+ Reply to Thread
Page 12 of 15 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 213

Thread: New Generation Anchor

  1. #166
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    Limp Rocna and The Fabrication Ultimatum

    That is an amazing photo. Also a very weird awkward anchor roller.
    When I was on the hype trail, discovered both anchor makers made statements that they used essentially the same steel alloy for their shanks.
    To see the Rocna shank bent like a noodle we miught suspect mild steel was used. This is just as revealing as the actual mechanical face off test. Don't believe the T-1 steel that Manson says their shank is made from can be bent like that (T-1 is used to make backhoe buckets).
    It probably takes an idiot on a windlass and the anchor caught in something immovable on the bottom to make it happen.
    But it seems from the face-off metal testing that the conclusion is that Rocna is plainly NOT constructed with equal materials to the Manson Supreme. I accept that.

    From the tension photos of the broken anchors it does look like shanks were not subjected to sideways bend tests. That would be interesting and more conclusive.

    SHANK TO FLUKE CONNECTION.
    Focused my personal fears on the shank-to-fluke WELD on both anchors. The Rocna (IF THE SHANK IS ACTUALLY WELDED AND WHAT WE SEE IN THE PHOTO IS NOT A SINGLE CASTING) has a beautiful weld bead along the seam between shank and fluke. And that looks like that weld survived, didn't crack, from whatever SIDE force was used to pretzel the shank.

    My off-the-shelf Manson Supreme - along the same BUTT WELDED seam - has a series of three beads welded on top of one another on each side. One side of the shank looks very pretty. The other side doesn't - it's sort of flat and might even be missing a bead....so I'll always wonder about the consequences when hooked off a lee shore in hurricane Harriet.

    It seems that the machine test is merely a kind of stretch test, often done with metals. I'd like to see how it was set up in the machine.
    Bending tests are obviously just as important if not more important. And definitely I'd want to see high stress put on that shank to fluke weld. That would get my attention. Call it the Fabrication Ultimatum.
    I like to see a test that tries to puill the shank off the fluke to test that weld!
    There needs to be an accompaning VIDEO of the demonstration. Pix of broken anchors are not good enough.

    As far as it goes,
    MANSON DID NOT GO ALL THE WAY
    with the Rocna challenge testing. As a stand alone comparrison it is merely a gimmick.

    Nothing has been proven.
    Imco has always been that the shank should be brought thru a forged mortise in the fluke (The Spade does this on their take apart) and WELDED TOP AND BOTTOM to the blade.

    THAT will convince me that the weld would never let the shank separate from the fluke!!!
    Even if one or the other, or both, got twisted.
    Last edited by ebb; 09-12-2011 at 08:22 AM.

  2. #167
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    Rocna Slammed

    Practical Sailor, Sept, 2011,
    has a page and a half "Product Update" titled: " West Marine Issues Rocna Spec Notice".

    (what follows is my opinion on the subject)
    This article details Rocna CEO Steve Bambury trying to bamboozle his and his company's way out of what appears to be a deliberate down grading of the alloys used to construct the WHOLE RANGE OF ROCNA ANCHORS. This includes misrepresenting alloys advertised on their internet site. [have heard the website has since been scrubbed] Stainless are not talked about here. Just Rocna's in a "feyre cloke" of zinc.

    Quote from the article:
    "According to Bambury, Rocna recently learned that a 'small portion' of anchors manufactured in China during the first quarter of 2010 were made 'using a shank steel with a reduced specification.'
    'We know that less than 300 anchors ranging in sizes from 9 to 330 pounds.' Bambury told PS. 'None of the 33-pound models were sent to North Amorica and can be ruled out.' He said there is no way to identify the anchors with the reduced specifications."
    9 to 330 pounds is the whole Rocna range.

    According to PS, quoting an independant contractor overseeing Rocna's China production, the lower grade shafts began appearing in 2008 when Rocna moved its manufacturing from Canada and New Zealand to China.

    WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
    This means there isn't a single Rocna anchor in the marketplace, off the shelf, on the floor in a West Marine store that you can trust your life to.
    Or, for that matter, off the bow of a cruiser. You might be OK if you bought a Rocna 5 years ago?

    Here, in the quote above, you have that first Bambury statement in the PS article..... which says it all.
    Realize that each anchor in the range from 9 to 330 pounds has a different shank thickness. Don't know for sure, of course, but that has to be a fair assumption. BUT that does mean that a lot of different thicknesses of plate for this range of model sizes were made with the mild steel alloy. If you make a lot of anchors, that is a lot of material you must have on site to cut a run of shaft blanks from. THAT is not a MISTAKE. That is deliberate intent.

    And will Bambury assure that the rest of the anchor, the fluke, is not flukey as well? Made with another downgraded compromise.
    Who is getting REDUCED here?
    A bunch of sailors whose lives hang on a dependable hook.

    Bambury Rocna MUST RECALL EVERY ROCNA FORGERY they have made since moving to China.
    West Marine (which seems always to have some problem or other) by making this deception public will have difficulty owning up to their return policy, how far back will they go? But there are a number of walking dead out there who will always be satisfied with cartoon anchors.

    Why would anybody do this to a company? Bankrupt its infered reputation? Unbelievable.
    This tragedy is not just a matter of a few plates finding their way onto the factory's receiving dock. This has to be sabatage, pure and simple. Bambury's quote above is disingenuous and probably a complete fiction.
    No trust will be given to ANY Rocna anchor again.
    How real is it that the CEO just 'recently learned' of the skewed specifications of his business' ONE product?
    AND that only a "small portion" of counterfeit anchors made it to the marketplace?


    Would I buy this company's foule pyg?

    What's in a name? [The Manson Supremacy.]
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________
    I will never bye the pyg in the poke.
    Theres many a foule pyg in a feyre cloke.

    (The Phrase Finder) John Heywood, Proverbes and Epigrammes 1555-60
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______
    s/v Faith heads up a long discussion on this subject on the sailfar.net site
    Last edited by ebb; 09-19-2011 at 05:38 PM.

