New Generation Anchor

[ebb]

is Manson's newest next generation anchor. In an interview on the Manson website with a Manson rep at a boat show*
Chuck Hawley of West Marine tells us that he is going to change out his Supreme for The Boss on his personal yacht.
The guy holding the anchor tries hard to present The Boss as a powerboat anchor - the reason
may be that the next next generation anchor, as Hawley dubs it, is HOOPLESS. Many bows can't handle the hoop - and many would just want to get a new generation that fits the old roller. No roll bar!

If you take a look at the dimensions page, the fluke of the next next looks like the lines of a stealth bomber** designed by computer for a virtual wind tunnel. It's a gorgeous looking anchor !
It is in truth, so far as I can see sitting here at a desk, that illusive next step the new generation anchors had to accomplish to prove the concept.

This design clearly puts the whole anchor to work on the sea floor. It clearly looks like it will penetrate any bottom (but for coral and rock, of course.) The Boss still has the signature rock slot, BUT now with a picky adjustable bolt thingy to allow the shackle to slide or not.
Don't like the idea, because it may get forgotten and either corrode or fail allowing the shackle to slide - which can be dangerous in dynamic anchorages. The bloody slide on both anchors will be horizontal to the sea floor when the fluke is a set position, making it real easy for the shackle to slide into a pull out mode. The bolt thingy needs a positive and absolute failsafe lock position to prevent it moving. According to one poster it didn't work for him! The slide is, imco, plainly stupid for larger than daysailors & has to be designed out of existence.

A SIMPLE SOLUTION WILL BE TO HAVE A BAR ACROSS THE SLIDE JUST BEHIND THE SHACKLE. REMOVE THE SHACKLE INTO THE SLIDE MODE WHEN DESIRED. If the shackle is safety wired, have both shackles on the shank - one 'fixed' - the other slides. Why the dinky 'patented' doodah?

The wings on the fluke give The Boss a wide stance at the no-rollbar tail. 18" on the 25lb. Only an inch less compared with the 19" spread of a 25lb Mantus,
Side be side comparison of the two, imco, shows the awkwardness of the Mantus, eventho the extra width of the anchors may have been the solution (all along) to persuading single fluke anchors to stand up and dive every time. Hoops may be history!

Underwater Manson video of Supreme pulls show the anchor digging in. Not in hard pack sand or grass.
There are a number of shots, a couple show the anchor plowing - visibly implying that if the pull had continued the anchor would have continued to PLOW, rather than set. The Supreme sets when the shank shackle is also IN the sea floor, being pulled by long chain dragging on the bottom.

It's hard not to notice the more elegant, slightly taller and wider radiused arch shank in The Boss design, more extreme than the muscular angled Supreme.
Seems like the higher pull on The Boss by chain sitting on the seafloor imco would naturally pull an unencumbered fluke into a deeper set. Certainly pull it into grass or hard pack more decisively.

The anchor has a radical curve to its fluke. It is almost as if the roll bar has been flattened and incorporated into the trailing end of the blade. The roll bar bar is gone, but the turning concept of the roll bar translates into the wide curve of the fluke. Manson's description calls the fluke tips: "roller flaps".
Missing from Boss are the gussets that weld the rollbar to the underside of the Supreme fluke (sometimes called tipping flaps) that, imco, keep it from full penetration. Could be argued that the rollbar also stops full burial. Which in some cases may be a good thing!
The Boss is a slick looking anchor that seems to have solved the problem of turning an anchor onto its (un-lead-weighted) tip to get instant penetration. We have no visuals! There is nothing complicated on the anchor that can hang it up except the seabed.

There is a stylish cutout near the bottom of the shank where a bit of line can be tied with a float.... to be able pull the fluke out from cable or chain on a known fouled bottom. The whimsical shackle slide seems even more un-necessary. Especially on a fullsized working anchor. And who on his motoryacht is going to navigate out onto his unprotected fantastic-plastic bow to twiddle with the anchor's patented "preventor"? .
Even though the Hawley interview stresses that The Boss is aimed at powerboats, the
only testimonial at this point in time (1/28/13) on the Manson website is from a sailboat owner!

Sure that Manson anchors are designed to do the job regardless of what bow is at the other end.
There is a price differential: a 25lb Boss will cost you at least $100 to $150 more than the Supreme. That's powerbote for you!
No underwater videos! To prove the concept to me, Manson needs to provide some well designed visuals as well.

There seems to be an intriguing hi-tech smartness to this anchor's design. Push a button and it will park itself.
__________________________________________________ _____________________
*http://www.manson-marine.co.nz/SiteP...DEO%20TEST.htm
**The Boss comes in "black" as well as "mirror" and galvanized.

[ebb]

On the Cruisers Forum site, of those responders who have bought The Boss, ALL have them on the bows of Westsails and Niagras. The Manson pitch that Boss is specifically for powerboats seems to be ignored.
Surfing the net will find trawlers, no doubt, with Bosses on their anchor horses.

Paraphrasing one important poster on Cruisers, he points out that the 'scimitar' curve in the Boss shank (Supreme's are considerably flatter) makes it difficult to seat the anchor in a roller into a secure position. The Boss (on his boat anyway) cannot be pulled tightly into the roller.
Which means that even held under tension a wave slap can lift the anchor out of the roller.
This guy has to get his anchoring gear together. For safety's sake he needs a Custom Anchor Housing Device.
Imco it won't be too much a problem coming up with something, just money.

Here is a photo* of his boat accompaning the post that also shows the fluke riding significantly lower than a Supreme might.
However, with a spoon bow, the pointy end of The Boss comfortably locates far from the gel coat.... but, in his case, loose as a goose.

In my considerable opinion, Boss wave slappers should be sold WITH a complimentary anchor roller.
So far as I know, this has never been done by any anchor maker - probably make history!

It should be the responsibility of Manson to supply a matched roller for their new/next gen anchors.
OR, they might get away with providing recommendations for s.s racks that new owners can get fabricated at a local metal shop.
The Boss possibly needs a whole new concept in an anchor launcher.

Some may have seen here a doorskin holder/launcher mock-up for A-338's 25lb Supreme.**
You have a galvanized anchor so there is no arguement against having a partner roller rack that's galvanized..... Right?
Happened to take the model to Lux Metals where Dave convinced me instead to have them translate it into 10g 316. One of those shops that find it easy to make things with cad drawings, plasma cutter, and fancy sheet. Sorry I did that...really.....arguement is that the finished launcher will be lighter than galvanize. Very shiney and very expensive.

Many photos show anchors looking more like wounded seagulls lanquishing on foredecks... than shipshape anchoring kit.
Shank ends at the shackle need to be cross pinned. Preferably thru the sides of the sturdy channel the anchor rests in.
The anchor fluke will then be held tightly - but not under tension - into the roller so that it cannot move.
Found that the 25lb Supreme had to be fitted with two offset rollers out front to successfully retrieve and immobilize the hook.***
Imco there is/was no ready-made Bruce or CQR s.s. roller on the market that can do a decent job housing Supreme.
No after-market manufacturer makes a roller for Supreme - or The Boss.


MAKING THE ANCHOR ROLLER MORE VERSATILE
A form-fitting rendition of the proposed Supreme roller housing hopefully is going to tame the anchor when buttoned down.
Boss, on the other hand with its lofty shank, has a KINK in it. The flambouyant scimitar design gets very interrupted before it meets its business end.
Makes it look like a welded on afterthought. Ah Ahhh! Obvious it is a purpose designed feature....
When the lines of the Supreme shank are laid over the Boss for comparison, the chords ( longest straight line) from pin to whip curve are very similar.
Worth a try to see if the same roller rack can be tweeked to work for both very different appearing anchors.
Not only are dual rollers the conveyor and fairlead for chain & warp, but also will secure the anchor in its housing.

The Boss' interupted UPPER curve creates a throat that, we hope, will snug into the roller so the anchor can be pinned and contained.
Dunno bout the Boss' hunglow fluke. It may require its own custom.
Will see if the existing roller model can be made more versatile, accept another Manson. Maybe even the next larger sizes also?
Alternative thru-pin locations can possibly be added to the end of the channel....[just called Lux in the knick of time - the model's coming back.]
The "F" dimension (distance from the shackle pin to the whip curve) of the 25lb Boss on the Boss dimensions page is 20 3/8". The 25lb Supreme measures at about 18 5/8", pretty close. So, make the channel longer, and add next size up hole options in the form of an extended bump-up...... Hole it up for the 25lb Boss..... maybe also the 35lb of both species..... Maybe other anchors. Won't be as pretty, but practical, and versatile.
We'll see. With all those holes thru the channel in the back, maybe a built-in chain stopper can be added!
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ................................................


Would you agree that it is the responsibility of the maker to provide a suitable safe housing for a new style anchor? Validate the hook.
A great incentive for buying an anchor.... if it was offered with its own fitted roller. Factory can build them better and cheaper.
Take the worry out for the skipper buying and installing a new gen.... provide the launcher/retriever!
(There can't be be a silly libility thingy involved producing an anchor roller. Is there?)

