New Generation Anchor

[ebb]

Tony,
To say, in my long
long
long
round about way, I would not rig the ACCO swivel unless I had to.
The 3/8" Crosby Alloy shackle between the anchor and 1/4" HT ACCO chain is adequate for short term anchoring. It is more certain to weather a Craig experienced hurricane with a deep set Supreme. The WLLs are all well above a ton including the anchor.

This is the way out because normally you won't have an oversize link on the ends of your chain rode.
I will go through the pricing process (I'll try 1st Chain on the net) of ordering chain with the oversize because a 7/16" shackle LOOKS a hell of a lot better on the end of a 25# anchor (than a dinky two ton 3/8" A shackle!!)
When you order with the big links I assume that galvanizing is done after the oversize is welded on. It's a custom process.

For general non stormy anchoring out where cycling wind and tide and a hard set anchor can generate knots in chain and line I would put the swivel in.
I would have the CROSBY ALLOY ANCHOR SHACKLE with its pin in the anchor.
Then add the swivel. Then add the chain.
Having that extra shackle means that it is less likely that the swivel will bind.
DON'T RIG THE ACCO SWIVEL TO THE ANCHOR WITH THE FORK. It's easy to imagine a hard set anchor with the rode at a crazy angle yanking on the swivel trying to bend it. Attaching the swivel to another shackle on the anchor shank makes a kind of knuckle. More likely to lead the swivel fairly.
Of course things could still get into a knot when Murphy does the anchoring.

1) Anchor.
2) Crosby alloy anchor shackle - bow in, pin out.
3) G43.

1) Anchor.
2) Crosby alloy anchor shackle - pin in, bow out.
3) Acco Swivel.
4) G43.


imco The Acco Anchor Rode Swivel can use an upgrade.

It's nice enough, but I wouldn't really trust it in a blow.
The embossed markings are ambiguous.
The swivel is not marked well enough to excuse it from the WEAKEST LINK category.
I really want a swivel that will always be rigged to the anchor rode system.
[Clearly, do not use ANY fitting - including a shackle - if it does not have clear embossed markings.
The WLL of any fitting in the rode system should be equal to or better than the chain you are using. The Working Load Limit is key to designing the anchor system.]
IMCO

Peerless Chain please answer.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __
Peerless Chain has not contacted this letter writer.

BUT,
I CANNOT GET THE ACCO RODE SWIVEL TO SWING FREE ON A SINGLE SHACKLE TO THE MANSON SUPREME.
Anchor to anchor shackle - anchor shackle to swivel - swivel to chain.
The Supreme has a wide shank end to accommodate the slide option. This means that even with the swivel attached to a regular shackle on the anchor,

THE ACCO SWIVEL WILL STILL BIND ON THE ANCHOR SHANK

even using the larger 7/16" Alloy shackle.
Somebody clue me in, OK?
I don't see how we can rig the Acco Swivel to the Supreme.
Add another shackle ? Too much garbage on the anchor. I'm at a loss.

The Supreme needs a stretch bow shackle. One that will freely pivot from the top to the bottom of the wide shank.
The goddam anchor maker should supply this special shackle with the anchor when you buy it.
The Manson Supreme has had its detractors - often for the whimsical slide option for pulling the anchor out of rock or coral.

THE REAL PROBLEM WITH THE MANSON SUPREME IS THAT THERE IS NO SHACKLE AVAILABLE THAT CAN FULLY PIVOT THE END OF THE SHANK.
The full pivot should also be done with another shackle or chain attached to the anchor shackle. This means to me that it is possible for kinking or binding to occur at the attachment point of the Suipreme.

I would complain to these guys.
imco

[Chance]

I'm seeking a solution.

Just received my 1/4 HT chain and 3/8 Crosby Forged - Quenched and Tempered, with alloy pin, Hot Dip galvanized with red pin which will not pass through the 1/4 G4 HT galvanized chain I have.

What recommendations are there, where WLL it still taken into consideration?

I don't want to significantly dimenish my overall WLL of the entire achoring system (anchor, shackle, chain, nylon) by placing a weak link into the system.

Help!

