Choosing a Bower Primarily for Sand/Mud versus for Rock

[Mako]

This is in regards to choosing the better primary, stockless anchor on a single-anchor trawler. Weight would be the same for either. The choice is between a Poole TW and an AC-14. Both are high holding power, and at minimum, will be sized per class rules. The application is a “cruising” boat, so there is no predominant bottom type to plan for.

I got in touch with Sotra and their response was:

“The answers to your questions below is the Poole TW. They are better on sandy bottom, and AC14 anchors are better for stone bottom.”

My feeling however leans more towards the AC14. The other relies too much on fluke area, like a Danforth which historically does poorly in grass or rock. If the designer okays, then I may up the weight one step higher, perhaps with heavy leader, but that is to be determined.

It seems that few on this forum use stockless anchors, but I would appreciate some feedback, especially from the commercial guys, who usually see these on their workboats. Thanks

 

[Shrew]

The funny thing about asking commerical fishing boats and work boats their opinion on anchors is, these folks anchor the LEAST. They go from dock to dock loading and unloading, or from dock to fishing grounds, to dock to offload, back to dock or fishing grounds again.

 

[FF]

Some of the head boats in the NE anchor while the folks are on the rail fishing , but the boat has the engines on and is fully manned.


They seem to love the wire real setup that can be dropped and retrieved from the pilot house.

 

[Nomad Willy]

I met a man that had/has a 50’ steel trawler and spent all summers (at that time) in SE Alaska. His boat wasn’t as heavy as most steel boats. He had a Navy anchor on his bow and said he used it all the time. It was at least his primary.
He also didn’t have windshield wipers and plastic windows. He said of the wipers “don’t need-um”.
I don’t have wipers either and he’s right. Don’t need-um but still would like-um.
After 12 years it’s never gotten to the top of the to do list.

Not my Navy and probably the only one around here but a nice painted (no rust .. unusual on a Navy) example.

 

[tozz]

This is in regards to choosing the better primary, stockless anchor on a single-anchor trawler. Weight would be the same for either. The choice is between a Poole TW and an AC-14. Both are high holding power, and at minimum, will be sized per class rules. The application is a “cruising” boat, so there is no predominant bottom type to plan for.

I got in touch with Sotra and their response was:

“The answers to your questions below is the Poole TW. They are better on sandy bottom, and AC14 anchors are better for stone bottom.”

My feeling however leans more towards the AC14. The other relies too much on fluke area, like a Danforth which historically does poorly in grass or rock. If the designer okays, then I may up the weight one step higher, perhaps with heavy leader, but that is to be determined.

It seems that few on this forum use stockless anchors, but I would appreciate some feedback, especially from the commercial guys, who usually see these on their workboats. Thanks

I have a forfjord #12 on our boat and have had great sets anchoring mostly in mud here in Puget sound area. Unless we are in tight anchorage with limited swing we always try to get at least 5:1 scope out. No issues even up to 20-22 kt this year and with another boat rafted up.

 

[Lepke]

I have a 200# navy style as a primary anchor, but carry a danforth as a storm anchor. I've never had a danforth drag in 60 years and many bottoms. I also carry a 80# plow for a stern anchor. The navy anchor works ok with proper scope. Thinking of changing. I had a folding stainless anchor on my fishing boat. It never dragged either. Really good in rocks. Wish they'd make them again.

 

[MurrayM]

This stockless anchor is supposed to be rated as super high holding power: https://www.posidonia.com/anchors/anchor-for-ships-and-yachts/ptw-plus

 

[Mako]

tozz - I've always heard great things about those Forfjords. But I get the feeling they were invented in the Pacific NW. I have never seen them in Asia, not even cheap Chinese copies. What length and displacement is your boat?

Lepke - The Navy has never been known as a good holding anchor. Plus isn't 200lbs a bit light for that 80ft beast of yours? Perhaps grab a 300lb HHP anchor from a used reseller. Probably plenty of Pooles lying around.

I like the comment from Sotra about the AC-14 being very good in rocks. Everything holds well in sand or clay - but rocks, hard pan or coral is the challenge.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Look at how well/bad the Forfjord did in Steve G’s “Anchor Setting Videos”. I’ll save you the trouble .. did poorly. My own short experience poor also. And as for mud the Forfjord has very small fluke area.

The AC-14 may be better in mud that it appears. Notice the big “shoulder” that probably acts much like a bull dozer blade and the flukes pull it down so it’s more effective. Typical of stockless designs but the AC-14 looks to take this to a higher level I think/suspect. But Sortra should know.

Murray,
I like the pivot point on this one. Notice the 41 degree throat angle. Most or maybe even all the stockless types have much more angle than toy boat anchors.