You've seen on the net that bent all to hell Windline looking like a Rocna meltdown?
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________
*http://cdn.cruisersforum.com/forums/...1&d=1345174762
** Anchor Roller thread #58
***This piece of gear is untried, untested. It remains to be seen if it performs as assumed.

[ebb]

Have just taken Manson Supreme & Boss website dimensions to Patt's copy world
where they zoomed the anchor pictures up to full size !
Boss anchors are definitely monsters. Next size up Supreme (35lb) still looks compact and tidy.

Boss does look like the Supreme rollbar was bent back into the plane of the fluke.

While the position of the shackles IN AIR are relatively the same in Boss and Supreme,
the Boss SHANK sports a TOO OBVIOUS elevator addition underneath the roller-stop 'whip curve'
The designer then leveled out the shank, making it horizontal because it couldn't be angled,
to get the shackle end in about the same position IN AIR (on the drawing board) as the Supreme.
But the 35lb Supreme shank from pin to whip curve is almost a match with the 25lb Boss.
If the two are sitting on their flukes side by side, their shackle pin holes are both 14" from the floor.


Not sure what to make of that. Are these anchors designed with one secret anchor roller in mind?
I'm having second thoughts about Boss. Maybe it DOES HAVE TO be limited to powerboat bows.
It is ponderous (looking). It has TOO huge a fluke. Even though the blade has mostly
the signature cylindrical profile, I'd guess the mass of fluke area will keep it from burying.
And if it does bury, it'll be a dog to get out of the bottom. Need tug supported comparison tests.

First Interest is to see if a size larger shank and whip-curve throat will fit the 25lb custom roller.
Just to see if in a pinch a 35lb Supreme can be launched and retrieved from a smaller roller
The 35lb Boss profile is out of the question! Its boxy sideways 'footprint' is 37.5" x 18"! HUGE.*
The 25lb Boss is VERY LARGE. a boxy 33" x 16". Compares with a 35lb Supreme, imco.
Didn't get plan views of the fluke enlarged, but I bet they'll look as big as manta-rays.
The Boss now seems ambiguous to me, while Supreme still looks confident & handsome.

So we'll paste the paper onto MDO and cut out the side view shapes. When I get the roller
back from Lux, we'll have a preview how a 25lb Boss might fit the Supreme roller. Or not.


The roll bar on the Supreme is seen by some cruisers as a trash, rock & weed catcher. Some
have had problems getting the Supreme to set. Or hauled it in with a load of crap caught on it.
Could have been Manson's impetus for designing the Boss. A revolutionary design that isn't working.
Designing away roll bars is good exercise. But I'm not sure Boss has the solution.
Manson has left themselves an open door for a next gen Supreme by assigning Boss to powerboats.

Been thinking a Next Gen Supreme (called Sovereign?) has a conical curvature in the fluke rather than cylindical.
That'll widen the rolling arch of the fluke - that nullifies the rollbar - at the back of the blade.
A cone radius from the spear-head tip to the foils at the rear of the fluke, will get it to slice in easy.
Cone radius blade gets wider as it gets larger making it easier than the pipe radius of Supreme to bury.
Bend the spear tip down off the skid just a skoch, giving the fluke a nudge in the right direction: IN.
The idea, of course, is to have an anchor unstable in every position except the one
that gets the fluke to slice immediately into real estate. So they better get on it!

Boss uses its wide fluke stance to roll itself upright. It's strange lofty shank acts like an elbow to push
the anchor upright, and the anchor is equally uncomfortable on its side and has to roll up
because of the deeply curved fluke. Boss needs some styling.
Anchors shouldn't try to be fashionable if they're not handy and unsuitable.
Maybe sailors are buying Boss powerboat anchors in an attempt to keep Manson honest?
.................................................. .................................................. ................................
*35lb Supreme side profile is 27"x 16" with the angled shank making it look even less bulky.
The F factor is found in the dimensions of the Boss anchor from the M. website.
.................................................. .................................................. ................................
Is it a PeteSmith-inspired attempt at pulling the wool: for Manson to advertise that Boss steel is Lloyds' register,
but the anchor itself does NOT have Lloyds SHHP certification? (Welders are Lloyd's certified)
.................................................. .................................................. ................................
BENT ROLLERS
http://www.geoffschultz.org/2002 Sai...n/P6040586.jpg
More accessable famous anchor roller photo:
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ount-55743html
this is the address without google's edit (>>>.cruisersforum.>>>/forums/f118/building-an-anchor-mount-55743>>>)

[ebb]

DESIGNING YOUR OWN
Recommend, short of building a full sized model of your yet to be purchased Manson anchor(s),
taking the manufacturer's diagrams to a copy shop and blowing them up.
Render the side view by pasteing the paper picture onto MDF and scroll it out.
From this you can figure out a roller/holder/launcher for the anchor.

Existing model for the 25lb Supreme is somewhat OK. (pix Anchor Roller thread)
Dave at LuxMetals suggests an excellent improvement to the model.
Gotta get up from the computer and make a new model. ( pix to come)
But that is what has to happen anyway to have a more versatile launcher for our versatile anchors.
Want to have the launcher/holder accept both next gen Manson anchors. Manson, Kingston, Windline aren't doing it.
A larger stronger launcher might also allow carrying unknown anchors.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____
www.easternmarine.com
3" Stoltz Polyurethane Bow Roller RP-33 are great looking orange jello 'V' rollers. They have a higher durometer than black rubber -
and are relatively simple replacable parts: $7.89. Unknown UV resist. Channel will be about 2 7/8' wide inside.

The new MDF shank mockup of the next size up 35 Supreme fits perfectly into the 25 S. dual rollers. Shank edge flat in the channel.
Which needs to be lengthened to include dedicated pin holes for longer shanks.
This is a good thing because a longer channel is called for anyway.
At least 1/2 of the housing must cantilever outboard to separate the bow from sharp flukes.
Surprisingly, ALL THREE different anchor spearheads place within an inch of each other when housed! Amazing!
Overhang of the roller frame and lack of secure bolting results in the roller possibly
becoming a recipe for stainless lasagna, with emphasis on sag (that is blue lined in the post above here.)
A strut to the cutwater may be necessary. Especially when using the launcher for actual anchoring.
Something only powerboats do.

Fitting the mockup of the 25 BOSS shank into the original roller model is problematic.
The shank's whip curve, where the roller seats when the anchor is housed, is different than the Supreme's.
Yet the very different Boss 25 and Supreme 35 MDF shanks do somewhat relate. When one is placed on top of the other,
whip curve to shackle hole: it's close. ( BUT they could have been consciously designed closer!
The difference is in what could have been the slightest change in radius of the BOSS whip curve.)

More important is that the existing model 25 Supreme channel and dual rollers brings , seems to bring,
the 25 BOSS' low slung wave-slapper UP to within 2-3 inches of where the 35lb Supreme fluke would sit.
Shanks rest as flat as possible inside the channel. Boss rests on two arbitrary 'points'.
Boss fluke still hangs lower and , of course, way wider than BOTH Supremes. Guessing with doorskin and MDF!

Whip curves inside the shanks of Boss & Supreme, could have related better if the designer at Manson
had a specific roller model in mind that engaged either anchor of similar weight and size.
Both plastic rollers of the housing itself, must imco, engage the shank to keep anchors quiet when housed.
The problem is with the scimitar arch of the Boss - because the anchor rests on widely separate points of contact in the holder.
To help capture the Boss we will have to make the lower roller adjustable with a sliding bolt slot.
The anchor housing needs a strong backbone/bowsprit as well - for powerboat style anchoring.
Discretion being the better part of intention. Getting away from simple is always a mistake....... Is versatility worth the effort?

So, an anchor holder that will take a Supreme 25lb AND 35lb - PLUS the no rollbar Boss 25lb - that's the rub.
If Frank gets to read this, this is why the boat doesn't get finished.
And I do understand, apropos splashing litlgull, this is probably a detail that could be done later.
Detail Manson should have forseen & finessed..... with frustrated sailboat owners in mind. IMCO.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __
pre-historic marine cousin of OSTRICH discovered in NZ: BOSSOPTERUS ONEKAKA: Jurassic scavenger of the deep.

[ebb]

....Bruce, CQR types fall behind newer designs in 180-degree pulls."

Nice, imco, to have these tests from the small end of testing. Trailor sailors, weekenders, bassboats take note.
Don't know that smaller anchors deliberately pulled into the same sand & mud as twice as heavy anchors are straight away comparable. Twice the weight, twice the force, twice the mass, twice or more fluke area, and etc - certainly something to argue about. Somehow tho, it's just not serious enough...............25lb and 35lb anchors are serious. Boat model tank testing must take into account the 'molecular size of water' to assure the data relates to the full sise model. Mini anchors may not act the same in tests as the larger.
P.S, prides itself on their methodology, and it appears the testing is authentic and extensive
for the 8 new style, whose average weight was 12.5lbs - and the 4 old style, 16.5lbs av w.*

"Holding", on their comparison chart, was rated as "Good" for the older heavier weights. (That includes a photo of a CQR in 16' of water resting on its side.) And "Very Good" for ALL the newer hooks. (Including a 10lb Supreme, in 16' of water with green chain that looks like rope.)
We are talking about three different pull tests of 90 and 180 degree RESETs doing: 1) beach pulls - 2) unknown shallow water runabout pulls - and 3) 2.5 fathom "all chain rode" resets at 4.5:1 using a catamaran with dual 20hp Volvos - with folding props.