PS: Both of Crosby's shackles (G209 and the G-209A), the later being the "alloy" version with double the WLL rating have a pin dimension of .44 inches. It is obvious to me that this is too big for 1/4 HT chain.

[c_amos]

Chance,

I hope you get it worked out, I really do. I said in post 135 on this thread that I saw the same problem. I had a bag of assorted shakles in my 'kit' when I went to put my storm anchor out for the approach of Hurricane Noel while in the Bahamas. Nothing fit except the little 1/4" shakles that looked like they would be at home hanging from an earlobe...

Maybe you can get a local welder to add an oversized link on the end?

Good luck.

I'm seeking a solution.

Just received my 1/4 HT chain and 3/8 Crosby Forged - Quenched and Tempered, with alloy pin, Hot Dip galvanized with red pin which will not pass through the 1/4 G4 HT galvanized chain I have.

What recommendations are there, where WLL it still taken into consideration?

I don't want to significantly dimenish my overall WLL of the entire achoring system (anchor, shackle, chain, nylon) by placing a weak link into the system.

Help!

PS: Both of Crosby's shackles (G209 and the G-209A), the later being the "alloy" version with double the WLL rating have a pin dimension of .44 inches. It is obvious to me that this is too big for 1/4 HT chain.

[ebb]

Acco galv. SHORT LINK ISO WINDLASS G43 (embossed) has an inside width of .41. [from catalog spec.]
My 3/8" Crosby A shackles have an actual pin size of 42.5.
&*%#$*&?:>^$@!!!

There is a 1/4" regular link G43, with the same load specs but (according to a chart on the 1st-chainsupply.com web site) has a .50 inside width. It is self-colored trucker's binding chain that evidently doesn't come galvanized. That figures since galvanized marine anchor chain is calibrated (ISO) for windlass chain gypsies and has a smaller inside diameter (.41).

Embarrassed to say that my 'test' chain must be (by measure) G30.
(Upon closer inspection it is also hallmarked on widely spaced links 'Germany'.)
This is the chain I was going to toss.
The links actually measure inside .45 below the weld.

Acco 1/4" galv. G30 WINDLASS is listed in their catalog with an inside measure of .43.
Acco 1/4" galv. ISO G30 has a .507 inside width.
This 1/2" width in the link is matched by their ungalvanized regular link G43. (from Acco catalog charts.) Doesn't seem correct: I think the 'windlass' G30 is ISO or shorter link.
I'm getting a headache.


[CGEdwards' Crosby G-209-A - with uncolored pins - are the alloy shackles rated twice the WLL of the G-209/S-209 which has the RED PIN. The 3/8" G-209/S-209 is rated at one ton.
This grade has a 5/16", rated at 3/4 ton with a pin diameter of .38. Assume this would fit the 1/4" G43 link.
The G-209-A shackles are not made in 5/16" Maybe they should be.
The alloy probably'd be rated at a ton and a half.]

Look at this:
3/8" G-209 (red) Screw Pin Anchor Shackle - WLL 1 Ton - $6.78.
3/8" G-209A Alloy Screw Pin Anchor Shackle- WLL 2 Ton - $8.90.
They are identical except for the embossing, painted pin and a couple bucks.



We should have shackles that FIT and totally match the WLL of the chain they are used with. Seems like nobody thought of this. Why isn't this the responsibility of the manufacturer?
I measure the pins on the Acco Swivel at .36 (23/64) - just under 3/8". Obviously it fits the 1/4" G43 Acco link.
THIS shows imco that Acco is aware of the SWIVEL SHACKLE PIN and CHAIN LINK width connection.

And in my OPINION
Peerless/Acco should make a dedicated 3/8" Alloy shackle with a slightly narrower diameter pin that would fit their bloody G43 windlass link!
The shackle should match or better the WLL of the G43 link it would be used with. Right?
Their swivel apparently does NOT match the WLL of 1/4" G43 either!

Don't you think Peerless/Acco is aware of these mismatches?


[I feel the same about the Manson Supreme. Mine should have come with a special long shackle (rated at least WLL 3 tons) that pivots completely around the shank of the anchor. Using a normal shackle risks it binding on the shank at some angles of pull. Angles very close to the normal pull angles on the anchor. And that means also that whatever we have connected in the anchor shackle ALSO will bind on the shank of the Supreme.


