the easy set of the Bruce
isn't as compelling.

--

Roger Long

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 21:33:27 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:

Here's the review:

*snip!
The Delta
feels enormously reassuring just to pick up and hold. The Bruce's
just didn't grab me although I'm sure they can grab other things.


I like the look and feel of the Delta. I might get an 85 pound
Delta instaed of a CQR. My Bruce does grab and has never failed to
set. The Bruce design was made to dig in and set within twice its
length. I like the Bruce.
In soft mud I would use a Fortress or Danforth. Anything else, a
Bruce or a plow-type.

Roger Long wrote:
Here's the review:

http://www.multihullsmag.com/magazin...cles/delta.htm

I just got back from the marine supply store where I put a CQR and a
Delta of the same weight side by side. It is very convincing. All
the weight of the Delta is digging it in whereas the hinged shank of
the CQR is actually relieving the weight on the tip. Furthermore,
handling both, I realized what a pain it would be to have the head of
the CQR flopping around.

There was also an aluminum Spade of the same size but quite a bit
lighter, of course. It had about the same fluke area. I'm sorry
Glen, I really like your web site but it just doesn't feel like an
anchor to me. I probably would like the steel version better. If I
had a weight sensitive boat, it would be the way to go. The Delta
feels enormously reassuring just to pick up and hold. The Bruce's
just didn't grab me although I'm sure they can grab other things.


A good choice.