"ROLL BAR [Following is a direct quote from pgs 16-17 of the Feb2013 issue.]
We tested three roll bar anchors: Anchor Right's convex SARCA and two concave designs, a Rocna and Manson Supreme. We only tested the Rocna in the hard sand/clay seabed. All three anchors performed well in the 90 degree test, sliding around and moving a minimal distance.
In the sand seabed, all performed well in the 90degree and 180degree veer tests. The big surprise was in the 180dgree somersault in sand/clay seabed. All anchors set well and quickly during the initial pull, but on somersaulting, both the Rocna and Supreme [but NOT the slightly convex and slightly downturned toe SARCA] retained a clod of seabed in the fluke, dragged upside down, balanced on the embedded shank and the rollbar until the act of dragging dislodged the clod. Once cleaned, the anchor rolled over and engaged as normal.
"The Supreme performed better than the Rocna. It's possible that the upturned heel of the Rocna allows greater compaction [this has always been my objection to bowled/spooned anchors] - and this slowed the 'clean out' (PS). The Rocna and Supreme exhibited the worst resetting characteristics in the sand/clay seabed of any anchor tested, except the CQR. The anchors showed this tendency to scoop up and hold seabottom again in the mud seabed.
"Another potential problem with these anchors is that if the anchor is dropped with the boat stationary, it is possible for the anchor to settle upright on its rollbar and fluke, alowing the chain to wrap around the vertical shank...When loaded, the anchor simply cannot set. This is likely a rare occurance and easily avoided, but testers were able to snag one anchor this way."
(Because the photo in the article shows the Supreme being yanked 180 with green rope, the one must be Rocna or, likely, Sarca that got loaded!)

Supremes have been guilty (from other sources) of loading junk against the rollbar when being pulled around. This may have been a spur in Manson's butt to branch out into a second unique and original design: No rollbar BOSS. This also is reason enough for sailors to be buying the anchor. Soon we might get feedback about its good/bad points. Boss was not tested and compared - nor was the Mantus. Both are available in the desktop size used for this Small Anchor Reset Test. They may have made more to the PS story.

Technique, experience, conditions, gear and boat make anchoring unpredictable. And individual reports untrustworthy.
PS says that (third party certified) SHHP "is not indicative that an anchor will perform well if subjected to a wind or tide change in all seabeds."
Can't disagree with that. But it is more likely that a certified anchor is built better with better materials - and may perform better when you really need it. SHHP implies a higher degree of trust. Not 100% guarantee, but likely better than an anchor "Built of high quality steel."

Under the title 'Shallow' Concave, PS compares the SPADE and the pricey s.s. ULTRA
"as uncannily similar in design. Both have protruding, v-shaped soles [they are log-splitter WEDGE shaped imco] and a hollow shank, and only slightly concave with a heavily weighted toe. This seemed to indicate that there might be a strong technical advantage to having a v-shaped sole, AS THOSE TYPE OF ANCHORS TENDED TO SLIDE AROUND [buried] IN THE 90 TURN BETTER THAN THE OTHERS." How many turns it took to make that statement is unknown. Comment made that the Ultra was covered in mud. It's unlikely a slick anchor will arrive out of the seabed with more mud on it than its galv. look alike. More probable that the sleek Ultra wedged itself deeper into the bottom than the Spade, picking up virgin clay.

Not really unexpected, PS gives us only an incidental glimpse of the Ultra on the front cover amongst a gaggle of crimson painted & galv anchors.
OK, remember those two! Spade & Ultra - they both somersaulted in the 180 pulls and RESET IMMEDIATELY - Supreme & Rocna both pulled up seabed with them and took an embarassing number of yards to reset, the numbers were not published. All received "Very Good Holding".

Every new gen anchor web page has at least one video of their anchor besting everyone elses in their own beach pull amazing-quick-set demos.
Practical Sailor gives ALL contenders a "Very Good Holding" grade in their 'Value Guide' chart (after an average one to two meter initial set.)
Before the word 'compaction' (to describe a nasty clod) appeared in these 'Veer Tests' to explain the sticky mass of mud/sand caught in the fluke of the Supreme....
there was a previous post in this thread suggesting that technically widening the Supreme fluke in a conical projection could possibly unload clods faster out the back... than the constant radius pipe-section of the current Supreme design I own. Compaction, the compressing of sticky seabed clay onto the fluke, is a nasty problem. Opening the curve might help the Supreme 'clean itself'. Dump its clod. There's no help for concave or bowl designs. Suggest 'curved plate' to describe the Supreme fluke. Concave connotes a cupped shape imco.

IN THIS RESET TEST, in clay and clay/sand, SUPREME (and the chinese hooper) " EXHIBITED THE WORST RESETTING OF ANY ANCHOR TESTED." Holy Holding Power!!!

CQR was a fine anchor until the new boys came to town. Then it just seemed to keel over and die. Never to set any more.
What did this? ...... negative boat community telekinesis? They've studied how fans can influenece ballgames.
Will the end of rollbars be celebrated when every Supreme fails reset
because rollbars are beginning to appear with clods of seabed.... like the Bruces of old?
Spade has its fans for being a good multi-purpose anchor. The wedge digs very well into gravel and stone seabed., where Supreme might balk.

Obvious that the tests were well designed and meticulously carried out. If I imagined comparisons of anchors restricted to the heavy end -
150lb - 225 pounders, I'd feel similar sense of lack or insufficiency as to what PS accomplished in choosing these tiny anchors for compare.
That all the new generation anchors came out more or less the same: "Very Good" in this test of midgets, really is not useful.
And can be due partly to the small size of the anchors.
Hope it doesn't mean we're back to acquired prejudice, hearsay, compromise and opinion - still searching for that mythical all-purpose anchor.

Buy an anchor as if your life depends on it! It's not an 'as if' thing, either. Nothing secondary about selecting the best anchor.
Study the article and judge for yourself. Find out if they tested the delicate version of your favorite!
They're all Good, They're all Fine, Even if the hook don't Shine.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ............................................
*new gen: Ultra - Spade - Sarca - Kobra - Sarca Excel - Manson Supreme - Rocna. Old gen: Delta - CQR - Manson Ray - Lewmar Claw - Fisherman

[ebb]

The test is obviosly well designed and
could be a model for future anchor tests.

The problem is that the PS anchors are not going out
into the world to be used as cruisiing anchors.
Simply, ANCHORS TESTED ARE NOT CRUISING ANCHORS.

The PS testing model might be used to test cruising sized anchors.
Conclusions from real world testing we'd be more likely to trust lives and boats to.

China Rocnas need to be pitted against competition in a well designed
unequivocal method - moral & ethical questions aside.

Hollow shanks should be pitted against solid plate shanks.
NO HOLDS BARRED.

Pretty sure I would be willing to contribute ($10-$20?) to a fund that conducts the testing.
Setting up a full sized test is very expensive - that's why it wasn't done by PS.
Can't imagine that the subscribers - practical sailors - are impressed at all
by what Practical Sailor calls a "simplified" test.
Don't believe any competition should be funded directly by a seller of anchors.
Don't trust the purveyors. Don't trust the hype on manufacturer's web sites.
Would support PS testing of full size anchors if their test procedure
had 'peer group' - third party - consultant - watch dog - input. Test certification.
Anchors for test must be off shelf - acquired anonymously without notice of use.

In the PS brief descriptive intro of the Feb 2013 tested anchors' material and construction
.... the CAST FLUKE of the ROCNA is not mentioned!
Unfortunately there is NO photo of the anchor in the Anchor Veer Test article.
__________________________________________________ ______________________
2013 Defender catalog arrived. "NEW!" Rocna has a larger ad than Manson, where they have
managed in small print, to include SHHP - in their website's associative method of mentioning
RINA certifrication - implying China Rocnas are RINA certified. They are not. Caveat Defender!
To our knowledge RINA has not stopped Rocna's subterfuge* - bringing SHHP into question.
Think I'll 'trust the Lloyds cert that Manson has. Altho even Manson plays games with 3rd party certs.
Manson says their Boss anchors are made with Lloyds Cert metal. The anchors however are not certified
for SHHP (Super High Holding Power) by Lloyds. Why not?
__________________________________________________ ______________________
*If nothing else, this demonstrates that Rocna considers its customers to be stupid. Name basking,
using the glow of SHHP to try to color your anchors with credibility, seems to show what low regard
they have for sailors and for the actual certification process.
We can expect that Rocna will produce a product of any standard, or no standard - and change
materials and fabrication methods at any time without notice or verification. Out of Control.

[c_amos]

For what it is worth Ebb, I am typing this on my ipad from the anchorage off of Village Cay marina, RoadTown Tortola, in the BVI's. I have captained this 42' boat down from NC, and it has a 60# CQR that has failed to set several times. I wish I had brought the Manson off of Faith, because even at less then half the weight I would have more confidence in it.

In the last 3 months aboard (only 2 nights in marinas), I have been reminded why I sold my CQR and bought the Manson.