I hope you all write or call these people.
These are products upon which we bet our lives.

Both of these "problems" should have been addressed by the chain maker
and the anchor maker. It shouldn't be ours.


Don't know what special order big end link chain will cost. Assume the big link on 1/4" chain would be a 3/8" link which is .394 diameter - with a .60 inside D, too small for the honkin 3.3Ton A 1/2" (,62 pin)Crosby but just fine for the 2.5Ton 7/16" with a .51 pin.
Seems they could weld that on there, don't know. 1st Chain Supply is one online supplier. Their offerings do not include an oversize link on 1/4" G43 ($75 per link). We have to buy 1/2 drums (400' at $2.90 at ft.), pails (133') not offered.
Seen prices 2/3s lower on the net. But China is very active in this area, chain and shackles. I'm 'dark and stormy night' paranoid and will stick with NACM specs. For now.
Going to try to find out why 1/4" REGULAR (.50 inside width - just 1mm too small for a 7/16" pin!!!) G43 cannot be galvanized - won't need that oversize link. Maybe it's already available somewhere. I don't plan an electric windlass on Little Gull. But can see a manual one in the future.
Guess 1/4" G43, whatever length (100' = 76#), wouldn't be too difficult to haul up with a fixed chain pawl.

Apropos not being able to use a larger WLL rated shackle:
it is absolutely mind boggling why these chain and shackle manufacturers have to be 1mm to big on pin sizes viz inside link sizes. Plain stupid!
Perfect example of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. There is a blatant safety issue here for mariners and we shouldn't have to downgrade to compromise.
imco

[ebb]

All off the shelf shackles are too short, imco, for the shackle to make a full pivot around the wide shank end of this anchor.
When you attach chain or a fitting like the Acco Swivel to that shackle it is possible that they can bind and take unnatural leads off the anchor if the anchor is set hard.
It is not always going to happen that the bow of the shackle in the anchor will lead fair off at another angle from a straight on pull. It could bind and it's possible imco that if the strain is strong it could bend the shackle or more likely bend the swivel.
Ole salts know this as 'shackle knot' or anchor bind.


I'm convinced that an optional custom LONG BODY bow shackle should be available from Manson for the Manson Supreme - at this juncture my anchor of choice.
It should be long enough so that the bow of the shackle with chain or another fitting attached pivots completely around the head of the shank without knuckling or catching on the anchor.

There is no such shackle in the marketplace.
I have an anchor without a proper shackle.

I've written a snail and email to Steve Mair at Manson in New Zealand.
Unlike Peerless/Acco,
Manson communicates with its customers.

[Chance]

Thanks gents, for the feedback. Ebb, your thorough and well said posts are very appreciated.

This is what I know: It's point less to buy 1/4 HT chain because in order to connect all the components (anchor, chain, nylon rode, etc.) one will end up having to use a shackle that is rated significantly less (WLL) than the chain itself. As we all know, the anchoring system is only as strong as the weakest link, and in this case it's not the chain link, it's the shackle. It all comes down to size restrictions.

So....

Here's what I have decided: I am moving up to 20 feet of 5/16 Hight Test chain. This chain will serve as leader from the plow, and will transition to 150 feet of 1/2 three strand nylon.

5/16 HT has a WLL of 3900 lbs
Crosby G-209A alloy shackle of 4000 lbs
Samson Pro-set premium nylon 3 strand has a strength average of 6300 lbs.

I'm thinking of using the 1/4 HT chain I have with a Fortress, a 5/16 Crosby shackle and keeping this set up for a secondary / back up.

I would have liked to have more than 20 feet of 5/16 HT up in the bow, but the weight is adding up significantly:

Anchor roller: 11 lbs
Anchor: 22 lbs
platform (to be constructed) approx. 15 lbs
Chain: approx. 20 lbs
Nylon: approx. 10 lbs
Bronze deck pipe: Approx. 5 lbs
Fasteners: Approx. 2 lbs
Total: 85 pounds! (all at the exteme forward end)

[c_amos]

Chance,

Don't know if this helps any, but I have about the same set-up, probably a bit more weight in the anchor roller, and I have 55' of 5/16" chain. I noticed no effect from the weight up forward. In the context of a loaded crusing boat I do not think the difference is AS significant. Some talk of 'hobby horsing' with weight at the ends... never saw it aboard our boat....

