Manson Supreme
The 35-pound Manson Supreme was certainly an unusual-looking entrant. It
has a broad single fluke that was among the sharpest of the bunch,
combined with a rigid shank and a roll bar. The shank is equipped with
both a fixed-shackle attachment and a channel that allows a shackle to
slide, reportedly making for easier retrieval. Manufactured in New
Zealand, the Manson proves the Kiwis know anchors, as it set quickly
each time and held to a maximum of 5,332 pounds, releasing and dragging
only once.
Quoted from West test


Rocna
The Rocna was designed and manufactured in New Zealand. The 33-pounder
looks similar to the Manson, with a roll bar and sharp fluke, but lacks
a channel in its shank for an alternate rode attachment. The anchor
tended to drag at first but finally set each time and held once to 5,000
pounds.
Quoted from West test

Rocna 20kg (44#) $638 at Port Supply
Manson Supreme 45# $445 at Port Supply


Read the two paragraphs carefully and just based on this, which would
you buy?
Gordon

On 2007-11-04 21:03:56 -0500, Gordon said:

Manson Supreme
The 35-pound Manson Supreme was certainly an unusual-looking entrant.
It has a broad single fluke that was among the sharpest of the bunch,
combined with a rigid shank and a roll bar. The shank is equipped with
both a fixed-shackle attachment and a channel that allows a shackle to
slide, reportedly making for easier retrieval. Manufactured in New
Zealand, the Manson proves the Kiwis know anchors, as it set quickly
each time and held to a maximum of 5,332 pounds, releasing and dragging
only once.
Quoted from West test


Rocna
The Rocna was designed and manufactured in New Zealand. The 33-pounder
looks similar to the Manson, with a roll bar and sharp fluke, but lacks
a channel in its shank for an alternate rode attachment. The anchor
tended to drag at first but finally set each time and held once to
5,000 pounds.
Quoted from West test

Rocna 20kg (44#) $638 at Port Supply
Manson Supreme 45# $445 at Port Supply


Read the two paragraphs carefully and just based on this, which
would you buy?
Gordon

Wow. Wonder which they have a higher profit margin on?

--
Jere Lull
Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI trips & tips: http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/

"Gordon" wrote in message
...
Manson Supreme
The 35-pound Manson Supreme was certainly an unusual-looking entrant. It
has a broad single fluke that was among the sharpest of the bunch,
combined with a rigid shank and a roll bar. The shank is equipped with
both a fixed-shackle attachment and a channel that allows a shackle to
slide, reportedly making for easier retrieval. Manufactured in New
Zealand, the Manson proves the Kiwis know anchors, as it set quickly each
time and held to a maximum of 5,332 pounds, releasing and dragging only
once.
Quoted from West test

Rocna
The Rocna was designed and manufactured in New Zealand. The 33-pounder
looks similar to the Manson, with a roll bar and sharp fluke, but lacks a
channel in its shank for an alternate rode attachment. The anchor tended
to drag at first but finally set each time and held once to 5,000 pounds.
Quoted from West test

Rocna 20kg (44#) $638 at Port Supply
Manson Supreme 45# $445 at Port Supply
Read the two paragraphs carefully and just based on this, which would
you buy?
Gordon

Further up this thread you probably saw my post about Rocna's selective use
of performance criteria to show that 'their anchor is the best'. You
probably also saw Craig's reply, defending his selection of criteria. You
probably also noted that he made some quotes from reports (less
comprehensive than yours above), specifically omitting to mention anything
about the Manson Supreme.

I maintain that there is very little to choose between the various modern
designs - they all perform well, very much better than older designs. I
admire Rocna's PR effort, but I do not like their sly slagging off of
'copies' (who copied whom, I wonder?), their selective quotes, and their
re-arrangment of the magazine's graphs in a way that misleads the public to
believe that the publications concerned in the tests concluded that 'tests
prove Rocna is the best'. None of the magazines made such a conclusion, as
you've clearly pointed out.

They obviously have a big chip on their shoulder about Manson. Their
problem. --
JimB
Google 'jimb sail' or go www.jimbaerselman.f2s.com
Compares Cruise areas of Europe

On 2007-11-06 07:13:18 -0500, "JimB" said:

Further up this thread you probably saw my post about Rocna's selective use
of performance criteria to show that 'their anchor is the best'.

Yeah, I noticed that as well.

FWIW, if they included the aluminum Spade in their "weight vs
performance" graph, Rocna would be a far distant second. I used an
aluminum 80 extensively before our current steel 80. My experience has
been that, other than situations where sheer weight is the determining
factor, the aluminum version performs just as well as the steel one,
and I inadvertently tested it in conditions far outside of it's
expected performance envelope over the years.

Until I see the Rocna tested in a wide variety of bottoms, as has been
the case in the anchors tested by Practical Sailor, it's on the "watch
and see" list. NO anchor has been best in all their tests, but a few
seem to always be in the running.

--
Jere Lull
Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI trips & tips: http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 01:29:32 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:

On 2007-11-06 07:13:18 -0500, "JimB" said:

Further up this thread you probably saw my post about Rocna's selective use
of performance criteria to show that 'their anchor is the best'.

Yeah, I noticed that as well.

FWIW, if they included the aluminum Spade in their "weight vs
performance" graph, Rocna would be a far distant second. I used an
aluminum 80 extensively before our current steel 80. My experience has
been that, other than situations where sheer weight is the determining
factor, the aluminum version performs just as well as the steel one,
and I inadvertently tested it in conditions far outside of it's
expected performance envelope over the years.

Until I see the Rocna tested in a wide variety of bottoms, as has been
the case in the anchors tested by Practical Sailor, it's on the "watch
and see" list. NO anchor has been best in all their tests, but a few
seem to always be in the running.

Had a rather boring day at home and did a bit of web surfing about
anchors. There is considerable name calling and back biting about the
Rocna anchor with at least one individual stating that they lie about
their tests.

Before I leaped at the chance to order a Rocna I think I'd do some
fairly extensive research.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:displayed e-mail
address is a spam trap)