I have recommended the owner change anchors. The CQR was "better" before "better yet" came along.

[ebb]

.......seems like it's worth just about anything......
Would give almost anything to be anchored* in the BVI near your charge.
Can feel myself climbing out of the companionway into a glorious day.

Both Bill and Frank are also on my case.
Want to be on my case, too. Here, the hills are green, the stone fruits in flower,
daffodils and jonquils jumping out of the ground. They are predicting frost
and must-have rain, after warm days, that makes the ice in my veins break up.
I'm moving. Can't predict how close.......?.
This AM, going to try full scale shank models of the Ultra & Spade in the
model of the expanded Supreme anchor roller. Have to get that project buttoned up......
[ EDIT: Diagrams did not enlarge to match given chart measures for either anchor.]


Happy to hear you're doing what you should be doing.
I'll be out of here!
__________________________________________________ _______________
* with the best anchor. And a decent roller to hold and launch the darn thing!

[ebb]

HAMILTON is a marine store with 5 brick & mortar locations in Maine.
The 350pg catalog is a well designed glossy color affair that probably is thumbed
more by commercial p'boats than rag boats. Looking at ANCHORS: Hamilton has a page for
mooring anchors - another page of danforth style - a page of Kingston copies of
fisherman, claw, plow. Also a Delta, CQR. And a Suncor Stainless CQR! All plows.

The only generational anchor is - lo&behold - an overblown paragraph in signature Rocna hype,
titled 'Rocna Original Anchors'. The anchor thumbnail looks like original Rocna until you see the shank has
the signature shackle slide of Rocna's mortal enemies: Sarca and Manson Supreme !
This shocking new Rocna style was recently introduced aimed toward recreational "fisherman". First, two at 9lb and 13lb
now burgeoned to seven sizes ranging from 13 to 88lbs. But here it is, the only modern decade 'new generation'
representative in this catalog sporting the phrase "Original Anchor". Has to be really good, if it's Original!
And it's now been upgraded from a weekend (that is, amateur) fisherman hook.

The CMP/Rocna con continues. Opening words: "The Kiwi design...." implies
this anchor has a KIWI New Zealand provenance. Which it couldn't possibly have.
Fronted by Canadian Metals Pacific, made in China - unverifiable cast fluke & steel shank grades - holding power not certified.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .....................................
Just checked Hamilton's online catalog:
BUT the thumbnail picturess of all seven weights of Rocna Fisherman's Anchors are mysteriously blank.... "Item on order, will ship when available."
There are six weights of Supremes for sale - not published in my copy of the 2013 paper catalog...
What's happening.... 'catalog collateral damage?'

There seems to be a collective insanity within the whole anchor situation.

[ebb]

www.navagear.com2011/08/30...quote:
"A new Rocna Fisherman anchor,
and a new marketing strategy available in 9 & 13lb models.*

"The Rocna Fisherman's design is based on the Rocna Original,**
which is classified by RINA to the highest level available,
Super High Holding Power (SHHP).
A Rocna possesses stopping power vastly superior to
equivalent-weight plough or claw type anchors in soft sand or mud
due to the large, concave blade." WHAT DID HE SAY?

Since I phrased it out there, you see where you are drawn in
to believing that the Fisherman's Anchor is third party certified by RINA as an SHHP anchor.
THIS IS A LIE. The Rocna website and their commercial ads are foul with this tactic.

But some of you bought the ruse, because you didn't hear that the fisherman's design is BASED on the ROCNA ORIGINAL....blah blah blah.
Every word that follows refers to another anchor. (The writer gives himslf an out to deny the lie.)
[Which refers back to a distant past, almost mythical ORIGINAL ROCNA - from a time of New Zealand manufacture when Rocna was new & proud
- AND
for a ONCE AND ONLY time actually had RINA certification - that ended in 2007.] You understand, NO 9lb Fisherman's shares this SHHP.


Notice this:
a ROCNA ORIGINAL is not the same anchor as an ORIGINAL ROCNA (circa 2007) Gotcha!

"Rocna Originals" , made in China, bear no resemblance (except shape) in materials & manufacture or third party certification
to genuine original Rocna anchors - which ceased New Zealand & Canadian production in 2007.


The writer copies the same pumped up hype used to market the other Rocna, the discredited one with the plain shank.
He makes the switch in the same breath....introducing the new and switching seamlessly to the inflated description of the well known original 'Original'.
Assume the writer knew at the time he wrote the piece that what SAILORS had been led to believe was original... was not.
Sailors had caught Rocna marketing bogus anchors. Hence his phrase: "A New Marketing Strategy" - otherwise known as damage control.
Altho it had yet to be understood IN PUBLIC FORUM that down grading by Rocna of specs (and expectations) had been deliberate - & secret.
Professionally known as: Bait & Switch. [an example by the writer quoted above]
The duplicity of the writer shows through where he heaps on more mashed potatoes
than you wanted to hear about.
By the time you swallow the buzz words: 'stopping power vastly superior'
you want to believe these NEW 9 and 13lb anchors have passed 'rigorous testing....
to the highest level available.'
None of that is real. What we are offered today are depreciated imposters called Rocna Originals....pseudo original.


The writer also tells us the rollbar is good for hooking with grapnels. If the shackle in the Manson inspired slide-shank doesn't respond.
Having the benefit of Practical Sailor's recent small anchor testing, it's cool that the rollbar is good for
something else besides positioning the fluke for setting, collecting garbage, and pulling out a chunk of the seabed
in 180 degree veers (according to PS.) WE better have some idea of what's on the seabed....
But hooked in the head - ad hype and deceptive puffery - better look closer at what we are led to believe, and don't
act too quick on what sounds honest and logical and sincere. It isn't.

Are we getting the skinny on a great new anchor? Or is it really what the reporter lets slip:
(quote) "A new Rocna Fisherman anchor, and a new marketing strategy." [same breath]
Right, what's more important to us than being anchored out on a new "rock solid" marketing strategy?

SPINNING THE MYTH
It appears that henceforth all models of anchors from CMP will be known as "Rocna Originals". CMP's damage control. I'm sure they
have copyrighted the semantic rubric, so that unwary buyers, in the years ahead, will feel assured the anchors have a "rock solid" reputation.

A china rocna may in some respects be an OK anchor, BUT this incessant unending subterfuge implies, doesn't it,
that the maker knows the anchor is dead and needs deceptive marketing strategy to sell it?
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....................................
*It seems the sliding shank design Fisherman's Anchor is now morphed into "Rocna Original Anchors" (Hamilton 2013 catalog) -
loosing its specialist designation (here, anyway) and gaining seven weights from 13 to 88lbs.
Also instructive: the catalog slot that ROA now occupies is the same spot where Manson Supreme used to be in 2012.... Politics? Payola?
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....................................
** also based on Sarca and Supreme originals.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....................................
SORRY FOR THE RANT. This Rocna thing has been more upsetting than I could ever have imagined.......PEACE!

[ebb]

April 2013 issue of Practical Sailor promises to be a good one.
They are finally taking a look at HOW an anchor is put together. Assume new gens.
Maybe it's their way of recognizing the Rocna fiasco, and how serious a breach it really is.*

Previously mentioned here that connections of plate and hollow(fabricated) shanks to fluke
need to be specifically tested. Evidently PS sez they will be discussing the industry phenomena.
Hope they do a credible job. Don't think they are 'testing' anchors against one another in sustained 90degree VEER pulls.
And Practical Sailor, I guess, can't or won't get too technical on welds and fabrication techniques.

Since PS is a publication that ultimately requires the support of the marine industry,
I doubt (my favorite) sleeze and hype offenders will get mention. [ 'later EDIT' below - Practical Sailor cozies up to Rocna!]

But it is about time that somebody takes an objective look at anchor manufacture.
Anchor makers buy certification from respected (but who is their watch dog?) certification companies.
Methods, materials are certified - but not individual anchors. Actual anchors for certification testing are prepared by the manufacturer.
Published testing methods have the appearance, sometimes, of being a joke.
There is no government or industry agency that creates guidelines for anchors. Or anchor testing.
Each manufacturer is on its own - and it is ONLY the presentation hype and hearsay that popularizes indivbidual anchors.
Any third party overseeing the safety of anchors would necessarily create quidelines for product testing.
This would make it difficult if not impossible for inventors (like Rocna once was and like Mantus is currently)
to get their new idea public attention by selling the product.

We don't want dragonian regulations for anchors. They would be flawed. The cost of anchors would skyrocket.
And inventors would shy away from innovation.
Perhaps guide lines that are impessive enough for manufacture to adhere to - publish type & alloy of metals used.
Maybe Lloyds would create and publicize anchor testing guidelines: maybe levels or grades of accreditation & premises.
And maybe the anchor industry could all kick in to FUND complete compeditive testing of current anchors. Maybe PS could lead.
Public input would bring on public interest.

CMPRocna's selling practices are example of how the rather secretive classifying certification process can be twisted in attempts to boost sales.
Will the PS article address the quality of steel in current china Rocnas? Probably not.

Will they take a look at the hollow shank connection of the Spade and the Stainless 316 Ultra?
Lloyds is never going to grade the shank to fluke connection on the SPADE. What will PS have to report?