[ebb]

Craig,
Could say that 5/16" is 1 ton stronger in WLL, (the breaking strength is two tons greater!)
at only 25% more weight: 1/4" at 73# and 5/16" at 103# per 100 feet.
Good numbers.

Let me ask you:
If you were going Pacific for example would you carry chain - and what length?

If you had a long length, how would you handle it? Haul it in with a chain pawl? Manual windlass? How would you let it out?
I'm imagining I'd have to get some leather palm work gloves on, trip the anchor, sit on my butt bracing against the pulpit and try to control its descent.
(Actually, I'd have it rigged somehow for dropping the anchor off the bow from the cockpit. But I'd probably have to haul it in as described,)
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ___________
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ___________
This is a later post (4/11/09)...... so it won't pop up on the main board.

It is confirmed that Peter Smith, maker, inventor (if you must), of the Rocna Anchor HAS SOLD THE BUSINESS (to an unknown buyer). The new owner is indeed having anchors made in China. Evidently they have been experimenting with casting the complicated shape of the Rocna fluke (trying to cut fabrication costs?). But welding or attaching a steel alloy shank to a cast blade is a big problem.
For me, the simpler shape of the Supreme is a big plus and obviously for Manson a simpler fabrication. It is a 'break through' design because of its simplicity.
Practical Sailor, up to its old tricks in anchor testing, has a really annoying 'test' by a"world cruiser" in their Dec08 issue. The guy is said to have "tested his new Supreme in anchorages rated Good for holding." Big red flag!
The guy is prejudiced toward Bruce/Claw/Ray type anchors which he has had a load of experience with. Look at the cruising sites on the internet and that's what you find: guys stuck on their favorite CQRs and Bruces. They are used to handling them, they fit in their bow rollers, they look right. Why would I be influenced by a single report - even if the guy is a "PS contributor"? It's only an opinion (of a "world cruiser") Teeny red flag! Not taking any respect away from the guy - it is the PREMISE that doesn't hold bottom!

[Chance]

Gents,
I have ordered my 20 foot length of 5/16 HT chain and it's in the mail.

I was concerned about the weight accumulation and subsequant "hobby horsing" effect some experience. It appears I have no worries. Now, I'm debating with myself weather I should go with 200 feet of 1/2 nylon vice the 150 foot length. With a typical safe scope payout of 7:1, this would suggest that I'm limited to a depth of no more than approximately 23 feet of water. I know, there are many varibles and that at times a 7:1 is not practical (over crowded anchorage), limited swing room, and at other times this scope would not be sufficient, gale force winds, looming storm, strong thunderhead. These conditions would support a scope of more like 10:1 to better the odds that the anchoring set up will do it's intended job, all else being equal and working correctly.
I don't have the nylon yet, and by the rate at which my refurbishing is going, won't need it anytime soon. Still, I like to plan ahead and dream of when the time will come that I too, can "SWING" on the hook and enjoy!

[ebb]

A good subject. The net cruisers talk about it a lot.
I'm not sure there is a side to lean toward unless I am to be persuaded totally by the weight issue.

A certain length of 5/16", or a couple, certainly solves the WLL "weakest link" problem.
Extreme cruising might require an all chain rode but it may be unnecessary.
(Larry Pardey in the Self-Sufficient Sailor argues for 30' 5/16" BBB and nylon line. His intent is to prevent the rode from from pulling the anchor shank upward. Long scope and kedging.) BUT I'll study what he says - again - soon.

What are the pros and cons of the argument in relation to small cruisers such as the Ariel and Commander?

What is the best line to use and what diameter? EG: Nylon has been seriously called into question because of its elasticity, ease of chafe, and melting under load.

Any credible sites deal with this?
Trustworthy sources?

