Marin, rather than quote your message, I will try and address your points as you brought them up:
- I did NOT state or imply that the roll bar design was bogus!* I simply gave the opinion of Robert Taylor, a long time anchor design expert for the US Navy. Bob stated right away that the huge roll bar was a "penetration inhibitor" which is obvious. He also pointed out that you cannot adjust the fluke angle, so performance will suffer in soft mud.
There are many other issues with the concave, shovel type fluke. One was pointed out in Sailing Today: "A downside to scoop anchors with roll bars can be compression of the seabed into the scoop - if the anchor were to drag it can't be re-set without being cleaned."
Additionally, I am hearing that in mud or clay, the concave shovel type fluke is bringing up a ton of sea bottom with it, which is a pain to wash off, and the additional weight is hard on winch systems. I'd be very surprised if you have not yet heard about this in your circles.
- Sorry, but that concave fluke design has only been out since Rocna, which was then copied by Manson, and I'd be surprised if it was earlier than 2004, so certainly less than 10 years. The original roll bar Bugel has a flat fluke, and the roll bar Sarca has a convex fluke.
- I believe that I have mentioned this before: If you have a wide variety of grass, weeds, or rocks where you are anchoring, then a plow anchor might be better suited than a fluke type. Which again brings up a question about the roll bar: How is the roll bar anchor going to penetrate this type of bottom better than a Delta, which does not have the roll bar in the way?
- The comment about us being "desperate" to sell our product is an exaggeration and implies that we will say or do anything to promote our business, whether ethical or not. Totally false. I challenge you to find a company within the marine industy who has a better reputation for honesty and integrity, and who stands behind their product more passionately than Fortress.
- The previous gentleman made the reference to the Rocna being made in China. I do not believe that I made a put down by simply repeating what he said. If so, sorry.
- I cannot believe that you did not clearly see the difference in how they tested the two anchors. Count how many seconds in the very first video, starting from the time that the tip of Rocna shank was at that brown wooden stick, as they SLOWLY waited for the Rocna to sink into the bottom, BEFORE they started pulling on it.
You slough off the test as being inconsequential and inconclusive, which I cannot comprehend. That "test" was a shameful embarrassment and a farce.
- Please tell me what "claims" I have made about Fortress?* That it will provide outstanding holding power in a sand, mud or clay bottom....as if that has not been repeatedly proven already over the past 20 years by our customers?
- I didn't quite understand the jello and concrete comment. It is ok for a company to use BS to sell a product, as long as at the end of day, the product works?
- Was your decision to buy a Rocna right or wrong? Only time will tell. I certainly hope that it was the right decision, and that the Rocna also gives you many years of dependable service.
I suspect that you sized up to a much larger Rocna anchor than what you had previously used with your Bruce. As a number example only, I understand that boaters with a 35 lb CQR do not replace it with a 35 lb Rocna, more often they replace it with a 45 lb or 55 lb Rocna, so of course they are going to get greater holding power simply by the fact they are now using a larger anchor.
This certainly gives them a greater margin for safety, and insures that they are more likely to be pleased with the Rocna.
We know from our warranty registration totals that 80% of our customers use their Fortress as their main, or primary anchor, and in those cases, customers often go in the opposite direction, as they replace much heavier steel anchors with a lighter Fortress.
Respectfully,
Brian
Fortress Marine Anchors
-- Edited by Brian-Fortress on Friday 11th of February 2011 07:50:30 PM