  3. #168
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    The Rocna Identity

    ARE THERE ANY VISIBLE DIFERENCES BETWEEN NEW ZEALAND AND CHINA MADE ROCNA'S?

    There must be SOME obvious manufacturing differences (aside from alloy content) between Smith & Son New Zealand/Canada Rocna's and the present day Bambury made-in-China anchors. (The obvious difference is the china cast fluke. But does every china Rocna have a cast fluke?)

    Owners of Rocna's could examine their hooks for any telltales in manufacturing that are obvious to anybody that will help identify the counterfeits. They are sure to start appearing at parking lot flea markets and garage sales. And maybe in marine stores without pedigree. CAVEAT EMPTOR

    AND SHOW US THE SIGNS. And post forums on the subject.

    Maybe West Marine and other vendors - and publications like Practical Sailor and other marine magazines will take notice as well - identify the differences for us - and PUBLISH them.
    [yeah, ryeet, watch these guys fall all over themselves clueing us in!]



    GALVANIZING is a technical art form.
    It is possible that the hot dip was also compromised on the fraudulent Rocna's and is obvious as well.
    Chipping of the zinc, rust appearing in the shackle wear area, patina rust, rust at the welds, etc.
    Could very well be that if your Rocna has a problem with its galvanize it probably is China made.
    Good galvanizing lasts forever!
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________



    Bambury ROCNA
    has been marketing a 6 and a 9 pound "fisherman anchor" which has a DIRECT COPY OF THE MANSON SLIDE SHANK.
    At first glance it is an exact copy of the Manson shank - but in a dogleg style. How doya like dem pyges?

    Guess something as blatant as this is not so much an attempt to horn in on the Manson design but is an attempt to take business away from Sarca who FIRST introduced commercial sliding shank anchors aimed primarily at the small boat inshore fisherman.
    Who can forget those endless Craig Smith posts (and very elaborate illustrated put-down articles by Peter Smith) attempting to ridicule Manson and Sarca for their shackle riding shanks?
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______
    You can't cheat an honest man. Never give a sucker an even break, or smarten up a chump. Otis Criblecoblis
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______


    SARCA
    You can find a youtube of Rex Francis at a 2010 boat show extolling the virtues of a hoopless, slideless,
    squashed Ex-cell Sarca
    that for all the world looks exactly like an improvisation of a dogleg DELTA plow.
    It seems to be aimed at the flaunt-your-jammy-anchor-on-the-bow-roller crowd.

    Francis has also produced some SUV/tractor anchor pulling Utube demos that show anchors being dragged for distance in sand. These pulls are essentially horizontal and show the anchors making gopher-like furrows. Supreme's and Rocna's make a disturbed and obvious furrow while the more recognizable cage-style Sarca's tunnel a little deeper, visually disturb the sand surface less - and purport to take more pounds of pull because of their deeper set. But still are obviously dragable - and, one would suppose, also doing an excellent job amalgamating the tunnel ecosystem.
    There is more flimflam than science in this kind of stuff.

    Best of luck to Rex Francis who is and still is imco a unique innovator and inventor. Thanks for his input here on this Forum.
    (In the past Sarca anchors were all deliberately made with mild steel. Don't know if this is still the case with his EX-CEL or one absolutely huge 'cage' Sarca I found on the web.)
    Last edited by ebb; 10-06-2011 at 04:15 PM.

  4. #169
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    no smith feed back yet

    petersmith.net.nz
    Peter Smith's website has NO MENTION OF THE ROCNA ANCHOR SWINDLE.
    [PracticalSailor article implies the evidence was evident in 2008.]

    craigsmith is alive and, well, still posting on ybw.com
    There are posts from the end of Feb this year, 2011.

    Couldn't stand all his blather - but you'll be happy to read he is up to his usual ways, this time it looks like he takes aim at the Francis SARCA pull tests. I have no problem with that - but the least of craigsmith insinuations is calling those Utube videos a "scam."
    Scam is not the right word. Scam implies intent. I don't believe Francis is a dishonest man. The videos are not well thought out as convincing presentations of a superior product - if indeed superior product is what a SARCA is.
    Any sailor/cruiser is going to take exception to the demos.
    They are BS.
    And so is the craigsmith maligning of rexfrancis - at the same time MOCK ROCNA'S are being cranked out in china.

    The problem is that because the comparisons are at least as stupid and biased as the stupid and biased 'tests' on the Rocna site,
    it calls the product being boosted into question. Double (or Triple) jeopardy, wouldn't you say?

    Why fake anything if you have a superior product?

    The problem is that some boat owners will take the demonstrations seriously.

    Another way of seeing these Francis SARCA demos
    might be to take these videos as making fun
    of all the other half-fast SUV tests we've seen and make fun of.

    The problem is the missing little smiley face that we need to clue us in to what attitude to take!


    Just remember the LONGER IT TAKES for the principals here to PUBLICALLY admit that every ROCNA anchor of the last THREE YEARS is a
    FORGERY
    the more likely somebody by buying a new china ROCNA will have a serious episode with it that could cost them their boat
    or their lives.
    There must be thousands who bought BOGUS BAMBURY ROCNAS.

    ARE YOU SERIOUSLY EVER GOING TO TRUST A ROCNA?
    I think Bernie Madodff is the real brains behind this deal...
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________________
    for R.F.
    I must create a system or be enslaved by another man's.
    I will not reason and compare, my business is to create. Will Blake, inventor 1757/1827
    Last edited by ebb; 09-27-2011 at 01:22 AM.

  5. #170
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    Somewhere on the Rocna.com site you'll find the WMupdate.

    Cape Dory Boats - View topic - Rocna Anchors Situation
    That's a google.
    At the moment the furor over the Rocna anchor deception is being aired only on forums and discussion sites.
    With the laudable exception of West Marine who have sent postcards to customers about the situation and
    the exception of Practical Sailor who have gone into the deception in some revealing depth and detail.
    Reported in their Sept 2011 issue.
    The Cape Dory site has a lead into the www.rocna.com/WMupdate on the Rocna Anchor home site.
    It is titled by the writer as "UPDATE FOR WEST MARINE CUSTOMERS."
    (Visited a few other vendors, including Azure, none make mention of the compromised anchors.)