[At the moment, imco, ULTRA is a new anchor that promises a real advance in next generation ANCHOR SETTING. It does not have a handicap rollbar, and small size models will set & reset and hold in every test seabed. Forum reports imply that it is well suited for hard sand, thick grass and cobbled stones. Promises, promises. However the anchor, compared with others, is grossly overpriced - and has a hollow shank in 316 steel.
Pretty stuff - but ther are more appropriate alloys in strength & stiffness.
Ultra has an internal rod inside the hollow shank to aid strength. Is it passive, under tension, what material, adjustable or replacable... etc?
With continuous good showing prehaps Quickline will offer us an affordable galv version......! Names? ULTIMA - MOST - TOTAL - FANG ?]

Every anchor design is embarrassed by something it does or doesn't do.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ................................................
*[later EDIT].......HOW SERIOUS A BREACH IT REALLY IS


"A Second Look at Anchor Tests - Practical Sailor Article" (google)

Have not got my April 2013 Practical Sailor yet - but ran across this editorial online from that issue: Here are seven sentences from it:

"In 2011, Rocna went through dramatic changes. The design and rights to manufacture were reassigned to Canada Metals Pacific (CMP) based in Vancouver, BC. The company and its major US distributor, West Marine, took significant steps to undo negative publicity. Efforts included an expensive West Marine exchange program and new quality control measures.
In Feburary this year, I got a chance to meet with representatives of Canada Mteals and was pleased by what I saw and heard. The company, long known for zinc anodes, had taken clear steps to ensure that the anchor materials matched the marketing claims. And based on independant testing, engineers were confident in the anchors ability to match the anticipated loads."

Wholey Catfish! Red flags everywhere. What we have here is what appears to be
PRACTICAL SAILOR ENDORSING THE CMP ROCNA ANCHOR..... on what an editorial writer "saw and heard."

Imco this shows an editor getting all bent out of shape. His magazine's reputation for impartial testing be damned. This kind of writing disquised as editorial opinion comes off as endorsement. The writer's words act as a shill for CMP. Altho I've yet to read the April article, it's now colored by this exraordinary demonstration of an editor's mettle (or, let's say, his unbiased alloy) too easily bent into becoming an ally
- of a company with serious ethical problems - who are trying to market a seriously depreciated anchor.
Fully demonstrates that the magazine's allegiance is not to subscribers and sailors but getting chummy with the controversial anchor maker's disaster control specialists. "saw and heard' ? What did he saw? What "independant testing" ? Whose unsubstantiated testing? Did he tour the Chinese facility?

"And based on independant testing, engineers were confident in the anchors ability to match anticipated loads." This quote sounds like a quote
from a printed source close to CMP, probably CMP. These are words of endorsement, these words are hype, these words are crafted to sell anchors. Unless these words are used by the editor as an example of market promotion, they have no place in an intro to impartial Anchor Tests.
This editorial introduction, favorable to CMP Rocna, also influences the "Second Look at Anchor Tests" article yet to be read (by this subscriber.)
CMP is a company that does not like to talk with sailors - but cleverly uses a product testing magazine to promote their product.

Wow! Abandon ye all hope for Practical Sailor. This disgusted post person here may have been more critical than correct.....Rocna is a disease.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..
To be a skoch fair to the editor, (and the complete editorial should be read for context) he does add two sentences after those quoted above here:
"This doesn't mean we're letting Rocna - or any anchor maker - off the hook (so to speak.) The boom in low-quality cast anchors, cheap knockoffs, and persistent allegations of "mislabeled' steel slipping into the manufacturing stream keep us wary."
[This is, of course, having just implied that he has "let Rocna off the hook". Not using the qualifier: 'seems to'.]
Imco, "wary" is rather a wishy-washy resolve to making a rotten SAFETY issue right.
That quoted: It's about time - long over due - that some responsibility for the safety of sailors viz anchors was taken seriously.
Glad that PS says they're stepping up to the plate (so to speak.) Can only hope they're ready for the big league. The anchor problem isn't suddenly a new problem. It has taken genuine and largely ignored public outcry to bring it to a head. COMING DIRECTLY FROM THE PUBLIC - NOT FROM PRACTICAL SAILOR MAGAZINE - fueled by blatant deception and fraud on the part of one anchor maker.... to get notice, get HERE, get this far.

No way is this far enough. Testing, evaluation, conclusions must be totally separate from anchor-maker or vender influence - including business lunches.
TO BE CREDIBLE, comparisons and evaluations IMCO must be done using full sized anchors commonly carried by cruisers.
[.....now.... where's that April issue? Maybe they've cancelled my subscription ! ! ! ]
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ............................................
later EDIT, day of the Strickly Sail show in Oakland, 4/11/13. Appears PS did pull my April edition, as it never arrived.

[ebb]

April issue of Practical Sailor hasn't arrived.
Imco a virus like me isn't going to bug PS enough to imagine them yanking an issue or pulling the subscription......really?
So it has to be coincidence that scolding PS has had this or any effect......don't I wish!
Being ignored is the standard response as it requires no imagination.
Never seen issues of Pracical Sailor at the Strickly Sail, but this time sure to look.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..............................................

Imco, most impressive anchor at the show was the Quickline 316L ULTRA.
Talked with the guys at their outdoor booth and bathed in the silver gleam of 1/2doz sizes on display. As I understand it, YouTube Randy B, who as venture capitalist, visited the Boyut Marine* stainless shop in Turkey on another hunt in 2008.... just happened to see the prototype anchor being put together by the shop owner...........(his name?)
There won't be a galv version because encapsulated lead can't go through the 860degree galvanizing process. ssUltra lead is completely encapsulated. [Be easy enough imco to design a slip in pocket for a chunk of lead in an already galvanized anchor. Tar-epoxy it in.] A 25lb goes for about $1200 - $48 lb.
Won't find this anchor on a bowroller in the marina, it'll disappear. One owner had his shot-peened to a satin look in an attempt to lessen the bling.
It is not rod but a stub plate that's inside the turn of the hollow shank at the fluke. Added strength inside the shank at the interface.
No welds show, none.....making the construct: marvelous and mysterious, natural and surgical, sophisticated and simple....... all at once.

Similarity to the take apart Spade** (not found at the show) mentioned by PS, is a stretch. Ultra is by far the most sophisticated anchor in the world. A legitimate departure from the Spade. And 316L Ultra might not match a galvanized MansonSupreme in mass & Grade 80 strength - BUT compared with all the others, it stands alone in Form-Follows-Function. Ready to instantly deep set! Was told that during development the anchor went through countless test stages - including a short lived galv version. Quickline is eager to have Ultra tested against all comers, and said reality comparison tests are long overdue. 316L is seen as less strong than Grade 80 steel. Let's see Ultra compared with Supreme!

MANSON had a gorgeous 25lb ss SUPREME ($998, Azure Marine - $40lb). A slide shank 15lb BOSS, in the flesh, didn't look so radical, nor even as tuff looking as the bling Supreme next to it. Girth difference could not be compared. NO rollbar Boss has a wide fluke that imco could pose a problem staying buried veered 90degrees. Has prominent angled wing tips to help flip it onto its fluke - but, imco, will impede burial, since the flaps are welded out on the tips of its wide fluke - angled against the direction of the pull - as if to put brakes on the signature rolled blade - preventing penetration.
(Boss bears more than a passing resemblance to Poiraud's (Spade) high arched shank and wide fluke Sword & Oceane anchors - now defunct.)
Supreme is robust, Boss a little anemic and fussy. In person, the patented little bolt whimsy, which keeps the shackle from sliding - or not - looked even more screwy - doesn't belong on a cruising anchor - costs more - perfect for power boats. Will Boss be around for long? Will veer tests be its downfall?
The tall aspect of the shank insures that the anchor is unstable on its side - on the seabed - and rolls to rest on its blade.
Sighting along the curved fluke, can see the curve is a constant radius cylinder section just like Supreme's - that 'compacts' mud as the fluke trys to bury..... if it happens as PS reports in their most recent trials. Boss does not have third party certification.
Doesn't get ebb's good SHT certification either (super high ingenious tech.)

MANTUS also had a tent, but the presenter was deeply involved. Mantus also didn't look as radical in life as online. Appears well made. Could swear the bolts were oversized and looked adequate for keeping the takeapart together. The hex heads or nuts protrude underneath the fluke like teats for baby mantuses. Needs testing against other new gens. Veer tests could be problematic. Can't say that seeing it invites liking it. And wonder if this mechanical wonder can be third party certified.
I'll make a prediction that this hooped anchor is the last of its kind. [http://www.knoxanchors.com for a Scot hooped anchor]
Compared with an aptly named ULTRA - if Ultra delivers on everything promised - this is where New Generation hoop anchors mutated into the present Ultra Now Generation, leaving most of the new generation behind. NOW they got it right!
(Have a lot of questions about anchor Certification....actual testing or merely materials....ethics of manufacturer prepared anchors, etc.)

