Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 36 of 36

Thread: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

  1. #21

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    I too carry three anchors, two are aluminum and why not. If I can carry anchors that weigh a fraction of a steel anchor or a concrete block why wouldn’t I? Speaking of concrete blocks, the way I see some boaters anchor they might as well use a concrete block or even the heaviest anchor they can handle. Maybe it’s because they haven’t developed the technique to anchor correctly. In that case the heavier the better. Muscle and machinery to a point can overcome incompetence but only to a point.

  2. #22

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    I get it now; if your smart enough to know how to anchor correctly use the lightest and most advanced anchor. If not use the heaviest or a train wheels or even a concrete block.

  3. #23

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    Yep, only 2500+ nights at anchor, what would I know?

    Anyway, the salesmen have obviously got you convinced. A clever 10 kg anchor will outperform anything.

    Good luck with that.

  4. #24

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    Quote Originally Posted by colemj View Post
    Of the three anchors we carry, two are aluminum.

    Mark
    What is your primary made of?

    We also have an aluminium anchor. For use as a stern anchor.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    currently Columbia/Panama
    Posts
    346

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    Our primary is steel. The two aluminum anchors are backups, but each sized for use as a primary anchor for the boat. The main reason the primary is steel is because aluminum anchors are not as rugged with regard to shank bending, and they are more difficult to get set in hard bottoms and thick weeds. The main reason the backups are aluminum is weight (and disassembly, but that has nothing to do with the material - just design).

    The tested and expected holding power for all of them are the same - weight is not a consideration to a set anchor. We did not choose a steel primary anchor because of weight.

    Mark
    Mark Cole
    Manta 40 "Reach"
    www.svreach.com

  6. #26

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    44C Please tell us about the anchors you use

  7. #27

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    Quote Originally Posted by colemj View Post
    Our primary is steel. The two aluminum anchors are backups, but each sized for use as a primary anchor for the boat. The main reason the primary is steel is because aluminum anchors are not as rugged with regard to shank bending, and they are more difficult to get set in hard bottoms and thick weeds. The main reason the backups are aluminum is weight (and disassembly, but that has nothing to do with the material - just design).

    The tested and expected holding power for all of them are the same - weight is not a consideration to a set anchor. We did not choose a steel primary anchor because of weight.

    Mark
    And you use the lightest steel anchor of that design available, because design is more important than weight?

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    currently Columbia/Panama
    Posts
    346

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    Quote Originally Posted by 44C View Post
    And you use the lightest steel anchor of that design available, because design is more important than weight?
    Yes, we use the lightest steel anchor of that design which is appropriately sized for our boat. The size is calculated on holding power, which is proportional to the fluke area, and not the weight. An equivalent aluminum anchor has the same fluke area but half the weight, and has the same holding power.

    I know you would like me to go down the rabbit hole of "why don't I use a 2kg steel anchor if weight isn't important?", but I think you are missing the point of designed shape vs. weight here. For equivalently sized anchors of a design, weight isn't important once set - resistance to pull through the bottom is all that matters, and that is dependent on fluke area presented. Weight does have some role to play in getting the anchor set initially, particularly in hard bottoms, soupy mud, and thick weeds.

    But after that it plays no role. Consider a 25kg steel ball and a 25kg steel Rocna - which would you prefer holding your boat to the bottom? Would you be willing to go with the steel ball over the Rocna if it was 50kg? 100kg?

    Mark
    Mark Cole
    Manta 40 "Reach"
    www.svreach.com

  9. #29

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    Funny, now you're making my point for me. Keep increasing the weight of the steel ball, and ultimately it will hold better than the rocna.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    currently Columbia/Panama
    Posts
    346

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    Funny, now you're making my point for me. Weight only trumps design and shape when it gets to ridiculous relative proportions. Until then, it plays only a minor role.

    Let's turn this around. You have a 100kg steel ball and a 1kg Rocna. How large does the Rocna need to be increased to hold equivalently? If the answer is less than 99kg, then weight is not the ultimate importance.