    IN THE ABOVE STATEMENT
    Roncna says, quote: "the notification you received from West Marine is not a product recall. Neither Rocna nor West Marine have issued a product recall on any Rocna anchors."
    Rocna goes on to say, "our manufacturing specifications have evolved over time, primarily to reflect material locally available...
    "We have since updated this website content and we sincerely apologize...."
    "The exact materials used are part of the proprietary intellectual property in our production specifications. Rest assured...."

    "While the materials used to make the Rocna have evolved, our functional specification has remained the same throughout."
    Rocnas "meet or exceed RINA's Super High Holding Power (SHHP) classification requirements."

    This last bit has since been proven to be a lie in the Manson Destruction Challenge. Unanswered by Rocna.
    There are NO tests, independantly conducted or otherwise, that can be said to prove the strength of an anchor if that anchor was supplied by the manufacturer for the test.
    What anchor was it that was used in the D.M.Standen Ltd destruction test mentioned at the end of the Update piece?
    Upshot, what Rocna is saying is that
    ROCNA INTENDS TO CONTINUE MAKING ANCHORS AND DOING BUSINESS AS THEY HAVE BEEN -
    with no intention of making any changes whatsoever.
    That leads us to understand, I would think, that the anchors will "evolve" steadily into worse and worser Bambury Rocna's.

    Watch it!
    That mealy-mouthed garbage quoted above
    matches exactly the mealy "locally available" material they used to make the Rocna on the end of your warp.

    OK, Suppose you got your chain from an outfit that published chain specs like that unconscionable trash above:

    'WE MANUFACTURE CHAIN WITH EVOLVED MATERIAL THAT'S AVAILABLE LOCALLY - G-20, G-WHIZZ, WHATEVER.....
    IT'S OUR SECRET PROPRIETARY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.
    REST ASSURED, YOU DON'T HAVE NO STINKING RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT ALLOY OUR CHAIN IS MADE WITH.
    TRUST US,
    YOU'RE TOO STUPID TO COMPREHEND THE SPECS ANYWAY.

    Golly, Miss Molly, gotta get me one of them rockin NEW DEGENERATE ANCHORS !


    Rest assured "Rock Solid" Rocna is sinking like a rock.
    Last edited by ebb; 11-23-2011 at 11:41 AM.

  6. #171
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    Thurs. 29 Sept 2011 - Rocna Anchors acquired by Canada Metal Pacific

    Probably better you go if interested to sailnet
    google> Rocna Anchors Has Been Sold !!!
    where the boys in the club there already have four pages of posts going.

    CMP is/was primarily a contract die-casting manufactury of non-ferrous products - like marine anodes.
    They also sell the ususal selection of "Engineered in Canada" (but not made in Canada) marine chain* that is aimed at the pleasure boating industry.
    There is no indication that that chain is not made in China. Wherever.
    Because the chain product range is limited to the recreation boat industry imco that is the case.

    (Primarily anode makers under the rubric 'Martyr', they are new to the chain business -2010 - the CMP chain is unsupported by any literature. And new to the anchor business 2011. In 2004 they opened an anode factory in Nangbo China - unknown if they closed their home base in Canada.)
    CMP says that Rocna recreation anchors will continue to be made in China.
    In fact this Vancouver company may just be the same old China rice-straw man with a different ID badge.

    Peter Smith evidently is back on board - if ever he wasn't.
    This gives me zero confidence.
    Bambury is out? But even that is not evident.
    No statements. It's all subterfuge and cover up.
    Everything about this drama is suspicious - even if I want to believe in good news and positive developments, it is probably a lie.

    As far as I FEEL about this, nothing has changed. It's nearly always has been about BAD ATTITUDE this company produced together with its product.
    The Rocna name is beyond redemption.

    [Later EDIT 9/30/11]
    ybw.com
    Rocna Anchors Acquired by Canada Metal Pacific [go to Forums, find 'Scuttlebut', scroll to title.]
    for ten pages more (and counting) on this subject from the Brit perspective. Where major players appear in disquise (and thereby continue to promote Rocna's bad breath) like CMP has a spokesposter on the forum - also other spokespersons for the company who swear they are not CraigSmith. Much maligned Grant King (in the role of whistle blower) is present. Lively - but cons (negative on Rocna and its methods) still outweigh the pros considerably.

    Appears to me that all along the company never has changed hands at all. There never has been a clear statement by any entity. And if there are what appear to be credible statements, as on the ybm.com forum, the talkers masquerade and peek-a-boo. Same players up to the same tricks, looks like to me. Why use a forum to clear Rocna's name? And do that pretending to be something you're not?
    It is as if every effort is made to show that Ronco chinese anchors really are something they are not. Down graded anchors disquised to look like and marketed as real ones.
    I'll bet you that
    Steve Bambury CEO is merely a Rocna employee who screwed up
    (to my knowledge he hasn't been keelhauled yet)
    when too many bent shanks showed up and pissed West Marine off
    - and Rocna wouldn't own up to their trying to keep from public record bad specification changes that Peter Smith (one poster says) supposedly went along with. Or deliberately signed off on. Who the hell knows???


    [CMP is not, will not be, the manufacturer of the Rocna - nor is CMP imco the manufacturer of the chain they sell.*
    They contract with a third party, usually secret, supplier whose business is to produce name brand products. Walmart, Sears, Trader Joes, they all do this these days.
    As does the current cosmetic Rocna.
    If that factory is in China you have NO control over the content of the product.
    No accountability, No codes or standards need apply. Just read Rocna's statements of intent.
    Brand name china products have a long history of some turning out dangerous, contaminated, badly made, and imco are produced without regard for employees or the environment. If Rocna had remained in New Zealand they would be 'thriving on excellence and innovation.' Not foundering on the brink of oblivion.]
    This statement I have bracketed in this later EDIT was said without understanding who or what CMP Global is. There is, however, no way of my knowing how or what products are made by CMP in China. Company literature and announcements are full of pumped up language and half truths and omissions that put on a best and least controversial mask.
    If I was a Kiwi in need of a decent anchor, I would on principle alone NOT own a china Rocna.

    pfftoo!
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________
    *stick with Peerless and Campbell.
    I do not know that this is a fact. It is just my feeling given the climate of present Rocna decision making that they are committed to this self-destructive route.