This is a better way to obsolete the cumbersome rollbar....
ULTRA now comes with American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) certification: SHP - equivalent to the highest RINA andLloyds SHHP. Actual 3rd party in water tugboat tested (STRAIGHT PULLS mud, sand, gravel***) This guarantees US Military buys this anchor. Good price driver! Sizes from 11lb to 792lbs! Each anchor has its own serial number, which you register with the company. THAT is as good as it gets: the manufacturer keeps a record of YOUR anchor. THIS creates a responsible standard for cruising anchors.
The semi turned down fluke - dubbed 'dipper style' - assures INSTANT SET. This feature plus the compact sleek touch-me design means imco this anchor willingly sets deeper when necessary - rather than getting rolled, plowed or yanked out. Claims for heavy grass and rubble. Instant set means it won't drag and load grass - preventing set - the rollbar's main problem, along with its weight at the back of the fluke.
Anchor looks like it flowed out of its element born as a single form.... rather than, like other new gens, so obviously fabricated of chunks and pieces. A clam-digger jeans look.... obviously good, when well done.

Reliable setting in the widest variety of seabed. Comes up easy - leaving the seabed behind. Definition of an ideal anchor for a small cruiser.

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...............................................
*Boyut must be the anchor products garhauer of the Mediterranian - developing new products for superyats and normal boats. Turkey is not part of the European Union and has a thriving economy.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...............................................
**SPADE. No third party cert. [Why wouldn't an anchor maker accredit their hype and boost sales - like Manson and Quickline?]
Except for the fact that Spade and Ultra both stay buried, turn in set, in 90degree veering situations (in the PS comparison tests of 'paper-weight' anchors) - there is no other similarity between them. How to understand what PS is talking about.... Unless it's kind of a PeteSmith smudge on Ultra for being "it's-so-obvious" a fudged copy of the Spade........ There is no who-came-first in anchor design - it's about safety, how well it's made, how well it sets. Despite Spade's internet hype to the contrary, the anchor, in PS 180 veer tests, did PULL OUT OF SET.....But cleaned itself off immediately - as the Ultra does - and RESET.
Lead tip weight SPADE and ULTRA might be recognized apart from the others as WEDGE ANCHORS (vs blade). But there similarity ends.

[Alain Poiraud, inventor of the Spade, died in Feb 2011. RIP. Poiraud also designed more extreme blade anchors, that may have inspired the Boss. Spade, now owned by Yves Gelb, intends to put a dealership together for the US: SeaTechandFun? No numbers on the "high tensil" steel they describe.
http://tradeonlytoday.com/ Try 'Spade Anchor serious' in search bar - should bring up "An anchor for the 'serious' cruiser" ArchivesTues29Jan2013.]

Morganscloud, 56' charter boat out of NovaScotia, bigger vessel, bigger anchor, bigger engine, bigger budget. Sane, thoughtful opinions on many subjects with serious feedback from other big boat conservative owners/yoyagers. Cut above the usual forum fare.
Nothing on the Ultra anchor. Ultra only got ABS cert in Feb 2012. MorgansCloud - Spade's biggest champion - chose a twice oversized as their primary - same reasons we would: dependability in multiple seabeds, including thick grass/kelp and rubble, ease of set, ease of retrieval, ease of carry. [However, they oversized, something a midget 26footer can't do.]
Rocna Versus SPADE, Strengths and Weaknesses www.morganscloud.com/2011/11/23/rocna-versus-

***Remember the testing is paid for by Quickline. ($50,000 plus?) There is the ethical problem - whether anchors selected for testing are manufacturer 'prepared' - or should come 'off the shelf.'
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...........................................

Celebrating 3 weeks of expungement by Practical Sailor. Oscar Wilde said, "A little sincerity is a dangerous thing and a great deal of it absolutely fatal."
♫ On a happy note: Awoke this morning thinking that if KAT EDMONSON sang into a voice activated 3D printer, the result might look like an Ultra. YouTube, 'Way down Low.'

[ebb]

Oakland Grill Omlet $9.95, PERFECT. (a perfect omlet is as hard to find as a perfect anchor).
Empty parking garage. Expected crowds for the boat show being Sunday, but there were far more people milling around the plaza farmer's market than in the cordoned off BoatShow. Weather was beautiful, no waiting at the ticket booth ($15) which led directly down to the floats and the HylasBenateauCatalina fabtasticplasticchrome AQUA-RV's packed like gigantic brislings in the sardina marina. Only people around were sales and greeters. There wasn't one smaller boat that looked inviting and comfortable .....went inside the center.

Far fewer vendors there than last year. The halls shrunk with movable walls, looked like a half empty stage set. Talked bottom paint with the e-paint and SeaHawk guys, handled candy colored yacht ropes at Yale and NewEngland, walked breifly through Garhauer and Svendsens - deja vu year last, one past before, and before that!..... and escaped into the sun ouside again. It's unsettling ambling by vendors trying to catch your eye. Innovative vendors were absent like a species gone extinct. Got a free sample of Kanberra teatreeoil boat deodorant that smelled like lime gummy.


[IN THE WAKE OF THE ELUSIVE MULTI-BOTTOM HOOK]

MANTUS. Go to their website and take a look if you haven't recently. Huge changes.
There are some six Utubes, taken together are impressive for the energy put into making them.
There is one UNDERWATER set & drag comparison you could watch.... with Supeme, Boss, Rocna, Spade, Fortress, Delta and even a CQR and an 'authentic' Bruce. First WAR video shows five anchors dragged at zero scope (shaft ON firm grassy sandy seafloor) draging just like we expect CQR, on their sides- NEVER diving in. Mantus also took about 10ft to finally dive in & set. SET is a relative term.

Outside at their tent, a long conversation with the guy about the anchor - not the doctor-inventor. They had a dry setup with 10#-15# Supreme, Rocna, Delta, and Mantus*, all laying on their side as they would on a plywood seafloor. He asked me to lift the tip of each fluke with a finger, to demonstrate where weight was concentrated. Equal weight anchors.....but pressure was doubled (painful) under the Mantus tip. Now THAT'S interesting.
Granted Mantus has a wider stance (therefor more tip weight) because of the rollbar stub-outs on the end of the fluke..... and those constructions on certain seabottoms will sink in easily, thereby lessening weight on the tip......but also, these rather strange appendages will keep the anchor from skidding - and, we have to accept it is designed that way to help trip the tip into the seabed. Mantus advertises INSTANT SET!
[*no Ultra, no Spade lead weighted tips] SKIDDING KEEPS ANCHORS FROM SETTING. (no kidding)

My demonstrator also pointed out a couple of glaring differences between MANTUS and SUPREME. Supreme fluke has the spear point "beveled on the wrong side." The chamfer should be on TOP of the blade... not underneath. Here's the logic:
Imagine a wood chisel. Which way would you hold a chisel to knock off a wood plug in a counterbore? Naturally, with the bevel down on the work, so the blade doesn't dig into the surface. Your hand guides the chisel slightly up as it slices off the bung and you haven't gouged it like you did a hundred times before.
OK, we want the anchor's sharpened bevel to catch 'the work'.....where would we have the bevel?
No kidding.....not undercut, because it LOOKS cool that way.... like Supreme does it (and Rotten Rocky), bevel the top of the fluke, leaving a bloody chisel edge that digs in as soon as the anchor moves.....where Mantus has it.
So simple and logical, it's cutting edge.

And also THIS comparison with Manson. It's a given (to Ebb, anyway) that Supreme is a handsome, hunky, steroidal hook.
Its roll bar has an equal and substantial role in its aesthetics.
Mantus makes theirs REMOVABLE. Use it when you need it. Proportionally, it's lighter in appearance and weight, more like bone than muscle.
The entomorphic look of the Mantus is emphasized with its wide spindly rollbar bolted on.
Seen from a sensible rather than aesthetic viewpoint, it becomes acceptable - moreso, if practicality is compared with its pumped up cousin.

Mantus is appearing on sail & cruise forums. Anecdotally performs as well as Supreme. Seems to hold in current and tidal changes.

At the Show they had a stainless copy on display. Even it looked... experimental. The anchor is a TAKE-APART.
It will always have that attribute as an impediment. Never fashionable like hi-heels Ultra - always flip-flop affordable.
With real reservations as to undisclosed alloys Mantus is made with..... it seems like a great stowable backup anchor for a small cruiser
......more reliable perhaps than an aluminum Fortress......maybe the Spade too.

Imco, one undeniable advantage of the Supreme design is its FLAT NON-BOWL fluke. Open, curved, not a bowl.
[The little Rocna in the boat show comparison display has the usual rear fluke upturns that make the anchor into a SCOOP, and imco can only hinder its ability to set deeper when a situation calls for it.....when you pray it will stay! Imco, scoop anchors will load and pull out.
Flow of sand or mud over the top of the fluke as it is pulled under is diverted by the up-turns at the back of the blade - if flow continues, the extra force pushes the back of the anchor downward - which redirects the pointy end upward. Not really where you want it to go.]

MANTUS is not bowl shaped - it is not a one diameter rolled fluke like Supreme - it is a single plate with three angled planes that runs flat & clean from tip to back - making it unlikely to collect seafloor. THIS IS THE MANTUS' BEST FEATURE...... The stub rollbar connectors probably won't stop bury as much as the angled rollbar gussets under the fluke on Supreme and Rocna anchors. Comparison testing is needed. Mantus' more open top platform than Supreme, suggests mud won't stick & pack but slip off the blade.
YET, sleek Supreme with its impediments and knobly Mantus are equally handicapped.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...