 

[cafesport]

If your boat design requires a stock less I’d recommend at least going with stud link chain. The Mega’s anchoring around us this summer with stockless never got a set, but they were also bound to run 24 hour watches so it didn’t really matter.

 

[Mako]

Some have made comments that a short, really heavy leader (say 8' or so) before the chain can interfere with the anchor digging and setting properly. I understand that Fortress in particular have their own characteristics, but for other burying anchors, I don't understand this statement.

 

[AusCan]

In South Australian waters, almost all fishing boats have stockless anchors. Most are locally made, similar to the Klip design. And yes, the local fishing boats anchor a LOT during big blow as there are few dock facilities around.

The Klip style stockless anchor is the best you can get for our local rocky bottoms, especially thick sea grass over limestone, or a thin layer of sand over limestone.

I wouldn't recommend them for general cruising where soft botttoms may be encountered. Other wider fluked stockless anchors try to be a bit more of an all rounder, but I doubt if any have much holding power in soft mud.

 

[Steve Bedford]

I probably shared the situation on this forum about the charter boat fisherman here in the mud and soft bottoms of the Chesapeake Bay. He contacted me about an anchor. He had many brands including new generation anchors and and was constantly dragging. It was about his technique more than the anchor. He has 6’ of chain with a 200’ nylon rope for a rode. He drops the anchor a specific distance in front of where the fish are. Does not determine holding on the seabed. He drops it so his clients can fish. Does not power set the anchor and just drifts back so as not to scare the fish away from clients. He dragged a lot. I provided him with on of our anchors that was one size larger than I would normally recommend. Happy charter boat fisherman!

Steve

 

[Nomad Willy]

Some have made comments that a short, really heavy leader (say 8' or so) before the chain can interfere with the anchor digging and setting properly. I understand that Fortress in particular have their own characteristics, but for other burying anchors, I don't understand this statement.

Mako,
I assume leader means chain.
The big thing I learned from Sfteve’s video’s was that while setting anchor the tension on the fluke end/tip causes the anchor to pitch down putting downward pressure on the end of the shank. The chain holding the shank on the seafloor is typical but the downward force on the end of the shank was new to me. I had assumed before I saw a Claw shank dive down into the seabed that all tension on the rode caused the rode to rise and the anchor shank to be lifted UP. I assumed anchors tended to be pulled straight out with the shank lifted off the seafloor. Not so as evidenced by some of Steve’s vids. Apparently the tension on the rode causes the anchor to pitch down into the seafloor.

The XYZ anchor guy apparently realized that. The XYZ anchors have a small shank so he attached a 2-3’ length of cable to the anchor between the anchor shank and the chain. Since the chain was being pushed down into the seafloor substituting the cable made/makes it easier for the shank to dive into the seafloor. The cable causes far less resistance to penetration than the chain.
I’ve used a cable quite a bit but w/o a camera I have no idea what’s going on down there.

Anyway Mako this may be the mystery to the comments you have heard.

 

[ranger58sb]

I was actually going to suggest OP look at yourSuperMAX anchors... but the original post makes it seem like he's only considering two specific anchor models (I didn't recognize either one)...

-Chris

 

[Mako]

I need to stick with a stockless but rated high holding power. So these are the two models that are readily available in my market and seem to be the best rated.

Regarding Nomad’s comments - what you stated makes sense. I could see where a huge chain leader could interfere with the burying of the anchor.

 

[FF]

"I could see where a huge chain leader could interfere with the burying of the anchor."

The chain might help set an anchor but its primary purpose of a leader is to absorb the chafe on rocks and the bottom .

Chain can be scratched by rocks ,cable can be chafed or bent enough to perhaps to part?
Although with a 3/4 or one inch diameter cable its a remote chance.

Danforths was set with no leader , until after WWII and sales for the recreation market , where a boat might be anchored for a long time.

 

[Nomad Willy]

FF,
Much smaller cable than that or it would not be a benefit.
My cable piece is about 1/4” but my boat is small.
You’d hafta have a 90’ boat to require 3/4” cable.

I’ve always thought of the chain as weight to hold the anchor shank down on the seabed to give the anchor it’s best shot at setting. I’ve never had more than 15’ of chain and often use just 4’ but twice as heavy as one would usually use for a 30’ boat. Catenary wise it would be about the equivalent of 10’ of 1/4” chain. The heavier chain to hold the shank down better and to require less chain length for retrieval .. can run the line up closser to the capstan.
I’ve not had damage resulting from rock chaffeing here in the PNW.

