lol Mac give up . . .Originally Posted by ebb
Apparently you don't know Ebb !lol Mac give up . . .
I do get the impression 'the EBB' is a dedicated bloke and won't give up without being totaly satisfied. That's not a bad thing really.
Looking at the whole video I would say the Sarca is not shown as it is not regarded as a serious compeditor. I think it is the 'other new gen anchor' on the chart thing. The Spade probably as it is not as widely known anchor down this way.
The whole video is an hour and a 1/2 so I suspect the lads just put in what they see as the known anchors which are regarded as serious compeditors down this way.
The video on the site could make one think dodgy stuff was afoot but after seeing the whole thing I'm happy to say all anchors were treated exactly the same and as far as 'tests' like this go it was on the straight and level. Yes it is a 'promotional' thing so most would expect a tad of 'padding' or 'truth by omission' which is common practice and quite understandable. As I've mentioned before I would regard the Rocna site as a lot more honest than many others even taking the 'promotional' thing into account.
That PBR (PS) test was so poorly done it does not rate any consideration. read the method and I think the word you will use is 'bizzare'.
The CQR and Claw (bruce knock-off) did not set well beceause thats what they do in real life anyway more than often, this is well known. It was a Bruce knock-off and I suspect more and more they are not as good as the real thing and I also suspect a real one would have done better.
This has been a very interesting thread to follow.
It is always better when one can walk away with new ideas, a better understanding and more knowledge.
But, my question is...should I replace my Bruce anchor? Is it foolish trust it's hold after I have set it, payed out enough scope for the depth and check it periodically to make sure we're not drifting?
How did people anchor out for all of these years without our newest designs?
should I even sleep tonight
Tony you might just as well ask the same question if you lived 2000 years ago:
The bow and arrow still works rather well eh - but that doesn't mean it's the best choice anymore.
Sleep? Depends how the wife/ girlfriend feels
The Bruce and the other more known ones are not 'bad' anchors just things move on and improvements have been made.
I'm sure all will agree that if your anchor has worked well not given you any reason to be worried, why change. If it has been not-setting, letting go or just been a complete pain in the a**e then look at changing.
All the chat about anchors always seems to over look the effect of the rode behind it. You have a good rode and the anchor works better, have a crap rode and even top end anchors will struggle at times.
If I had a Bruce that has not done me wrong, a good rode behind it and I deployed them well, I'd sleep very well.
If a 1960 Morris Oxford (it's a car) gets you from A to B fine why buy a Ferarri? Sure the Ferarri will do it a hell of a lot better but the Oxford will still do it, with some encoragement. When the Oxford packs up look at the Ferarri.
Where EBB I miss him already
Not an African anchor.
The very first vender inside the entrance to the vender's tents was/is (The Strickly Sail boat show is still in progress) Swiss Tech America. I stopped short because the photo displays had three views of the Wasi. Buegel to me. "You don't happen to have one here, do you?" Gene Lamb, the US franchiser of Swiss Tech, looked down at my feet. I was almost standing on a live one.
The first thing you notice is the s.s / titanium metal and how chunky the anchor is. The shank of this small (8kg, 18#) looked like it was between 3/4 and 7/8" thick.
What is not apparent in any of the photos is what the blade is like. The blade is the same thickness as the shank!!! - with a, let's say 120 degree chamfer underneath on the pointy sides of the triangle blade. The blade is dead flat. It is not hard to imagine this anchor slicing STRAIGHT into any bottom.
The 8kg anchor at the show is not listed in the catalog product line on the web site, which starts at 11kg or about 25#. I haven't had time to read up on this, but it would seem more than adequate for the Ariel. The anchor and its swivel and chain are sold as a system and is very expensive. Strangely, in the catalog, it is given the same amount of space and importance as a cup holder and the boat hooks.
I think the 18kg, 31# would make a fantastic versatile primary anchor capable of penetrating 'mud shale clay gravel volcanic rock and grass.' The anchor looks incredibly strong (hmmm, wonder about the shank to blade weld?) and incredibly capable of PENETRATING a wide variety of bottoms. There are NO curves that imco would keep this anchor from setting deeper as the stress on the rode increases. I'm persuaded this anchor will not 'pop' out of a set once dug in. NO WAY.
[But lets add: that s.s is much more slippery than galvanized and imco more likely to slip. slice. chisel. in deeper.]
Gene allowed that a suitable shackle (perhaps a Suncor straight D with a no snag pin) would do better for American buyers of the Wasi because some swivels sold here have been returned bent. Evidently the manufacturer cannot understand how the Yanks are bending (but not breaking) the swivel. Actually it looks pretty easy to me! The Powerball has a very slender neck. The Powerball and a chainhook are available (sans anchor and chain) thru other vendors like Perko. The chain to anchor connector is a very hot issue.
Gene Lamb told me that he was the sole importer of the Wasi and that it was unavailable in galvanized. Both statements seem to be a stretch. because there is an outfit called inter-yacht.com in NC that sells galvanized at a more reasonable price. Gene also said that Chuck Hawley of West Marine has just completed a new test of anchors that included the Wasi/Buegel. What other usual suspects were included is unknown, so is when the results will be made public. If anyone is interested in the (unsophisticated, as craigsmith calls it) Wasi/Buegel in galvanized I would research to find out if the inter-yacht hook is some sort of a knockoff.
I found that comment of craigsmith's on the SSCA forum. What gets me is how disingenuous (false candor) it is to call the Buegel unsophisticated. In its simplicity and elegance it is extremely sophisticated. Much more so than Peter's knockoff of the design with the added doodahs that the Rocna represents. Falsely sophisticated, perhaps? For instance, putting the bevels on the underside of the Buegel blade is supremely smart, and very sharp.
__________________________________________________ _____________________________
P.S. tests.
1998 -wet packed sand - "The Bruce, in many conditions, is a ferocious setting anchor....In tests by other groups. the Bruce was not as good at ultimate holding power." Bruce, "clear winner".
Jan '99 - sand - Spade & Bulwagga star.
Dec '99 - mud - Barnacle, CQR
Jan '01 - muddy sand - included a 140 degree veer - Bruce, Fortress, Supermax.
Jan '02 - sandy mud - First time with powerboat (twin 90hp OBs) - Quickset best but "popped out at 600# then reset to 780#"
'03 - soft sand on hard sand - set with power boat then rodes led to winch on shore, observed by diver....
google: 03anchor
You take it from there. The WASI clearly will set and set deeper than the competition. It suffers from being extremely expensive in the US, being marketed as a system, and also rather awkwardly marketed.
Maybe craigsmith could get a job over there. They could use some slick marketing. And could see if the Roc will set in Med grass.
Last edited by ebb; 04-21-2006 at 10:45 AM.
Most of us have no idea what the different types of anchors look like, reccommended sizes and cost.
Its very confusing
maybe somebody could do a cost comparison. I started to, but its difficult . Different sizes and materials.
Post any corrections or additions and I'll incorporate them
Rocna
22 lbs
$320
33 lbs
$394
http://www.rocna.com/home.php?region=na
http://www.suncoastmarine.ca/pricelist.html
(prices in Canadian $)
Last edited by commanderpete; 04-22-2006 at 03:08 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote