I have a Danforth anchor on my Hunter 42. The stem is over 40" in length, and it sits on a bow roller of the same length. The bow roller has a roller at both ends, and the stem of the Danforth rests on both rollers. I have an electric windlass. I am thinking of changing my main anchor to a Lewmar claw (the Bruce design). It has a 27 3/4" stem and will rest only on the front roller. It is about 12" too short to reach the back roller. Is there a reason I should change the bow roller to accomodate the new, shorter anchor?
bow rollers
- Thread starter Aimless21233
- Start date
- Status
Try It First....
...before you buy it or at least a satisfaction guarantee. Better, try one of a dockmates'. The reason being that I had one given to me from a diver who recovered it. I found that it did not retrieve at all well on my 40.5 roller. It fouled and jammed. I put my Danforth back on. I think it was a matter of balance and shank length. Others may have had differing experiences, and I'm sure they will interject if so, but the easy way is to just test it on your own boat. As for the aft roller, I don't remember it as a problem, but I only used it a couple of times. Rick D.
...before you buy it or at least a satisfaction guarantee. Better, try one of a dockmates'. The reason being that I had one given to me from a diver who recovered it. I found that it did not retrieve at all well on my 40.5 roller. It fouled and jammed. I put my Danforth back on. I think it was a matter of balance and shank length. Others may have had differing experiences, and I'm sure they will interject if so, but the easy way is to just test it on your own boat. As for the aft roller, I don't remember it as a problem, but I only used it a couple of times. Rick D.
Reconsider
your choice of new anchor - particularly since it's a cheap copy of the genuine Bruce. Here's what Bruce used to say about the issue: "At first glance the genuine Bruce anchor and the look-alikes that have flooded the market appear to be the same anchor. Close inspection will reveal that the look-alike is different in a number of disturbing ways. If you line up a row of the look-alikes you will find further disturbing features: whereas the genuine Bruce anchor has the same geometry throughout the anchor range, the look-alikes have shank angles that vary widely throughout the anchor range and even between same-size look-alikes... "Would you leap from a plane with a haversack on your back because it looks like the real thing and comes at a rock bottom price? Remember an anchor is a safety device upon which the survival of you and your boat may ultimately depend." And here's what West Marine say about the Claw: "Failed to set during this test. Maximum tension under 700lb., briefly." SAIL: "The Claw is Lewmar’s version of the popular Bruce anchor that cruisers have been using for years. It stows easily in a bow roller, its one-piece construction is super-strong, and it is reportedly designed to be effective in a variety of seabeds. However, our test results came as a bit of a surprise: The maximum load we recorded for this anchor with 5:1 scope was 886 pounds. And that was only a short spike before the anchor released completely. During most of the 5:1 pulls, it seemed to set and release rapidly without ever really catching. One pull showed it was slowly dragging under a load of about 300 pounds, but we were never able to say with certainty that the anchor had set. We recorded similar results with 7:1 scope. One idea we considered was that the Claw’s flukes were simply not sharp enough to penetrate the harder claylike sand.The beach pull was also telling in that the Claw dug a much longer trench than other anchors that produced better results during the holding-power pulls." What's your boat worth to you?
your choice of new anchor - particularly since it's a cheap copy of the genuine Bruce. Here's what Bruce used to say about the issue: "At first glance the genuine Bruce anchor and the look-alikes that have flooded the market appear to be the same anchor. Close inspection will reveal that the look-alike is different in a number of disturbing ways. If you line up a row of the look-alikes you will find further disturbing features: whereas the genuine Bruce anchor has the same geometry throughout the anchor range, the look-alikes have shank angles that vary widely throughout the anchor range and even between same-size look-alikes... "Would you leap from a plane with a haversack on your back because it looks like the real thing and comes at a rock bottom price? Remember an anchor is a safety device upon which the survival of you and your boat may ultimately depend." And here's what West Marine say about the Claw: "Failed to set during this test. Maximum tension under 700lb., briefly." SAIL: "The Claw is Lewmar’s version of the popular Bruce anchor that cruisers have been using for years. It stows easily in a bow roller, its one-piece construction is super-strong, and it is reportedly designed to be effective in a variety of seabeds. However, our test results came as a bit of a surprise: The maximum load we recorded for this anchor with 5:1 scope was 886 pounds. And that was only a short spike before the anchor released completely. During most of the 5:1 pulls, it seemed to set and release rapidly without ever really catching. One pull showed it was slowly dragging under a load of about 300 pounds, but we were never able to say with certainty that the anchor had set. We recorded similar results with 7:1 scope. One idea we considered was that the Claw’s flukes were simply not sharp enough to penetrate the harder claylike sand.The beach pull was also telling in that the Claw dug a much longer trench than other anchors that produced better results during the holding-power pulls." What's your boat worth to you?
Craig, Hearsay and on the job performance...
I have three Manta's, Bruce knock-off's. I use my 11#er with 10' of 1/4" chain with 7 to 1 scope. It failed me once on a reset in heavy grass. You can not tell me that Rocna with the semi circular rim (that defines it from a Delta) would not have fouled on a 180, or even a 90 degree reset with grass involved. r.w.landau
I have three Manta's, Bruce knock-off's. I use my 11#er with 10' of 1/4" chain with 7 to 1 scope. It failed me once on a reset in heavy grass. You can not tell me that Rocna with the semi circular rim (that defines it from a Delta) would not have fouled on a 180, or even a 90 degree reset with grass involved. r.w.landau
I was a farmer long before I was a sailor
This is what I know about plows. If you want a plow to run deep you must set the beam so that the point is angled into the ground. If you want it to run not so deep you change the angle of pull. It is time to do the math. a 5:1 scope is about 11 degrees from the horizontal 8:1 is about 7 degrees and 10:1 is about 5.7 degrees. If the angle that the anchor makes with the beam is less than the angle of pull the plow comes out of the ground. If a plow anchor won't hold at a 5:1 scope don't condemn it until you have determined that it won't hold at any scope. If you must anchor in areas that demand a 5:1 scope then choose an anchor that works at that scope.
This is what I know about plows. If you want a plow to run deep you must set the beam so that the point is angled into the ground. If you want it to run not so deep you change the angle of pull. It is time to do the math. a 5:1 scope is about 11 degrees from the horizontal 8:1 is about 7 degrees and 10:1 is about 5.7 degrees. If the angle that the anchor makes with the beam is less than the angle of pull the plow comes out of the ground. If a plow anchor won't hold at a 5:1 scope don't condemn it until you have determined that it won't hold at any scope. If you must anchor in areas that demand a 5:1 scope then choose an anchor that works at that scope.
Fair
Unless done by an independant (even then suspect) firm, these tests done by worst marine and rags (remember these are not non $ profit entities by a country mile) are just about as wholesome as the fellows from the tobacco industry who lined up and one by one lied under oath on nicotine being non addictive then the senate bought and paid for by lobbiests pass laws from these (tests?) done by the the very lobbiests themselves quite neat we have some examples but not as blatent as down there in the (land of the free) shhhhh. rocna is not all that great an answer for all conditions in most esperience the all mighty cqr is don't buy into new zealand either we use to live there the marinas are quite good at cheating they boycotted American warships call the indiginous peoples (mauris) the n word plus were cowered into giving the french back their 'commandos' that blew up the peacniks ship Rainbow Warrior after the frech blew it to smitherins then were caught by a security guard lol.
Unless done by an independant (even then suspect) firm, these tests done by worst marine and rags (remember these are not non $ profit entities by a country mile) are just about as wholesome as the fellows from the tobacco industry who lined up and one by one lied under oath on nicotine being non addictive then the senate bought and paid for by lobbiests pass laws from these (tests?) done by the the very lobbiests themselves quite neat we have some examples but not as blatent as down there in the (land of the free) shhhhh. rocna is not all that great an answer for all conditions in most esperience the all mighty cqr is don't buy into new zealand either we use to live there the marinas are quite good at cheating they boycotted American warships call the indiginous peoples (mauris) the n word plus were cowered into giving the french back their 'commandos' that blew up the peacniks ship Rainbow Warrior after the frech blew it to smitherins then were caught by a security guard lol.
- Status