MANTUS is a major achievement BUT it has imco some major PROBLEMS:
PROTRUDING HEXHEADS on the bottom of the fluke are dangerous and have to be designed away......Or leave them there
and WELD THE TIP DOUBLER ONTO BOTTOM of the fluke....with bolt heads sheltered within or behind the reinforcement.
Also, inherently flawed are nuts and bolts at the shaft-to-fluke connect.....nuts on top screw into a deminished shaft diameter due to threading. Problem: fasteners shouldn't be in tension, constant concern about bolts loosening but also corrosion in cut threads. Technogical backward steps. MANTUS CANNOT BE PUT ON YOUR DECK BECAUSE OF PROTRUDING NUTS UNDER THE FLUKE. Absurd design flaw.

►SERIOUSLY, look into redesigning the take-apart fluke/shaft by inserting the shaft thru the bottom into a forged slot and fasten it together thru a collar with bolts in sheer across top of blade. Shaft seats into truncated slot (like wooden shaft of pick-mattock tool) with clevis pins holding it tight. No bolts to bend or wear or rust. Stronger the pull, tighter the join. Force is on the whole fluke, rather than bolts alone.◄

Horizontal rollbar stubs (can SNAG LINE & CHAIN and upset the anchor) .. why can't these wide-outs be on the same plane as the fluke? As extensions of the fluke angle. What's the problem? If they must stick out, the transition will be smoother, the anchor streamlined, looking less cranky - and more likely to SLIP THE RODE if it loops under the rollbar in a tidal change. Even less weight (less pipe) to the trailing edge (more tip weight!) Shank & fluke are mild steel...Ideal alloy: Grade 80 for the shank, Hi-Test 4140 for the blade. Must be made in USA. Rollbar should be galvanized inside, left open or rubber plugged.
THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT MANTUS IS MADE IN USA. Assume only US manufacture has control of materials and methods.
No disrespect - just want a winner I can have aboard!.................. IMCO....................
Like to see results of a destruction test (shank pull) on an unprepared full size (25#-35#) Mantus.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................
A perfect ALL-PURPOSE PROGRESSED ANCHOR doesn't exist. It's caught in the same bramble of compromise any MidgetOceanRacerCruiser like Ariel/Commander experiences. For the bluewater sailor.....
THERE IS NO CLOSE-ENOUGH for a primary anchor.
Trade-offs, cop-outs, sell-outs, half-measures in design, materials, methods do not apply to boat anchors.

[ebb]

Pretty much impressed with seafloor videos Mantus presents on their home page.
Won't quibble about anchor drag edits that might - or do - show the Mantus being towed along the bottom by the panga (or whatever) UNDER the surface of the seafloor.
Definitely IN the bottom rather than skipping along and stirring up clouds of sand or mud that all the other contenders seem to demonstrate.
Always possible to see videos on other manufacturer's sites that show their anchor out-performing the competition's.

Ever since the Rocna Debacle, admittedly Ebb has been over-sensitized to being taken for a chump by an anchor vendor.
Like being jilted by somebody trusted - the heart in the stomach disapates with time, but the memory is impressed in DNA forever.
The Mantus videos are obviously not third party, and are there to promote the featured Mantus.
But one thing is certain, anchor Mantus likes to set. Whether it likes to set DEEP is, imco, even more important and needs third party confirmation.
Whether we ever get that is a real problem. It's doubtful that WetsMarine will ever sponser comparison tests again !
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...

FROM MANTUS TESTIMONIALS
[Like the onsite video comparisons the testimonials are, of course, very Mantus positive.] QUOTE:
"Hi Greg:
Just received your 13lb. Being very curious how you got your design to set in hard
packed sand (where others fail), I had to try it right away in our yard. It did indeed set,
well done! It seems that you have perfected the chisel point, a little different than both our
Rocna and Manson.
I have to admit I'm a bit of an anchor buff, and have about 30 anchors in our boat house.,
and I love to photograph them under water to see how they perform. We have been
sailing on Georgian Bay since '65 (part of Lake Huron, one of the Great Lakes), where
the sea bed is often a combination of weed, rock, gravel, mud, and sometimes sand (and
old logs too left over from the days of logging the area).
You should think about a simple knock down design with perhaps one shank bolt and
welded tabs the shank foot slips into, it would be great for those who want to stow it in
pieces and need quicker deployment.
Again, great job, thanks! Brian"
.................................................. .................................................. ..................................

Well, at least one other Mantus fan calls for an UPGRADE of the SHAFT/FLUKE connect.
If I had the time I would buy a 25-35lb Mantus and proceed to change upgrade it into a trial anchor (as I see it!) as outlined in the preceding post.
1) Remove the welded shoe from the shaft.
2) Cut a precision slot for the shaft out of the fluke.
3) Weld together another shoe(collar) 1" to 1 1/2"H - and weld it to the fluke around the slot (filling former boltholes at the same time.) Shoe needs to follow exactly the outline of the shaft 'foot'. The thru-hole at the bottom of the fluke will be larger than the top of the collar.
4) Fit the 'restored' shaft base to the slot/shoe.
5) Drill holes sideways thru the shoe-collar and shaft end for clevis pins.
The idea is to create a truncated socket or shoe for the shaft to SEAT in.
Shaft inserts thru bottom of fluke reaching a point where the base stops even with the bottom of the fluke.

FLUKE. Where the rollbar is attached, it's current angled wide-outs will be bent back, straightened into the same plane as the fluke's twin shoulders.
Attachment tabs on the roll tube will be cut off and welded to the new angle. Tabs no longer will be connected on an arbitrary horizontal plane, but on the plane of the flukes. The fluke roll-bar ears will be cut off and welded back...on this experimental anchor.
.................................................. .................................................. .............................
A BETTER SHAFT BASE is for it to be factory hot forged into a thickened splay foot that dovetails and fits snugly on four sides into a truncated female shoe of the same wedge shape. With the shoe/housing bonded with the fluke, rather than the shaft as Mantus now has it.
A one-off trial shaft base can be built-up with weld rod and ground to the splayed shape in a small shop.
Don't want the expanded end to get stuck in the slot - which it might if too skinny. Snug, but easy to knock apart after use... without swearing.

Another change: orient the ROLLER-TUBE TABS so that they are inline with the pull of the anchor when it sets. Fore-n-aft.
Rotate them approximately 90° to parallel the center-line of the fluke. These decorations on the current model may act as tripping toes (I want to call them epaulettes) to get the rode to briefly lift the back of the anchor just enough to dive the fluke. Make 'em more streamlined.
Instead of drilling holes for nuts & bolts.....maybe weld heavy round bolt heads on short shanks into holes in the fluke. Have the rollbar tabs drop over the heads and set by pulling back into tear-drop style slots in the tabs. No tools (except maybe a rubber hammer) needed to knock the roller off! Nothing sticking out.
If that doesn't work, another alternative might be to have the roll-bar ends inserty into short next size up pipe stubs and pins.
What-do-you-know: A BOLTLESS, NUTLESS, KNOCK-APART MANTUS ! The 25-35 pounder in this DIY alteration may not end up as WIDE and perhaps change the heavy tip weight, instant set performance? What small boat anchors lack in overall weight, they can makeup in tip weight. More tip weight the better! This exercise is just toss for someone who is convinced the current Mantus ought to be upgraded.

Imco, streamlining the Mantus will result in a smoother DEEPER set. And FINESS the take-apart option.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .....
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .....

Once the INVENTOR has had his or her brainstorm, worked out the stuff not seen at first, gotten the plan, funding, materials together & created the product and a market (a significant BIG DEAL)
.......at that event, the ANCHOR falls into a crystaline sleep, stops developing or improving.

Take MANSON SUPREME: clearly this ground breaking anchor will be vastly improved by
(1)reversing the prominent point chamfer to bevel the top of the fluke... AND TO ASSURE INSTANT SET, bending the point down 3° or more.
(2) creating a conical fluke-blade, rather than cylindrical - flattening the arc at the back of the blade - to ease penetration and discourage compaction.
(3) lightening up on the roll bar. Less diameter, less back weight, more tip weight. (have to remember, it's just a helper)
(4) removing the under-blade gussets and tube ends that act as 'brakes' -- PUT THEM ON TOP - so the bottom of the fluke is clean and cuts freely into the seafloor. A lighter rollbar can also be removable - mounted in short cups welded to the top of the shoulders.
(5) one more thing might be added for upgrade: Round off the back of the fluke so that the anchor cannot stand upright as it does now.
(6) provide a shackle hole near the end of the shank at the back of the fluke for tandem anchoring or buoyed retrieval. A cruising anchor doesn't also need to be a sliding slot bass boat anchor. No-one but an idiot would trust their home to a sliding shackle.
Concept needs redesigning. Sadly, for Supreme, it's too late. - Supreme is frozen in time - and imco will be replicated without improvements... until it fades away.
Obviously, Manson know they have a problem with Supreme. Not just with the rollbar. Instead, they jive the awkward roll fluke BOSS as an improved upgrade. But say it's all about power boat anchor retrieval. Now they have TWO problematic close-enough-but-no-cigar new gens.
It's not about sales and fudging anchors to fit off-the-shelf anchor rollers...IT'S ABOUT HOW WELL AN ANCHOR HOLDS THE BOAT.

Trial up-grade models can fairly easy be knocked together and actually tested. But changing the current Supreme can only be done at the factory. Might make a model of an improved version in fiberglass, try weighted tips. Use it as a lunch hook, drag it on a beach, see how it performs.
Problem with an actual upgrade Supreme II or Mantus II is that it puts the excellence of originals in limbo. A good-enough-anchor requires a whole raft of flimflam that even a vendor has to believe. Skippers, equally, are locked into Bad Science and mediocre sales hype that doesn't hold water. Forums are full of unenlightened posts extolling the virtues of unenlightened anchors. Good enough anchors crank sailors into darwinian spirals. On a rocky lee shore during rising winds, when a skipper sets his maybe-it-will-maybe-it-won't CQR or DANFORTH, DELTA or SPADE, or that spiffy NEWGEN HOOKEROONIE... . . . . . . and it begins to drag....
he and his anchor become extinct.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______
A person with a new idea is a crank until the idea succeeds. Mark Twain

[ebb]

Sent MANTUS a version of page 11 here.
I know it's a chore to read.


Got a short chatty e'mail back from Greg Kutsen. Last line reads:

"The reason we did not make the shank slide through the fluke,
is if the bottom surface of the fluke is not smooth,
it negatively affects the likelihood and quality of a set in a hard bottom...."

If it's not smooth, that's my point, exactly!
Any bump is avoidable, but even a smooth elongated bulge on the bottom is better design than four totally offensive hexheads....gee whiz.

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...............................................

"You've got something better, I fancy.
You are the stormy petrel of crime, Watson. What is it?" ----Sherlock Holmes, The Naval Treaty.
(...a smarter anchor.)
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................

Any design anchor will set in certain bottoms better than others. We want an all-purpose anchor - muti-bottom anchor.

DIVING ANCHOR
We have learned that some popular old-style anchors are difficult if not impossible to set in many bottoms. Plows like the Delta and CQR are not trustworthy, they zipper seabeds and seldom dig in.
Scoop anchors like the Claw, Bruce and partially others like Rocna and Spade will often take a bite out of the bottom and hold it in the fluke. What this does is negate or disengage the blade by leaving the blade to pull a wad of seafloor, rather than allowing the metal to slice and slip deeper into the bottom. The more extreme 'authenic' Bruce or forged Manson Ray pulls out a ball of bottom when it drags.

An anchor under tension shouldn't walk along the sea floor or just under the surface in a partial set. It must keep diving into the sea floor... if that's what it takes to hold the boat in place.
The sailboat's primary anchor has to do two things equally well:
FIRST Merely pulling the anchor at 2to1 or 12to1 scope should always, every time, encourage the blade to slip into the sea-floor for its initial set.
SECOND When conditions worsen, it is crucial an anchor keep digging in without being defeated by its dandy but dumb design features.
(Handles of garden spades are housed in sockets molded into the front face. Back of the blade is more or less flat and uneventful -
BUT ALWAYS SMOOTH - the force of a foot cuts a clean hole. The soil in front breaks and crumbles and the gardener turns his garden-bed.

A BOAT ANCHOR'S PURPOSE IS NOT TO BE A SHOVEL
Setting anchor means cutting into the seabed by pulling. This means that the shank side of the fluke, the front, pulls disturbed or turned-up bottom. It's a self defeating hold. Obviously, further penetration is what is going to hold the boat. Not detached loosened material.
Anchors with impediments to diving in (whimsies like trim tabs & accent pieces, roll-tubes, prominent tube ends and attachments on the bottom of the fluke) can, imco, be dangerous. This will include the wide-out horizontal tabs on the shoulders of the MANTUS fluke.
Anchors may seem to hold, yet easily drag later, because initial set is never deep enough.
In fact, deep setting seems to be discouraged by all new generation anchor designs.

Anchors with a single scoop or spoon, meant to grab onto the bottom with a concave blade (like Rocna, Spade, and to some extent the super slick wedge Ultra).....
cancels the piercing action of the blade by separating and holding a wad (even pebbles, sand or mud) of bottom the anchor is supposed to penetrate.
{Of course, I'm trying to get a point across here. No tests have been done to support this argument. And it will probably have to be proven or deproven with a well designed virtual reality program....if not by cleaned up experimental anchors.}
An iron bowl holding on to the seafloor, like a 300lb mooring mushroom we'd want for our A/C, isn't portable enough. Nor is a piece of pie shaped mushroom hook. Because, simply, a piece of sea-bed in the fluke keeps it from deep set. It achieves its scoop and as if it is designed to do so, rolls out with its cargo. A muffled 25lb scoop is unlikely to hold the boat, unless it weighs 100lbs. OK, look at it this way: Suppose you have to haul up your favorite anchor and it has a glob of mud glued in its fluke (or a jammed rock)... and it has to be dropped immediately to reset....
Will you leave that glob on the anchor when you're going to try it again? Maybe you have the wrong anchor.

HOP SKIP JUMP. A scoop type anchor is not a deep setting anchor.
A fluke to take hold of the bottom has to act dynamically at all times. Can't be influenced by a disengaged plug of sea floor in its face while holding on. Plain flat flukes work clean and sharp when penetrating. When additional depth of set is absolutely required, we assume it'll slip in deeper.

{Sometimes the Supreme flat curved fluke seems to act like a scoop (according to my friends at P.S. in one of their tests)....because sticky bottom compacts on the curved-up sides of the fluke....disabling the anchor. Certain sea-floors aren't part of Supreme's all-purpose intelligent design.}
The bottom of an anchor's fluke imco must be as smooth and clean as possible from tip to tail.
Likewise the top of the fluke ought to be as free as possible of nooks & doodahs, blocks & barriers, to help penetration..

Highly polished, super slick, wedge-bottomed ULTRA has edge-fluke brakes (in the form of prominent downturned fins) on its shoulders - possibly inspired by Supreme/Rocna/Spade. These appendages are there, they say, to keep the wide tips of the blade from digging in before the pointy end. Which is conceptually understandable, but counter-intuitive. Form forgot function. The bottom of the Ultra anchor is not made for multi-seabed penetration. Quickline probably did all their pre-production testing in wet sand.
It's more plausible that Supreme/Rocna roll-bar designs required these little fins as gussets to support welding roll-tubes to the blade.
(Both Supreme and Rocna, imco, mistakenly, put these gussets on pipe ends allowed to protrude underneath the blade, where they still are to this day, rather than more logically terminating them on top of the fluke.
{ Want to guess why P.Smith publically hates Supreme so much?... because Manson copied his biggest mistake! Have to own your mistakes, but sharing them with your biggest competitor, horrors!! They act like hooks designed to keep the fluke from burying. Whatever for? An unencumbered fluke bottom surely is content to cut and dive in better. Real tests will prove this.}
ULTRA marketing, rather than good science, imco, tells us their fins actually help the anchor stay buried (in wet sand) during 90degree turns. 180degree pullouts not mentioned! .....Balderdash, there is NO support for this nonsense - visual or logical.

If a roll-tube or weighted tip orients the hook upright to initially sit on its fluke, then gussets or fins at the ends of the fluke are at least redundant.. Quickline, ultimately, could flatten the ULTRA scoop, which will add more stability to the upright attitude of the anchor in its ready position.... removing the fin barriers altogether.
If non-roll-tube Quickline Ultra has proved to its inventor that these impediments on the bottom of the fluke are indispensable, he can remove them to the top of the blade and line them up to stream with the pull (like the fins of a '59 Cadillac Eldorado), rather than angled, as they are, at opposing 40 degrees along the bottom edges of the fluke. It's obvious these dynamic duos discourage the anchor from setting deeply. What is that logic?? You can spin hype supporting these appendages - but they are as useless as epaulettes on a falcon, if not dangerous.
Ultra really has to get real. These angled fins may just discourage Ultra from adequately setting in all kinds of firm bottoms, mud-sand-grass, because the weighted point of the fluke is a wedge that must displace material to penetrate rather than cut into seabed like a blade point. Stainless Ultra wouldn't work at all if it wasn't so sleek and slippery.

Prominent tube and gusset ends below the fluke shoulders on Supreme & Rocna - kopykat angular fins on the Ultra - and the angled wide-outs on the Mantus - are hyped to provide them conceptual genius for being there. The appendages are ALL inept, awkward, ugly and plain wrong - if I say so myself. Let's include here the flawed single point fluke concepts: HUMP and SCOOP ! !
BUGEL, whose flat blade 'home boatshop' concept started it all, had it right.. sadly, never finessed to an upgrade - as our inspired pretenders have all attempted.

Inspriratus interruptus: What are these anchor makers collectively thinking? New-gens promise so much,
but not one really delivers a truly superior anchor.

Fast set, deep penetration, intuitive design. Trust my life and my boat to a half fast anchor?
Insurance, and certification companies like RINA and Lloyds could have a stake in this.

C'mon, somebody, THE TIME HAS COME... STEP UP, DO IT RIGHT.