Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 1, 9:50 am, Bob wrote:
Hi All: All the talk about the Rocna anchor started me reading and looking. There are some very compelling data the Rocna sets fast and holds well. However, Ive noticed that all the tests Ive seen were all similar sand type bottoms. Here is my question: If anchoring in sand bottoms (hard, loose, sand/mud) why would I chose the Rocna instead of an anchor design specifically for such conditions; Fortress FX series. In other words, Fortress FX or Rocna? Which holds best in sand or mud bottoms? Or is the Rocnca's appeal that it holds adequately in a variety of bottoms? Say, the better crescent wrench (adjustable spanner for you Limeys). bob FYI- While cruising about 10 years ago in mexico, I had a fellow cruiser / scuba diver tell me he was always finding Fortress anchors on the bottom with broken shanks -- that they held fine. However the shank is brittle when pulled sideways or twisted and breaks. He would not use one for that reason. He had no vested interest in any anchor brand at all. Greg |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2007-11-02 16:52:35 -0400, thudbranch said:
FYI- While cruising about 10 years ago in mexico, I had a fellow cruiser / scuba diver tell me he was always finding Fortress anchors on the bottom with broken shanks -- that they held fine. However the shank is brittle when pulled sideways or twisted and breaks. He would not use one for that reason. He had no vested interest in any anchor brand at all. That *is* a problem with that style of anchor. Even if they don't break, bending the shank can make the anchor less useful. Primary problem for me is how easily I've tripped ours out by a wind shift wrapping the rode around the bar. The modern designs avoid that frailty. Another problem is when they get set deeply in the Chesapeake mud. Any time we got hit by solid wind, much less a squall, it could take a very long time to get it out in the morning. -- 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/ |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 05:47:24 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:
Another problem is when they get set deeply in the Chesapeake mud. Any time we got hit by solid wind, much less a squall, it could take a very long time to get it out in the morning. I know the feeling but it's actually a good problem to have. |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 3, 6:13 am, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 05:47:24 GMT, Jere Lull wrote: Another problem is when they get set deeply in the Chesapeake mud. Any time we got hit by solid wind, much less a squall, it could take a very long time to get it out in the morning. I know the feeling but it's actually a good problem to have. Sounds like the kinda problem Skip needs. Bob |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2007-11-03 10:13:50 -0400, Wayne.B said:
On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 05:47:24 GMT, Jere Lull wrote: Another problem is when they get set deeply in the Chesapeake mud. Any time we got hit by solid wind, much less a squall, it could take a very long time to get it out in the morning. I know the feeling but it's actually a good problem to have. I used to think so, or more properly I was worried that the Spade came out too easily, but though both anchors have about the same area and "dive" about the same depth (sometimes several feet into the mud), it seems the Spade rotates around it's "tail" and presents a smaller area as it's being pulled up. Though I haven't done side-by-side tests, I believe the Spade's sharp point penetrates faster and easier, so it's usually deeper than the Danforth would be. -- 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/ |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 17:49:50 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:
I believe the Spade's sharp point penetrates faster and easier, so it's usually deeper than the Danforth would be. Probably so, ours usually comes up with a huge mud ball on it, probably weighing more than the anchor itself. We've got a 1 hp generator driven high pressure wash down pump and it still takes several minutes to clean the anchor off when it has been well dug in. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Experience with Rocna anchor ? | Cruising | |||
Fortress anchor | ASA | |||
Fortress Anchors | General | |||
Looking for an anchor that I can store disassembled - other than Fortress? | Cruising | |||
WTB: 44# Bruce or FX-37 Fortress Anchor. S. Florida | Cruising |