    EDIT (10/1/11): Practical Sailor Oct 2011 arrived with no followthru on the West Marine non-recall of Rocna anchors, investigated and published in their Sept. issue.
    Last edited by ebb; 11-23-2011 at 11:46 AM.

  7. #172
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    A Second Wind for Rocna

    new thread on cruisersforum.com
    You must check out page three of the thread.


    [CMP has yet to make a statement of its own on Rocna.
    They have used third party methods to talk with us the consumer.
    Yachting Monthy supposedly says that CMP will take back and make right any Rocna worldwide.
    Sounds good, eh? But it doesn't come from the horse's mouth.
    Probably protecting themselves from liability. Filtering through the press means you can deny or be misquoted.
    YOU are responsible for the return, not CMP. Not Rocna.]

    The Peter Smith letter reproduced on the cruisersforum thread proves to me what I have suspected all along.
    THIS ROCNA DRAMA IS A SINGLE CHAIN OF EVENTS.

    Peter Smith and Craig Smith are part and parcel with the newest name change.

    Peter Smithness and Craig Smithness is permanently part of the Rocna anchor business.


    If CMP is real and not a china straw man for a china factory that is not libel for the products they make, are not subject to western metal standards and codes, then the anchor might be stopped from its downward spiral. That would be extraordinary and unlikely because I believe that THIS has been the anchor's destiny from its outset. That bad smell seems always to have stuck to this product.

    Every anchor that the china factory makes must be tested.
    Every anchor smallest to the heaviest.
    That includes every Manson lookalike the Nangbo factory is making under the Rocna label.

    They must prove that the cast fluke is 100% connected to the plate shank.
    They must permit third party confirmation that the alloys they say they are making the anchors with are actually being used to make those anchors.
    Unannounced inspections as is done with third world nuclear installations.


    Both Peter Smith and Craig Smith should be severed from the manufacturing and promotional functions of the "new owner." They can blog all they want to. But because of the sleaze they have contributed to the anchor's name, they should be divorced from any connection, including advisory, to the anchor.
    I really don't believe that CMP in their relationship with Rocna are in any way separate from the Smiths.

    CMP ought to retire the Rocna brand name and come up with a new one.
    How about Ancor? (Even backwards there's something missing in that name too!)

    THAT won't happen. They depend on our short memory and tendency to forgive. And, if not continually stimulated, our tendancy to quickly forget.
    They depend on a wide global market that isn't exposed to, never heard about, has been censored from this deliberate fraud.
    A bad anchor will result some day in a bad accident. Why encourage Rocna in this endeavor?
    Right! It's the victim who is to blame for "improper deployment of his anchor."
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______________
    CMP is a 120 year old company that is in the nonferrous metals business, foundry and casting.
    They have a couple of product lines that have their own web pages. Martyr brand anodes: Zinc for salt water and magnesium and aluminum anodes for sweet water - they advertise that the Mg and Al anodes are environmentally free of cadmium. CMP for 20 years has been in the autopilot business with two product lines: Octopus Autopilot Drive Systems and Intellisteer.
    That is basicaly it.
    They have added as recently as 2010 a line of 6 styles of chain (most in 1/4' to 1/2" and mm sizes) aimed at the same boat market.
    So the current repeatable announcement that they have acquired the licence to market Rocna and that the anchor will compliment the chain which is sold under their CMP Global label makes some risky sense. According to one forum poster who says he bought some CMP 5/16" chain in Ft Lauderdale, he had the galvanizing fail, chip off.

    CMP Global chain is advertised as "ISO-9001 Quality Assurance - Exceeds Industry Standards - Engineered in Canada - Proof Tested." Impressed???
    Make what you will of those words.
    "ISO-9001 does not specify requirements for the goods and services you are purchasing. That is up to you to define by making clear your own needs and expectations for the product. A statement of conformity to ISO-9001 should not, however, be considered as a substitute for a declaration or statement of PRODUCT conformity."
    (Above quote from the ISO = International Organisation for Standardization)
    What you want when buying chain is: DOT Final Rule WLL - NACM Chain Specs. - Fed Specs RR-C-271E - ASTM / ANSI numbers. Each chain has its own spec numbers: For example: GMP Global sells ISOG43 HT Windlass Chain, yet the chain description ends with the suggestion that you call to find out what the maunfacturer's numbers are for the chain you are ordering. I've found only ONE internet RV(!) supply in the east coast US that admits to selling CMP chain. Could be I'm tired of trying how to find the stuff.
    ISO Quality Assurances are merely promises.
    Is CMP a big enough sponge to suck back what Rocna stole from the public?

    Just what will the Assurances be that accompany the new new new generation Rocna?
    Will they be OUR ASSURANCES?
    HOW DO WE MAKE CLEAR OUR "OWN NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS"??? I would like THAT made clear!
    We might be able to trust these people.
    It seems, on the face of it, that Peter Smith just in convincing CMP, under "licencing agreement", to make Rocna's in China and globally market Rocna's makes him a very fortunate New Zealander indeed! Would make better press if CMP made chain and anchors in South Korea!

    CMP Global owns a factory in Nangbo China into which they say they invested 6.5 million. Canadian dollars or Yen is not clear. And I would guess that owning a factory in China does not include the real estate it sits on. And 6.5 million of any money in terms of an investment sounds paltry for a large established business. Certainly would suppose CMP chain is made in China. CMP does not say where. "Engineered in Canada" is the kind of BS I choke on. It certainly suggests that if they say 'Engineered in China", it wouldn't fly! If you have a decent product why attempt to buzz it up with contrived language? It doesn't fly either. Not convinced that there isn't something rotten here.