Of course if I had a gipsie/windlass I’d have 1/4” chain. But I could still have my 4’ of 3/8” chain next to the anchor to aid in setting. But after initial setting the chain would reduce the shank penetration somewhat. I use to have the cable between the anchor and the 3/8” chain. The 3/8” chain would inhibit penetration more than the 1/4” chain.

 

[tozz]

tozz - I've always heard great things about those Forfjords. But I get the feeling they were invented in the Pacific NW. I have never seen them in Asia, not even cheap Chinese copies. What length and displacement is your boat?

63'
Approx 45 tons

There are so many variables to it and ymmv. We anchored out over labor day in 20+ kt and had no issues and even rafted up a smaller vessel that had dragged toward us with a bruce anchor. It had broken free and wouldn't reset. Lots of grass, kelp, and seaweed came up when they weighed anchor the next morning.

 

[Nomad Willy]

tozz,
The fishermen seem to make it work. But they have ground tackle so heavy any anchor at all would probably pwork.
I don’t know but I suspect that the Forfjord has rotational problems. I’ll explain. Some of the time Claw anchors set one side fluke and then (w the anchor sideways) the center fluke acts like a buldozer blade. It gives some holding but not as much as most expect. Then they complain about draging. I’ve seen quite a few Claws do this on dry or fairly dry land but usually they are hidden in the water.

Did you see the Danforth wagging along at 90 degrees (vertical) to where it’s supposed to be for quite a long ways. The ForFjord is closly related to the Danforth. The Dan is kinda Pigeon toed whereas the For is sorta splayed out or (duckfooted). At first I thought this was an advantage. But then I surmised that it would be an odd event for both flukes to enter the seabed equally seabeds being not uniform. So my theory is (heavy on the theory) that once one fluke starts down it overtakes the other and the anchor ends up vertical .... like a Northill.
The one time I tried to set my ForFjord it just slid along. Tried one of my XYZ’s and it took a stroll too. My S class Danforth hooked right up in the same place.
I had a friend w a 30’ Willard in Alaska and he had a 65lb For on his bow. Don’t remember what he said about it’s performance but the last time I saw him he was talk’in bout changing the For out. Most of the fishermenin the area used the For and those that didn’t mostly used the Claw. And those that didn’t use the Claw used the Deradnought. I have a 35lb example of the Dread. Only used it once. The quickest set I’ve ever experienced. The Dread worked immediately tension was on the rode. Amazing.

Anyway that’s my input on the ForFjord.

 

[tozz]

tozz,
The fishermen seem to make it work. But they have ground tackle so heavy any anchor at all would probably pwork.
I don’t know but I suspect that the Forfjord has rotational problems. I’ll explain. Some of the time Claw anchors set one side fluke and then (w the anchor sideways) the center fluke acts like a buldozer blade. It gives some holding but not as much as most expect. Then they complain about draging. I’ve seen quite a few Claws do this on dry or fairly dry land but usually they are hidden in the water.

Did you see the Danforth wagging along at 90 degrees (vertical) to where it’s supposed to be for quite a long ways. The ForFjord is closly related to the Danforth. The Dan is kinda Pigeon toed whereas the For is sorta splayed out or (duckfooted). At first I thought this was an advantage. But then I surmised that it would be an odd event for both flukes to enter the seabed equally seabeds being not uniform. So my theory is (heavy on the theory) that once one fluke starts down it overtakes the other and the anchor ends up vertical .... like a Northill.
The one time I tried to set my ForFjord it just slid along. Tried one of my XYZ’s and it took a stroll too. My S class Danforth hooked right up in the same place.
I had a friend w a 30’ Willard in Alaska and he had a 65lb For on his bow. Don’t remember what he said about it’s performance but the last time I saw him he was talk’in bout changing the For out. Most of the fishermenin the area used the For and those that didn’t mostly used the Claw. And those that didn’t use the Claw used the Deradnought. I have a 35lb example of the Dread. Only used it once. The quickest set I’ve ever experienced. The Dread worked immediately tension was on the rode. Amazing.

Anyway that’s my input on the ForFjord.

Good information and I appreciate the experience and knowledge! I see how in theory the fordjord could end up vertical or at least with one fluke bearing the load. We happen to have had good experiences with it as long as we put out at least 5:1 scope. We did drag off Stuart island once with 3:1 and I reset and dropped more chain.

My previous boat had an ultra and I loved that anchor. Set fast and firm everytime I used it.

Our nordlund came with the fordjord and a fortress fx-85 as a backup too. That's nice because it disassembles and I keep it tucked away in a lazzerette.

I haven't seen any dreads around us here in Seattle. Mostly new style like rocnas/ultras, deltas, and claws here. As mentioned previously the bruce seems to be very popular in the PNW.