[Chance]

Ebb,
Good, thought provoking questions. It is my understanding, and by no means am I an expert on the subject, but...
selecting a balance between some chain (a leader for weight to reduce and upward pull on the anchor's shank, to serve as as type of pivoting arm that absorbs some shock, and chafe protection from the sea floor)
Nylon rode's benefits:
1) help manage weight
2) Will absorb some of the shock load and will (by design) stretch a bit (this is a good thing) when hard lurching strains are placed on the anchor system. The key here is assuming a diameter is chosen that is not too big, otherwise we loose the benefit of the stretch effect)

Of course, it's prudent upon the Captain to manage "Chafe" while using nylon.

Also, a bridle assemby is of primary benefit, it aides in centering the anchor rode's line of pull with the steam head fitting as well as splits the load placed on the chafing points. In essence a properly rigged bridle will provide a back up should one side be chafed through and will minimize the bow's tendacy to sway from port to starboard and so forth when the rode comes off of the bow "not" on center line, which virtually impossible anyways with the forestay in the way.

I'm sure there has been "limitless" discussions all over, and articles written about all this, but I can't quote any site specific, sorry.

We mustn't forget that one could conceivable have the "ideal" and "best" anchor system setup and then it all goes to the crab pot so to speak because of improper or unknowledgable deployment, setting and monitoring, etc..

[Bill]

From Scuttlebutt:

ANCHORS AND ANCHORING TECHNIQUES
Choosing an anchor for the 2009 season? Anchors come in a variety of types, Fluke, Claw, CQR, and the Fisherman. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses. This week’s newsletter (http://myboatsgear.com/newsletter/200788.asp) looks at each anchor type and their modern equivalents. We also provide some anchor test data and links to reports. This information will help you pick the right anchor and size! RSS feeds are available at http://myboatsgear.com/mbg/index.asp

[ebb]

I feel that in terms of impartiality the language in above website (myboatsgear) is a proxy for the Mocna anchor. I would not be surprised that the whole piece is written by Peter or Craig Smith as there is a direct put down of the Manson Supreme - and familiar phrases and hype from the Mocna web site. The Smiths have populated a number of websites on the net supporting and advertising their anchor (including this Forum) - many of them imco irrationally and blatantly attacking the Supreme.
Conversely, Manson, to my knowledge, has never attacked the Mocna anchor.

The Mocna anchor business has been sold to new owner.
As I understand it, the anchors are now made in China and the complicated fluke/blade is now cast with the plate shank welded on to that. This is hearsay, but it is also, if true, a serious development with a once promising anchor.

Unsupported opinions are not impartial or trustworthy.

IMCO The website above (myboatsgear) is a disguised and irresponsible advertisement for the Mocna anchor. BEWARE.
I'm NOT saying that there is no good general knowledge about anchors and anchoring here taken from other web sites. I am saying that there is a definite skew toward making the Mocna seem the best choice.



There is no proof or test that has shown the slotted shank of the Supreme causes it to be weak. The slot may be whimsical but the shank and indeed the fluke are both fabricated from a T-1 steel alloy equivalent that has amazing attributes.

[ebb]

This is strictly OPINION:
Abandoning your Mocna anchor to a new owner who would have anchors fabricated, OR cast, OR forged in China is really most unfortunate. Is it possible to put years of sweat and tears into a unique product and then sell the production rights and name without restrictions?

We may never know the story, but it appears to be a tragedy of sorts.
From the first time I viewed the flawed and droll video on the Mocna web site, I felt that something was not quite right. Son Craig on every forum for years acting as a kind of shill for his dad's invention - also added to the bad taste I got (and others too it seems) about the anchor's provenance.

There was perhaps too much eccentricity connected with the product. I'm all for eccentricity - but it has to be transparent and above board. I feel Mocna made mistakes in the way the anchor was promoted on the internet. Being an expensive anchor, maybe sales were souring for them and that is why they sold out.