    Could definitely say that Rocna is 'engineered in New Zealand.' That's a guess of course.
    Funny thing, nothing so far in this Smithness & Smithness drama has convinced me to change out my
    Peter-Smith-blatant-Rocna-copy-Manson-Supreme for a CMP-Global-Rocna.
    (Peter Smith's elaborate web site dedicated to putting down the MansonSupreme pops up on the internet EVERY time you type Manson Supreme into google. Is this a pay-for-pop-up service perpetrated by google that Peter Smith purchased from them?) Check it out....EVERY TIME!

    Yachting Monthly mag, for their Oct 2011 issue, promises an article that will unscramble this big bowl of noodles for us. We'll see if it gets out of the kitchen.

    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______________
    This quote does seem appropriate on a number of levels:
    "You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts."
    Pat Moynihan, USSenator in office 1977-2001
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______________
    Paraphrasing the famous line of Alphonso Bedoya's - playing the jefe bandit in the Treasure of the Sierra Madre movie:
    Numbers? We don't have to show you no stinking numbers!
    Last edited by ebb; 10-13-2011 at 08:31 AM.

  8. #173
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    Canada Metal Memo on Brand Confidence & Statement From the Rocna Anchor Designer

    http://www.canmet.com/content/resour...CNA%20MEMO.pdf

    In my considered opinion:
    latest from CMP on the subject. [blue line doesn't compute - try google> Canada Metal]
    try> Canada Metal Memo to Rocna Customers re Brand Confidence
    (CMP mentions in this 'memo' that they have cleaned up and rearranged the furniture in the RocnaAnchor website. Haven't checked, I get Rocna Reflux whenever I go there. ebb has had it with this sordid subject - and unless something spectacular happens will drop it completely.......)yea!

    ahhh yes, one more little twist:
    Here also is a clarification from PeterSmith blaming it all on us and the mags:
    google> Rocna re-licensing & historical steel quality issues - Peter Smith.net.nz<
    [another blue line that won't work: www.petersmith.net.nz>Anchors & Anchoring]

    At the end of the statement in which 'Peter' says "Some of the public controversy has been prompted by pictures of Rocnas with bent shanks....some of these are legitimate cases...." he talks of the steel grade changes, including those of HoldFast's: "...the appropriate chain for the anchor will fail completely before the shank is even close to starting to bend. These figures are compatible with the standards of Peter's design and engineering of the Rocna anchor, and lateral (sidewise bending) strength is similarly considered perfectly acceptable."

    There is a HoldFast era U-tube video also on site showing a 55# "off the shelf" China anchor being tested in a chain pull cabinet in the China facility. The anchor tip is clamped and led 180degrees in the opposite direction from three types of unseen/hidden test chain connected to the shank in 3 separate pulls, indicated with a prominent digital counter. Not entirely clear what is happening but near the end, at some way-over-tonnage of a normal test pull, the anchor inside the chamber suddenly burps:

    The lid is lifted revealing the shank which is now radically twisted. NOT bent, but twisted in line with the pull!
    This is a straight-pull procedure that seems not only to be testing chain but also the shank to fluke connection. This doesn't seem to have been the point of the demo. BUT it does prove that bending or twisting of the shank can happen BEFORE THE CHAIN FAILS.
    and WITHOUT LATERAL BENDING.
    In this case with what for all intents is an inhouse non-authenticated anchor. So NOTHING is being proved. It shows THIS PARTICULAR 55# ANCHOR, has a fluke to shank connection that is phenomenol - if indeed it really is!!!
    Peter evidently has included this video to show "that lateral strength [of the Bambury HoldFast] is similarly considered perfectly acceptable." (But that didn't happen.)
    This demo shows that, even without sidewise chain pulling the shank twisted and bent, and no chain broke. Perfectly Acceptable? looking into the torture chamber through the camera's eye it did look like the anchor was still in one piece, so it must be Peter's opinion that its STRENGTH is acceptable.

    BUT he is in denial about the bending - which is what the international hullabaloo is all about!
    He intimates, almost accuses, that some photos of bent Rocnas wouldn't naturally bend as shown and were deliberately mangled to embarrass him, "the Rocna Anchor Designer."
    Wonder where Peter gets his bent anchor expertise from?

    That's amazing: bent shanks 'perfectly acceptable.'? Yes, the author IS talking about the tested strength of the metal. But since bent shanks ARE turning up with nasty photos on the forums then we must conclude it's the engineering that's at fault.
    Since the engineering is faultless,
    then obviously the users are doing something wrong when bending the perfectly acceptable shank, in most cases they're probably doing it "illegitimate"ly.
    Since we have to assume yachts' chain did not break while bending the Rocna shanks - then the chain must have been oversized or somehow inappropriate for the anchor - which is just not fair.
    Must be ACCO chain that bent those Rocna shanks, not CMP chain, which complements the CMP Rocna product. They are 'in the fold together!'
    Rest assured, a folded Rocna is still a safe anchor. Without a boat attached to it.

    This "re-licensing and historical steel... STATEMENT" site contains blue line links that take you directlty to PeterSmith's historical scathing putdowns of the MansonSupreme, and Sarca. Hell of an attitude, man!
    He and his alter ego forum ghost no doubt are still in the mix.
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________
    garbage is still garbage. ebb said that
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________
    Its a shame
    Its a shame
    I always seem to reach you out of time
    Its a shame
    I always meet you when it's just goodbye........baby it's a shame.

    last verse of a song by another Peter Smith (Danish singer)
    Last edited by ebb; 12-06-2011 at 07:57 AM.

  9. #174
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    Yachting and Boat World forums Yachting Monthly's Scuttlebutt

    (OK, I promised....
    How darkly spectacular is it that Rocna finagled the specs on all their galvanized anchors BUT also all their ritzy stainless anchors.)
    Take a look:
    Under the title: Rocna Anchors acquired by Canada Metal Pacific
    The thread has grown to 40 pages!

    Most interesting and even more important is the revelation that Rocna stainless steel anchors
    were also (if proven true) deceptively downgraded when fabricated in China.