 

[Mako]

I have a 35lb example of the Dread. Only used it once. The quickest set I’ve ever experienced. The Dread worked immediately tension was on the rode. Amazing.

That dread has quite small flukes, but as you mentioned earlier about the AC-14, it also has a huge "shoulder" that could be acting like a bulldozer blade. Good analogy. Perhaps you could do some more testing of that dread of yours.

 

[jimisbell]

I have a 200# navy style as a primary anchor, but carry a danforth as a storm anchor. I've never had a danforth drag in 60 years and many bottoms. I also carry a 80# plow for a stern anchor. The navy anchor works ok with proper scope. Thinking of changing. I had a folding stainless anchor on my fishing boat. It never dragged either. Really good in rocks. Wish they'd make them again.

If that stainless folding anchor was the Navy built Northill, they are available occasionally on the internet (Ebay) I just got a 30 pounder for $175. But the biggest one they made was only 50 pounds.

 

[foreverunderway]

I know this is not your question, but I believe it is to the point; anchoring.

In this age of "next gen" anchors, I think any discussion of any other sort of anchor for a vessel that relies on her ground tackle more than a few times a year, is rather pointless.
I poo-pooed the whole idea of a "next gen" anchor until I saw a boat anchor in Admiralty Bay, Bequia where every other boat, including mine, dragged consistently. In fact, I was so impressed I hopped into my dinghy and asked him what sort of anchor he was using. It was the first time I'd heard the name Rocna. By the way, we call our afternoon entertainment there the "drag fest" and trust me, it has nothing at all to do with guys in dresses!

A bit of research and several discussions with other Rocna users later and I was at that point where I really wanted one, but the $1500.00 price tag meant I'd have to work the budget to get one a few months down the road.
However, fortune smiled on me and I was able to pick one up for $300.00 from someone who couldn't fit the 88# monster to their boat. Hey, at that price, even if it didn't work out better than my present anchor, it was a cheap experiment.
For a year we dove on the anchor (we live on our anchor around 350 days a year) every time we set it, and that Rocna rarely took more than it's own length to set, without backing down at all (we will only back down on our anchor if Med mooring or dropping in no wind at all). To this day, 4 years later, through squalls to 65 knots, we have not dragged the Rocna noticeably at all.
If I had a boat that would not accommodate a Rocna, I would most definitely change the boat to suit a Rocna. As one old salt once said to me, "Any idiot can make a boat go, but it takes a seaman to stop one". I sleep very well every night on my "next-gen" Rocna anchor.

 

[Nomad Willy]

If that stainless folding anchor was the Navy built Northill, they are available occasionally on the internet (Ebay) I just got a 30 pounder for $175. But the biggest one they made was only 50 pounds.

50 pounds!
That would be a huge anchor. Mine is only 14lbs and it’s the biggest anchor I have.
But what I’m quoting you about is about your “Navy built Northill”. I don’t think the Navy builds anything. They contract to have built (to their drawings and specs) anything from buttons for uniforms to boats or ships.
So who did build the seaplane anchors?

I was in an ASW squadron in San Diego tha operated P2V’s and P5M Martin flying boats. The P5 was the biggest twin engined aircraft in the world .. at that time. So if a 50lb Northill can hold an airplane w a 118’ wingspan and 50000lb empty weight there little question it’s a capable anchor.

I look for things like anchors on Craig’s List.

 

[Moonfish]

We've only ever used the 65# Forfjord that came on our boat. Over 6 years and 3,500+ miles from Olympia to the Broughtons we have never dragged that anchor, even in 35 knots+. The previous owner went through a night in Alaska with 50kt winds and it held (said he didn't sleep a wink that night, though!).

Two things: One, we may be lucky (I'll take it!). Two, we have 50' of 1/2" chain, 12' of 3/8" chain, 38' of 5/16" chain, and 300' of 1/2" nylon rode. As was previously mentioned, if you have heavy enough chain any anchor will work. OK, maybe three things: a combination of one and two!

 

[Nomad Willy]

forever,
The Rocna is one of the best anchors in existence now but it’s only “the best” at one thing .. holding power. But at long scope only. I wouldn’t dissuade anyone from buying them and using them. And in lots of fairly common situations other anchors are better. Short scope, loose or slimy mud and the ability to be mounted on most boats are shortcommings for the Rocna. And it’s best in the world at holding power is almost matched by many other anchors.

We’ve discussed what are the best anchors available for 10-12 years and most all have a fairly good scope on how they stack up. There are at least 100’s of anchor posts (maybe thousands) and many are much like your post above but for various other anchors as well as the Rocna.

Now the posts on the anchoring section are mostly about performance in specific conditions, how to use an anchor and about where and how they are made. Anything interesting about anchors.

But having said this you made a good choice.

 

[foreverunderway]

forever,
The Rocna is one of the best anchors in existence now but it’s only “the best” at one thing .. holding power. But at long scope only..

Actually, much to my surprise, our Rocna is excellent at short scope anchoring as well. It is the most difficult anchor I've ever had to get up after only a night at anchor in sand. We will often bring the boat to straight above the Rocna and either have to forcibly power it out, or wait several minutes until it works itself loose.
However, this lil tale may change your mind about the scope necessary for a Rocna to hold. I'll certainly never anchor on 1.5:1 intentionally, but it's nice to now I can, at least for a short time, in good weather.
We pulled into Clifton Harbor in the early afternoon of Dec 31st, to clear into the SVG. I love Union Island and it's always a pleasure to visit there, but as I peered into the harbor from the entrance, I was amazed. The harbor was packed with more boats than I ever imagined it could be. As many as three Lagoon 52's were rafted up on a single mooring, making huge square blocks of water unavailable to yacht or dinghy. The pocket cruisers had snuck between anchored or moored boats as only a pocket cruiser can. In other words, it was a tiny bit congested.
Where oh where was I gonna stick this 53' boat for the 2 hours it usually takes us to get our customers ashore and back, and clear in? There was room in the deep area of the south side of the harbor, but we really didn't want to lay that much chain out for a lunch stop. There were usually a few good spots on the north side, near the Anchorage Hotel, and it was pretty shallow with good holding. I wove through the assembled melange of vessels, nationalities, and bikinis, just hoping for that sweet spot.
And there it was, a lil hole. Just at the port stern of a catamaran block and just far enough forward of a single 50+ foot cat to clear her mooring line when we swung. But of course, I'd not be writing this post if things went well, would I?
Unexpectedly, a chain link jammed itself in the spurling pipe. This had never happened before and at that point, we had about 70' of chain out in 40' feet of water. OOPs. Now what? Was I going to drag through all these boats with that big Rocna and chain down there, until Nikki cleared the snag? But that's about as far as my thinking went because I realized that she was coming head to wind and going nowhere. That silly lookin' next-gen anchor was holding on less than 2:1 scope! Never drug a foot from where it hit bottom, I guess. Once the jam was cleared, we eased off to about 3:1 and got our business done in Clifton and headed around to spend New Year's Eve in Chatham Bay.
That was one sweet New Year's present for this old guy.
We rarely use more than 3:1 plus the snub with the Rocna around here (77,000# boat) in tradewinds to 25 knots and it has not failed us once. If we are expecting stronger winds or in squally weather, we will, of course, put out more scope.

 

[Nomad Willy]

forever,
I could have predicted that.
Almost never ever do we really put our anchors to the racers edge. Most big comprehensive anchor tests use 35-40lb anchors and pull to 5000lbs of rode tension.

A number people in the past have said “my Rocna works at short scope fine” but the chances they really put it to the test is very small and they could have anchored in the same conditions w about a dozen anchors and held fine. That’s why so many think their anchor is great. The Manson Supreme will hold almost as good as the Rocna at long scope but far better when short in demanding conditions.

But if you set a Rocna hard at 5-1 or more, shorten up and you’ll be safe in almost all weather.

 

[jimisbell]

50 pounds!
That would be a huge anchor. Mine is only 14lbs and it’s the biggest anchor I have.
But what I’m quoting you about is about your “Navy built Northill”. I don’t think the Navy builds anything. They contract to have built (to their drawings and specs) anything from buttons for uniforms to boats or ships.
So who did build the seaplane anchors?

I was in an ASW squadron in San Diego tha operated P2V’s and P5M Martin flying boats. The P5 was the biggest twin engined aircraft in the world .. at that time. So if a 50lb Northill can hold an airplane w a 118’ wingspan and 50000lb empty weight there little question it’s a capable anchor.

I look for things like anchors on Craig’s List.

When I said "Navy built" it was in the sense that the Space Shuttle is NASSA built. Hell, NASSA never built anything. It contracted it. Most things are built by little people that take hamburgers home to the kids after work. Those anchors were built by, surprise, Northill Corp.


Not sure your age but the airplane kind of dates you. I was in Oceanside from 1936 to 1956. That plane was retired from the Navy in 1967.



The reason I said "only 50 pounds" was because Lepke, who I was responding to, has an 83' boat, was talking about a 200 pound Navy style primary anchor.. 50 pounds would be rather light for him.