    Taking this a bit further, what is the holding difference between aluminum and steel anchors of identical size and design, but different weights due to material?

    Mark
    Mark Cole
    Manta 40 "Reach"
    www.svreach.com

  11. #31

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    Relative proportions don't matter. The comment was that design was more important than weight. But the fact is, if it's heavy enough ANY shape will work.

    Whereas if it's not heavy enough, even the best design won't work.

    Of course what we want is the best combination of setting ability and holding power for a given weight. And that's where design becomes important.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    currently Columbia/Panama
    Posts
    346

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    OK, we will agree to disagree. The comment that design is more important than weight is true. Carrying the opposite argument to reductio ad absurdum doesn't prove it is untrue - it only shows that there is a minimum design surface area needed for a given application, and that comes with a material weight associated with it.

    Our 9kg aluminum Spade anchor has the same holding power as our 25kg steel one. A 9kg aluminum ball would not hold as well as a 25kg one.

    For me, I'm looking for the best combination of setting ability, holding power, and ruggedness. Once those are determined/chosen, the weight follows as an inherent property and plays no active role in the choice itself. I don't choose a particular weight first and then look for the best performance at that weight.

    This is why one finds a 25kg steel Spade has far greater setting and holding power than a 25kg steel CQR. The 9kg aluminum Spade also does.

    Mark
    Mark Cole
    Manta 40 "Reach"
    www.svreach.com

  13. #33

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    Reductio ad absurdum is a genuine mathematical proof. Simply saying something "is true" isn't.

    And funnily enough, you made my argument for me again. A 9 kg aluminum ball won't hold as well as a 25 kg one. Because of weight.

    And I hold reservations about the claims that aluminum anchors hold as well as steel ones of the same size. Certainly they won't set as well, and being less well set, would seem to me to be unlikely to hold as well.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    currently Columbia/Panama
    Posts
    346

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    You keep side stepping my point that our 9kg anchor holds as well as our 25kg one of similar design. And the point that a 25kg Rocna will out-hold a 25kg CQR. It has nothing to do with weight unless one is comparing poor designs like a ball, or comparing a good design with a poorer one.

    Since we own an aluminum anchor, I can attest from experience that they do hold as well as our steel one of the same size/design. They do set as well in most substrate, but don't set as easily in hard pack or thick weeds. Once set, they are in and hold the same as the steel anchor. I trust our boat to it.

    Did you choose your anchor by first specifying a particular weight and then grabbing the first one you found at that weight? If you instead chose a design and material first, then chose an appropriate size for your boat at that design, and the actual weight just followed intrinsically from the design, material, and size with no deliberate choosing on your part, then design was more important than weight to you.

    I imagine we have both presented our cases far enough now for others to judge.

    Mark
    Mark Cole
    Manta 40 "Reach"
    www.svreach.com

  15. #35

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    I haven't said design doesn't matter. What I've said is that ULTIMATELY weight wins. You can keep adding weight to any shape, and holding power will increase. You can't keep adding design.

    A good design will outperform a lesser design even of a greater weight, but only up to a point.
    Last edited by 44C; 19th February 2018 at 11:04 PM.

  16. #36

    Default Re: Anchor upgrade for a 2015 Leopard 44

    What a lot of "bums", well "bottoms" actually.

    Not all bottoms are equal, neither therefore are anchors. A Danforth for example will work in sloppy mud, add the mud flukes and it will work in super sloppy mud where just about any other anchor, technical or otherwise, steel balls included, will just keep on going. At the other extreme a grapnel will work best in rock crevases where the arms are short and close to the fulcrum.

    There is of course pretty much everything in between. Bruce anchors work well in average bottoms but will not penetrate crusty coral sand. Spade's are also excellent all rounders and will penetrate crusty bottoms but will not slew when driven deep and therefore have a tendency to bend their shanks or snag their chain, unlike a Bruce in similar conditions. Then there are CQR's does anyone use these anymore? Sorry that was my anchor prejudice "breaking out".

    So, yes weight and design matter but it is horses for courses.

    Peter

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

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