    Grant King ("no longer associated with Rocna") a contributor in the Yachting Monthly forum, has to me, really a very casual observor, emerged as the
    Daniel Ellsberg of the Rocna Deception.
    He is, like the Pentagon Papers guy, uniquely placed in this deception because he HAS ALL THE PAPER supporting the fraud. Dates, personel, sales receipts...
    Venture that like the famous whistle blower there is a moral aspect to this drama.

    In bits and pieces you might wonder what all the bruhaha is about.
    'Peter' is previously quoted saying there's nothing wrong with his downgrade anchors.
    To me the extent and depth of the fraud, like the Pentgon Papers, surpasses the denials and carefull words of the perpetraitors.
    Every anchor made, INCLUDING STAINLESS STEEL, all downgraded in materials used and, as I have just read (10/19/11) including downgraded fabrication

    PeterSmith's opening salvo putting the MansonSupreme down was the use of 'laminated' metal.
    That means sandwiching plates together and welding the edges - a techinique that Smith says is cheap, unprofessional engineering.
    The fabricating expertise of the chinese workers when laminating shank plates together is so good that when finished the welded lamination is erased/hiddof the shanks. And not mentioned to the buyer. That's what's being said.

    Well, there it is, folks. The Smith engine makes and markets anchors that are despised by the 'designer of the Rocna anchor'.

    This stainless Rocna revelation shows how contrived the PeterSmith "1st October 2011 Statement" really is. Contrived, because his attempt to downplay his downgrading of the anchor is only within what has been revealed SO FAR in the 'recalls' and the forums. A complete Statement might have included the stainless steel anchors, but did not. Why? Because that little bit of deception had not been revealed yet. Right? Hopefully an individual stainless steel Rocna anchor customer wouldn't find out that his significant purchase secretely had had a grade change.
    Same come back from 'Peter' will appear...that the anchors are far above RINA standards for the purpose of the anchor, etc.
    I don't believe Rocna has authentic RINA approval.

    Despise the attitude that makes this deception possible. In fact, it is so treacherous it is unbelievable to me. Maybe the changes aren't all that bad, BUT, you don't adhoc change anything if you claim to have approval from an acency that approves anchors. Or flog standards that are superior than your compeditors. The way it is done by Rocna: is fraud, it's lying, it's deception perpetrated upon the public. A very special fraternity of 'public'.
    Are you really OK with this???
    The entire Rocna product line made to standards below (how far below remains to be revealed) standards advertised./guaranteed.

    Why would Canada Metals Pacific want to deal with this?
    That is why I believe this CMP buy out is just another LIE by the Smiths.
    'I designed this anchor and I can do with it whatever I please - whenever I want!'

    Attitude played a huge part, imco.
    My opinion is: The Rocna should be terminated.
    If anything it's Nothing but bad news.
    Last edited by ebb; 10-21-2011 at 12:09 PM.

  10. #175
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    Lightbulb Yachting Monthly's Scuttlebut and how forums can be Dangerous

    [Sorry to interrupt more important and mundane boat business - especially since the discussion here has been, shall we say, rather slow.]

    There isn't anything of greater importance to the safety of the boat than good anchors.

    www.ybw.com/forums/index
    yachtingandboatworldforums
    [sorry, blue line doesn't compute]

    click on Yachting Monthly's Scuttlebutt
    scroll to Rocna anchor.......

    If you are patient and at all curious, by reading and scanning this amazing 42pg discussion
    you will have a frontrow seat of the King Rocna event (altho he never shows up) that almost compares with King Lear. A Brit comedy.
    Not as bloody, not written by a master, and not as good with metaphor -
    but the pathos, the human drama is superb: passion, short-comings, treachery...
    If you have read any of my comments above here you have then a prelude into a twisted
    and misleading mystery of subterfuge, hypocrisy, errors in judgement. Just about everything
    you'd never expect to find in the crumbling of a small and unique commercial enterprise.


    Many characters appear,
    some suddenly, some go off stage left never to be heard from again. Why did they take part?
    One of the main characters from the beginning is RocnaOne who throughout the story never identifies herself.
    She has an important role (imco the dsguised character is really female, or in drag, and there are very few of those in this testosteroyal morality play) because she appears to be the voice of the new acquiring owner, CMP (big on anodes), she is expected to reveal details how the unfolding take over of the empire is greased, yet never seems to develop the cajones to talk with conviction. But...but.....but read more of the babble, you'll see!
    Clowns appear, and idiots come on stage attempting to sabotoge things.
    Some will come on stage holding an anchor (if it was Shakespeare, it would be a rubber sword) asking the audience, what do I do with this?
    Others praise the absent and desparate Rocna, others put him down. He is condemned and saved by the Rocna's fool, his wisest councellor, who is also called King.
    Ahhhh hh, but this king's fool, will he be the one to bring the kingdom down?

    Although the story probably continues to a just end,
    poor judgement and the insanity of the main performers
    (who all the while other actors are busy on stage are actually writhing in the backdrop wrapped in chains
    too spooked to appear front and center) will prevail. They will prevail, but as mere ghosts of what they once were.
    CMP (big on anodes) is left holding the bag... as the stage lights dim and the play comes to a close......or doesn't.


    Imco we haven't ever witnessed anything quite like this.

    In the world of business what has happened/happening is truly amazing. Do we have some power after all?
    [last edit 10/21/11]


    Main stand out actors on the Scuttlebut stage:
    Grant King (post 255) (breathtaking posts at 357, 358.)
    wise Djbangi &
    Delfin, trawlerman

    (audience applause)
    Last edited by ebb; 10-23-2011 at 08:43 AM.

  11. #176
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    Talking YBW Rocna thread censored

    "21-10-11/17:12
    Natalie Davies - Administrator
    sticky Rocna thread pulled

    I have suspended the thread entitled
    'Rocna Anchors acquired by Canada Metal Pacific'
    while we consult our legal advisor on the implications of some of the posts.