They were also in the unenviable position of being a protagonist without an adversary, without ever really winning any battles against Manson. I don't think Manson ever legitimized Mocna's puny war by responding.
Manson produces copies of most popular anchors. That's a fact.
On the face of it, that does seem suspicious. However the company produces anchors of every size and weight for the whole southern hemisphere market. Purely business. Have you heard that any of their anchor styles are inferior? Or patent infringements? You might see them as a market force with a steely corporate persona. SO, if you are an itty bitty anchor maker you can be david battling goliath to get sympathy for your case by blogging the internet. Maybe Ahab blogging the white whale is more appropriate.*

Mocna wanted people to think that the Manson Supreme is a copy of the Mocna. By now anybody can see that the fluke concepts are totally different. Roll bars are roll bars - but even they are not copies of one another. Weight placement, balance and shanks different as well. There are still those who post on the forums whose opinions are influenced only by the hype from the Mocna propaganda machine and not by their own examination. Only by testing can the anchors be compared, not by ignorance and biased opinion.

Manson makes anchors. While like other large manufacturers perhaps impersonal, their reputation is solid and uncomplicated.
Did other boat owners get put off by Mocna's negative attitude and just naturally graduated to the Supreme because single flukes with hot roll bars had come of age? Became fashionable. Peter and Craig led me right to the Supreme! And the price was right!

I'm sure the Supreme needs improvement and some upgrading.
But I'll bet the anchor will be around awhile.
It must be particularly special for Manson because it is NOT A COPY. It is Manson's own stand-alone design.


Nor is it improvement on a Spade with a roll bar added.
The Mocna may have gone south.
If it has, that's sad.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______
Later post, just found this...check it out and check me out. You'll have to type it in.

google> Bent Manson supreme - Page 3 - Cruisers & Sailing Forums

The address is one of those that probably won't compute here.
This seems to be a fairly recent series of posts.
No Craig S in this batch.
[But scanning back I see I've footnoted this same Cruising and Sailing Forums site recently. Maybe even the same thread. Memory's going south..]
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________
another long forum:
Type in the google headline> Yachting and Boating World forums Rocna anchors - hard to come by
- gets you on a page where about eight posts in there is the longest post I've seen by Manson defending its rep.
Next page (last page of the thread?) there is a Manson response to the rusted and bent Supreme phenomena. Some testiness in both responses.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________
* [David was a young seaman who believed in a anthropomorphic bearded authority figure who spoke Whinge. David said, "The Lord who delivered me from the claw of Bruce and from the CQR of Simpson, will deliver me from the brand of this Philistine. David took his sling and five smooth Rocknas from the brook and went to fight the goliath Manson....."]
Just for fun, kids.

[c_amos]

The 'new generation' anchors are great, but have done nothing to quell the long standing debate over which one is best.

The truth is anchoring has more to do with proper seamanship then the bit of metal at the end of the rode.

I bought my Manson Supreme in 2006 (IIRC) and have had outstanding service from it.... it has never dragged.... even through a hurricane.

When I bought my Manson, I also looked at the Rocna. Both were then made in New Zealand and were very similar in appearance. I do not doubt that either would have been a good choice (at the time) but the Rocna was more expensive.... and the Manson had Loyds certification so I went with the Manson Supreme.

Over the years, I have followed the discussion and frankly some of the marketing was ugly... it was more mud slinging then fact, and Rocna seemed to be the most active in the slinging... I grew less and less pleased with the marketing.

A while back Rocna moved their production to China, I was skeptical (I know China has produced many questionable products, and would not recommend using Chinese steel in such an important component as my ground tackle.

Some photos surfaced of rusty Rocnas (with apparent galvanization issues) and others of Rocna's with bent shanks (after Rocna reps slammed Manson for much less significant bending).

A third party (excellent poster known as Main Sail) challenged Rocna to test their anchor;s construction... the declined to participate so an off the shelf Rocna was tested against an off the shelf Manson Supreme and....

Well Manson just paid for some independent testing, to see if Rocna could live up to their claims of being superior.

The Manson Challenge To Rocna

"If you would please bring down your anchor, we can test it on our calibrated and certified test jig. We have tested it against ours. We have videoed those tests. However in the interests of posting something that you will not say is made up, I welcome you to come here and we will video your face as we do the tests so the readers can see what eating your words after years of misinformation looks like.

Put up or shut up Craig. Any time you would like to test your anchor we are here. Any time."

Last edited by Maine Sail; 3 Weeks Ago at 09:50 AM.

The tests results are here.

I have long not been a fan of Rocna, but would absolutely not feel comfortable recommending one based on the this and the discussions that have taken place here. (warning, 17 pages long!)