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

In article . com,
Bob wrote:

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 ...

It does look that the Rocna is one of the better anchor designs.

Doe anyone know how it behaves on grounds with sea grass?

Most trouble for not setting with my current anchor stem from the fact
that as soon as it drags, it will fill up with sea grass and not hold at
all.

TIA

Marc

--
remove bye and from mercial to get valid e-mail
http://www.heusser.com

Bob wrote in news:1193935854.883686.98280
@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com:

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

I actually carry a Fortress FX-23 as another spare anchor (I carry 2
spares). I very much like the Fortress, particularly as it's easy to
deploy in a dinghy and light weight. I've always been impressed with it's
holding ability, especially in seagrass bottoms where the CQR had a hard
time getting set. I must admit I've never used it in mud.

The biggest problem that I've had with the Fortress is the tines getting
clogged up with material and it dragging (or it dragged and got clogged up
while dragging). I've regularly retrieved it and had stuff stuck between
the tines and the shank.

I can't tell you which is better, but the Rocna fits well in my existing
bow roller and for some reason gives me a better feeling.

-- Geoff
www.GeoffSchultz.org

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 09:50:54 -0700, Bob wrote:

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).

There's a couple of reasons and they apply equally to the Spade and a
few others of this type. Danforth type anchors, including the
Fortress, have great holding power if they are well set in favorable
conditions, typically firm mud or sand. They also have a few notable
weaknesses however: Unfavorable bottoms like grassy or rocky; and even
more important, the ability to get down through the water and set in a
boat that is moving, or in strongly moving current. Danforth type
anchors will plane like a water skiier if you need to deploy them from
a moving boat. I've seen it happen and it convinced me to buy a CQR
at the time, many years ago. Danforth types also have an unfortunate
habit of fouling a fluke on their own rode with a directional shift,
or somtimes on a shell or rock which prevents the flukes from pivoting
to the proper angle.

As a result I've come to view Spades, Rocnas, etc. as better all
around anchors but I still carry a Danforth for special circumstances
where I need something lighter light weight.

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:34:51 +0100, Marc Heusser
d wrote:

Most trouble for not setting with my current anchor stem from the fact
that as soon as it drags, it will fill up with sea grass and not hold at
all.

Yes, you need an anchor that quickly penetrates through the grass into
the underlying bottom. The longer that it takes to set, the worse it
becomes.

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

I'm one of the people who gave glowing support on how well my Rocna
copy (Manson Supreme) has been doing for us. It's a great anchor.
That being said, it let me down while trying to anchor in an area with
a loose sandy bottom. I carry a big danforth (35H) for sandy or soupy
mud bottoms. I also carry a CQR. So while I still think the Rocna
type anchor is the best anchor on my boat, it's important in my
opinion to have more than "one wrench" in the tool box if you have
room in your boat. If I could only carry one anchor, the Rocna type
anchor would be at the top of my list.

Bob wrote in news:1193935854.883686.98280
@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com:

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


I feel like I'm almost in danger of be accused of being a rep for Rocna
(believe me, I'm not), but I literally just got this unsolicited e-mail
from a friend who bought a Rocna based upon recommendation from me. We
haven't talked in quite a while, and this was quite timely for this
discussion. He has a 53' Swan and was replacing a CQR. Anyhow, here's the
e-mail:

------------
Hey Geoff,

[clip of unrelated/personal stuff]

Chose to go with heavy chain of similar length as previously installed
(135' vs 120' previous 12mm) and added 135' of rode matched to load
capabilities of the chain (1' braid). Worked very well with the Rocna this
summer in numerous spots that the plow was absolutely ineffective. Actually
saw a bottom sample from Cuttyhunk for the first time ever (probably
dropped a plow in Cutty 3-4 times per year for last 15 years and never
penetrated the grass). Grabbed rock in a few remote anchorages East of
Schoodic Pen.

Rocna has absolutely exceeded my expectations and has availed me many very
comfortable nights sleep while the wind was blowing hard.

Thanks for the recommendation. it's one of very few marine products that I
have found to be fairly priced and built and designed to exceed my hopes.

Regards to you and Sue,
E
------------

-- Geoff
www.GeoffSchultz.org

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

On Nov 2, 5:50 am, Bob wrote:
Hi All:

All the talk about theRocnaanchor started me reading and looking.
There are some very compelling data theRocnasets 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
theRocnainstead of an anchor design specifically for such
conditions; Fortress FX series. In other words, Fortress FX orRocna?
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

Danforth types are not general purpose anchors and have no place as
the primary type on any larger boat. They hold well in one direction,
if well set, but suffer from a number of other problems.

Their advantages, particularly the Fortress, are in stowability and a
fairly high performance-to-weight ratio.

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/