    While we are investigating this issue please refrain from
    starting any new threads on Rocna Anchors.
    Thanks
    Natalie Davies
    YBW Editor"
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________________
    That is a quote from the Brit Yachting Monthly site.
    (and this is my opinion)
    Imco opinions by posters who use anchors on their boats have every right to post those opinions, whether they be anonymous or business owners who are not advertisng their services on the public thread.
    For the most part nearly all of the negative comments by individuals are intelligent, thoughtful, honest and not subjectively inflamatory. They are however commenting on and revealing what appears to be a shocking on-going long-term deception by a commercial anchor maker. And they shake their verbal fingers. So what's legal here?
    The guy with the goods, the guy who says he has all the paper proof from day one for the Mocna deception,
    warned forum readers that these revelations would become more surprising than we could imagine.
    I would guess that any legal concerns by the magazine rests on this.
    But imco since all the posts are in fact opinion, then what we have here is the marine industry stepping in to control a situation that to them has gotten out of hand.
    I would guess some Yachting Monthly advertisers are having a big problem with Mocna's public freefall.
    It could happen to them.
    And in the public arena they have no control.
    Good god we could have a revolution here!!!
    NO gathering in the streets - OR in pubs - OR the marinas!

    I'm guessing that The YBW as a private commercial enterprise that hosts a forum for subscribers have gotten a bunch of emails and phone calls from concerned advertisers.
    We can guess who.
    It'll be instructive how they handle this from here on in. But the thread is censored/gone.
    They also have a public image to uphold with their subscribers, let alone their advertisers.
    And it could be worse than I, as an observor, can imagine.

    There is a lot at stake here.
    The people in charge no doubt want desparately to put the fire out.
    They want to put the situation into their own words. For that they want control. Smoke and mirrors.
    Anyone can understand that.
    But censorship on the www is a very sharp double-edged sword.
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________
    EDIT. Sometimes revolutions become one liners - check out:
    Anchors away then (4 pages)

    same address.
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ___________________
    Another refrain titled:
    Open note to RocnaOne (4 pages)

    After some bickering, on the last page, one entry by Grant King announcing he is taking Rocna to court in NZ next month! Not sure who or what kind of suit? Like HECATE, goddess of the crossroads, it's a three-headed monster. One bent body, 3 heads.
    [[later EDIT] on page 5 above, GKing has a newer post where it is evident that he was accused of wrong doing concerning money by BamburyHoldFast, so he's taking him/them to court to clear his name. In that process maybe a timeline will appear that will reveal the truth about who knew what, and did what, and when. The why always turns out to be greed.] From the nature of the lawsuit it may turnout that spec changes to the Rocna are not illegal. But certainly UNETHICAL.

    Interesting,
    believe I read that SteveBambury/HoldFast was hired on as an ADVISOR at CMP ! ! ! Could not possibly be true?
    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ____________________
    Ethics vs Morality.
    Used morality/morals here myself interchangably with ethics, because morality is more commonly used everyday.
    Ethics are universal long standing principles concerning right and wrong.
    Morals/morality are short term subjective values that support good and bad/evil.
    Personal, simplistic short version of this is that ethics is what business wrestles with in public
    and morality is what religion requires subjects to support. The borders separating the two are overlapping and blurred.
    The Rocna drama is absolutely in the realm of right vs wrong. There is no sin in being wrong.
    There is no equivocation in wrong. There is nothing personal or subjective in being wrong.
    The squirming of the main characters in this drama and their reps is because they want us to see their wrong doing in a subjective light where it can be heated up and argued about and disintegrated into name calling and so forth. By contrast most of the posters are aware of the distinction and are quick to point out that the main characters seem unable to restrain themselves.
    ROCNA DID WRONG. The record is emerging. This is about how business is conducted.
    Last edited by ebb; 10-28-2011 at 11:17 AM.

  12. #177
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    "Rocna Anchor acquired by CMP" back again!

    ybw.com
    Rocna Anchor acquired by Canada Metal Pacific
    Yachting Monthly's Scuttlebut

    The censoring began at around page 45 - the thread is back again! Lawyer approval???
    and has burgeoned to 54 pgs at present, 10/31/11. I'm totally surprised and gratified. Relieved. So the drama continues:

    Big guns still posting: Rigger, Delfin, Djbangi, Fishy Inverness, Grant Smith and even Rex Francis (whose SARCA shanks are now Bisplate 80!)
    What a convention! Reasonable, intelligent writing. Great reading, like a mystery story: surprises, turns, revelations.
    New people, there's a US lawyer now posted with tips on who's actually responsible for the counterfeit china anchors.
    More stink on the Peter and Craig Smith black hole - and some beginning ruminations on whether CMP is really going to pull it off. Their secret spokeperson seems to have lost it.

    I'm a great fan of Brit mystery shows on TV.
    This is the real thing. Real bad guys. Who did it? Who's to blame?
    There is nothing better than this currently.
    If you have the time, post your opinion here!
    Haven't read much of the new stuff, gotta go.
    Last edited by ebb; 11-06-2011 at 04:09 PM.

  13. #178
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Solomons Island Md.
    Posts
    142
    We should make a habit to always buy american made products.
    Commander 5

  14. #179
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    new generation american anchors

    Mr Paul,
    Can't think of any, but I'm not in the know on that,
    there may be somebody making new gen anchors here in the U S of A.
    We seem to lack the moxie - or the venture capital.

    They'd be imported from China anyway.

    Then, there would be no gaurantee we'd have a complementary cast of sleazy bad guys,
    Nor an entertaining forum of savvy head hunters to pin them barstids to the wall!
    Last edited by ebb; 11-23-2011 at 12:15 PM.

  15. #180
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Rafael, CA
    Posts
    3,621

    Rocna debacle update

    The Yachting Monthly Scuttlebut site 'Rocna Anchor acquired by Canadian Metal Pacific' continues to flouirsh. ybw has reinstated the original thread that started this TRIAL BY FORUM (as I see it.) I know very little of the internet, but this 1250 post (and running) condemnation of a deceitfully marketed marine product on a pubic forum seems really unique.
    Copy a couple quotes from that forum to round us up to date:

    EVIDENCE OF CMP FALSIFYING RINO SHHP CERTIFICATION ON ROCNA WEBSITE
    Poster 'saumur2 - #1250 [quoting Grant King} "The certificate on the Rocna website here (website blue line) now says under applicant CMP and not Holdfast [who are in bankruptcy] but still dated 25 may 2011 and stamped the same as previous. It also says for "rolled steel plate fluke."'
    [As we know, all yacht-chandlery china Rocnas have cast flukes - NOT fabricated steel - and the original CMP statement of their new ownership of the Rocna license said that they would continue to have the same - Bambury/Holdfast - anchors made in china with a shank of less spec than originally designed by P. Smith.] brackets are mine
    saumur2 continues:
    'It would appear that this is the first proof that CMP are colluding with the deception - surely they know that the anchor that RINA tested and approved is very much different to those being produced now.'

    At post Neeves #1253 there is a full page wrap up bringing another onsite poster up to date on the subject:
    Two paragraphs from the lengthy post:
    'More recently we have seen a change. On the Rocna website we have seen the RINA certification claim restated (which has led to RINA querying CMP and requesting a clarification or removal of the claim - as it is invalid). We have seen the perpetrators of the deceits paraded at international trade fairs, METS is a good example, as if heroes instead of the pariahs as they are seen by many of the public. Though it is difficult to quantify there are indications the deceit of the use of a low quality steel in the shank extends to more than "a few" and to a period much earlier than "early 2010" - but confirmation is difficult and CMP unwilling (for whatever reason) to provide any confirmation. By and large owners of these, possibly, off spec anchors remain unaware and at risk.'
    'It is impossible to know what is happening but the recent re-statement (on the Rocna website) of the RINA certification awarding SHHP status to Rocna anchors from 4kg to 110kg is so blatantly dishonest that it is almost as if CMP have lost control. The certification clearly states that it refers only to anchors with fabricated flukes (made from folded and welded steel plate) yet if you walk into any chandlers these anchors simply do not exist - the only anchors have cast flukes. The certificate might apply to anchors of 55kg and over, but these tend not to be in stock at chandlers and form a minimal part of historic Rocna sales. Maybe purchasers are meant to know the difference, but RINA does not think so and most people on this and other forum do not think so.'
    Neeves goes on to say that the public has continued to be misled as the new owner has 'developed a low profile.'
    Steve Bambury CEO of the bankrupt Rocna Holdfast Co is retained by CMP in what capacity we can only guess. My thinking is that he is there as a consultant - as are P. and C Smith. It may be a sort of control CMP wants over the situation by incorporating these bad eggs in one Rocna basket.
    At the moment their silence, which declaws critics by giving them nothing to grab with, is no longer golden but smelling bad rotten.

    As one poster pointed out, what also is sad is that so many [boat-owners] have their heads in the sand.
    Some people don't want bad news, they're in denial: it's all BS, or it's just too complicated. Those who willing go to WM and other stores to buy a Rocna - still in stock and available ( still cataloged as well) - deserve the Darwin Award.

    CMP has obviously taken legal counsel and choose not to say anything - positive or negative - about the controversy. They know it will all blow over. They and P.Smith are content with marketing a lesser anchor (in BOTH SHANK & FLUKE) than the original NZ made models. They are OK with deceiving the public with false RINA certification - which will mature into more negative publicity if they do not seek new RINA certification. RINA certainly will decline SHHP certification because the china made anchors will fail new tests. There was an admission of bribery - during the Bambury iicensing era - that I don't have time to research and confirm right now. You know, like aye say, it's the smell of it!

    Many have given CMP the benefit of the doubt. I can't accept anything about this fraud. Can't accept that CMP would appear to continue the fraud. Can't accept that a total recall of all Holdfast Rocna Anchors has not been implemented. There oughta be a law. Can't accept that the same anchors continue to be made in china. There's no GrantKing to keep an eye on stuff. Can't believe that Rocna anchors are still being sold, and bought at marine stores, advertised on many marine websites as if nothing is happening. No honest attempt has been made to warn 1000s of people who bought fraudulent anchors that they and their vessels are at risk.
    Why is this happening? Why is this still happening? This is a definition of UNETHICAL. A conspiracy of fraud by all Rocna parties.


    SPADE DOES ROLLBARS
    Spade anchors have introduced two new models, both with roll bars.
    Presumably one is a copy of the Rocna - called 'Spoon'.
    The other a copy of the Manson Supreme - called 'Seablade'.**
    SAIL mag who reports this in their Jan2012 issue on page 28 with a photo, says,
    "Both hooks are constructed in galvanized steel on an automated production line, which allows them to be priced competatively with more cheaply made anchors from Asia, From $239." Sounds scary, doesn't it?
    There you go, anchors made by robots. Probably made by cheap chinese robots.
    (** type Spade Spoon / Seablade into google and a site will come up. Small pictures, garbled hype, no RINO certs, no metal specs. First impression, when you compare either imitation to the rocna or supreme anchor, you'll see that the imitations are really awful. They actually look amateurish and rediculous. And the persentation insincere.) imco they are more than slightly mad.
    It is hard to believe these anchors are real and not a SPOOF. They might be put out as a joke by Spade.

    SPOON VS BLADE
    I'm still convinced that NON-spoon CURVED BLADE anchors are the more versatile design than those with a cupped top, more likely to penetrate grass, more likely to stay embedded under tension, more likely to turn while embedded, more likely to be easier to retrieve and come up up clean. Just my observation. More similar designs hopefully will force competitors (Supreme included) to tune up their designs and upgrade. imco Manson Supreme still is the best of the claws. And I really like the dandy carrying handle!
    CMP, a Canadian company, who originally confessed they were looking for a complimentary anchor for their line of presumably asia made chain, should cut Rocna loose to shrivel up and die.... and go with French Spade's cheap copies. Make a deal and flog both styles, spoon and knife. (and stop forking the public with Rocna junk.

    In the meantime

    DON'T BUY A ROCNA ANCHOR. Your life depends on it!
    Last edited by ebb; 01-30-2012 at 12:38 PM.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts