SailNet Community banner
  • SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

Anchor Wars - In Search of the Lost Truth.

45K views 214 replies 32 participants last post by  Minnewaska 
#1 · (Edited)
Ok now ... This is a topic that has been unmercifully hammered out principally in the YBW forums (post count off the scale) and also in a lively thread over at AS.

Really there is no need for more of the same here but there seems to be a couple of elephants still sitting in the corner and maybe we should try and get some answers.

I'm not going to refer to threads on other forums, really that is somewhat pointless.

Read on if you dare.
 
#2 · (Edited)
Brian from Fortress stated ..

1. The Rocna anchor did not "win" the West Marine test, the results of which were reported in Sail, Yachting Monthly, and Power & MotorYacht magazines which Rocna has been falsely claiming since October 2006.

2. The Rocna anchor did not have "40% greater holding power than the next best anchor" in this test as they have falsely claimed since then as well.

3. Rocna falsely claimed that they possessed RINA certifications for their anchors which they clearly did not.

4. Craig Smith of Rocna purchased the domain name of a deceased competitor (Alain Poiraud) and this domain name is now pointed to a web site where this deceased competitor's product (Spade) is being denigrated.

Based on the above, and with these facts known, why anyone would consider purchasing the product of a company with so little integrity, or would even attempt to defend them, is incomprehensible.......no matter how great their product might be.

A very serious issue now has yet to be resolved, and that is the composition of the steel material that Rocna is using for their Chinese anchors. Despite Rocna's claims, which people have trouble believing for obvious reasons, there is a great concern that this Chinese steel material is inferior to the steel used previously with the NZ and Canadian made anchors.
1. Did Rocna really claim to have "won" this battle or did they merely claim that the test showed that Rocna had gained the highest average holding power - maximum before release ?

2. In that test did the report say that Rocna had an average holding power of 40% higher than nearest rival ?

3. It seems this may be the case but is it black and white ?

4. Is this true or was the domain purchased well before Alain Poiraud's death ? Who actually now owns this domain, Craig Smith or Peter Smith ?

Brian, you offered to post the real Sail results. Please do so. A version of the Sail report was on the Rocna web site but has apparently been removed. I'd also like to see Sail's comments on the supposed Rocna falsification.

My quote is merely part of Brian's original post which can be found in the Crib Notes thread.

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/720140-post37.html

Further ..

Isn't it true that no proof has been offered as to Rocna using inferior grade metal ? The original claimant "Whalebone" has been outed as a disgruntled ex Rocna employee and has been strangely silent in offering his claimed proof.

Is it fair to claim that Rocna "falsified test results and certifications" and if so why ?

The questions raised are quite damning of Rocna and of Craig Smith. I think its fair that we get the answers even if those answers do in fact damn Rocna and/or CS.
 
#3 · (Edited)
1. Did Rocna really claim to have "won" this battle or did they merely claim that the test showed that Rocna had gained the highest average holding power - maximum before release ?
This is the graph that seems to irritate the competition:
www.rocna.com/rocna-world/rock-solid-test-results/

The data is from the original main SAIL graph, which is here:
www.petersmith.net.nz/boat-anchors/independent-performance-testing.php
(On that graph the bars are in green).

2. In that test did the report say that Rocna had an average holding power of 40% higher than nearest rival ?
Max Before Releasing (average holding power) data off the graph:
Rocna - 4800 lb
Spade - 3300 lb
...

3. It seems this may be the case but is it black and white ?
SAIL published several other charts on following pages under a sidebar to illustrate certain points, such as effect on scope and effect of location. These charts take subsets of the data and don't even include all anchors. However because they appear to show different results, they allow agendized individuals to try to muddy the waters.

4. Is this true or was the [ancora-latina.com] domain purchased well before Alain Poiraud's death ? Who actually now owns this domain, Craig Smith or Peter Smith ?
I do. It was purchased on 1st September last year. Alain died in February this year. The domain details are easily checked.

Additionally, the people at Ancora Latina always denied any connection whatsoever with Poiraud.

Brian, you offered to post the real Sail results. Please do so. A version of the Sail report was on the Rocna web site but has apparently been removed.
It hasn't been removed, it's here:
www.rocna.com/rocna-world/independent-reviews/
 
#4 ·
For what it is worth the Sail magazine was what originally started my interest in the Rocna. I still have the magazine laying around somewhere and when I get a chance I'll get it out and re-read it. However, my clear recollection is that the Rocna was the best performing anchor in the test and by more than just a marginal amount. That is why I began to consider buying the Rocna instead of the Manson Supreme in addition to my impression, right or wrong that all Manson's were knock offs.

Some time later I saw the synopsis of the Sail test on the Rocna website. I didn't compare what was on the site vs the Sail article line by line as it seemed to be consistent with what I remembered from the Sail article.
 
#10 · (Edited by Moderator)
...my impression, right or wrong that all Manson's were knock offs.
All anchors are evolutions. The Rocna is a step forward, perhaps the best overall design at this time, but...

* The angles are not unique. If you look at just on half of a Northill anchor, for example, it looks pretty similar. I had a genuine Norhill on my last boat and it's setting behavior was very much like the Rocna (other problems).
* The shank obviously came from Delta and Bruce, as well as some others.
* The roll bar, perhaps, came from Bugel. A very similar anchor that I believe is a bit older.
* The attitude, perhaps from Fortress :)laugher ).
* The Manson tests better than Rocna on occasion. Though It seems probable there was some copying, it is also possible there are some improvements. I do wish they would lose the second slot; pointless and actually costing them some sales, I think.

Good anchors. I just they would lighten up and realize that happy customers (both Fortress and Rocna) speak loudest.
 
#5 ·
Craig,

I understand that your Father invented the Rocna. It seems like an outstanding anchor. Whether true or not, I strongly suspect any current controversy over performance or manufacturing is going to be worked out.

Can you clarify why you engage in the defense today? Is it out of pride of your Father's work or do you have a financial interest in the success of Rocna in any way? Or other?
 
#7 ·
That's true that Rocna has been campaigning in a very dirty and unfair way against all the other brands on the market and claiming things that are not true regarding boat tests (there are a lot of independent tests made by dozens of European magazines to join to the few American ones).

It is also true that the Rocna is a good anchor. After reading most of those tests I would say that global impression is that the Rocna is the easiest anchor to get a hold on most bottoms, slightly better than the Spade and the one that works better with minimal rode. With normal rode the best holding power on most grounds belongs to the Spade.

I will buy a Spade for my next boat, probably because I have used a Spade for almost 10 years and I have not reasons to complain, except have to being awake at night during blows to dodge all the other boats that were dragging towards me:D . But I think that I would be also very well served with a Rocna.

About test magazines results, they quote some on the Spade site:

SPADE anchor by Press - Ancre Spade Sword Skrew - Ancres haute performance -

Regards

Paulo
 
#11 ·
That's true that Rocna has been campaigning in a very dirty and unfair way against all the other brands on the market and claiming things that are not true regarding boat tests
I don't know if I agree that Rocna did/is doing this. But I will say that I feel a certain person does on this and other forum sites, which in the end was 1 of reasons I got something else when it was all over.
 
#9 · (Edited)
One of the things I have learned looking at all those boat tests (with lots of anchors) is that almost similar anchors can have very different behaviors.

If you look well they have common points but they have also differences and not only on the roll bar:

For Those About To Rocna…

Description - Ancre Spade Sword Skrew - Ancres haute performance -

This one looks more like a Spade and it is American, but I never herd about it. It looks good.

Ultra Anchors | Stainless Steel Anchors | Quickline USA

Regards

Paulo
 
#16 ·
Paulo,

I saw Don typing saying the same as Andrew, meaning another "person" related to the Rocna family if you will is doing the campaigning if you will on the Rocna behalf. You did not specify the whom if you will. I do not see Don trying to slander you, only agreeing with a sub note as to they who and why.

marty
 
#18 ·
TDW- In light of Craig's post stating that he benefits finically from the sale of Rocna anchors, and the fact that it appears he has been asked to remove is affiliation with Rocna from his signature by the company, does he have a duty to disclose his association? (Its been a while since I reviewed the rules of use here.)
 
#24 ·
Rocna Mis-representation

Unfortunately, Sailnet does not allow you to attach Excel files so I am unable to attach the spreadsheet that I received from Chuck Hawley of West Marine with the pull by pull results for each anchor at the three test locations.

If you would like to review this detailed spreadsheet, I would be glad to e-mail to you, please just send me a PM with your address.

This is what Bill Springer, who wrote the test story for Sail magazine, recently had to say in his blog about Rocna's fraudulent claim that their anchor "had 40% more holding power than the next best anchor tested" :

"I've not heard Rocna's claims directly, but I can say that neither the data, nor the report, says that the Rocna had "40% greater holding power than the next best anchor tested."

Below is Bill's blog with more about this test:
Bill Springer's Sailboat Stories: Which Anchor Holds Best? 14 Anchors Are Put To The Test
 
#25 · (Edited)
Charts from West Marine test

Here is a sampling from the West Marine spreadsheet noted above. I have included only the part with Fortress compared to the Rocna, and as you will note, the Rocna did NOT out-perform the Fortress in this test.

Also, I have attached a section of the test notes from the New Brighton location, where the Rocna anchor benefited by a false pull reading at that location.

This false pull inflated Rocna's "peak strain" numbers, which they have chosen to ignore in their marketing efforts.

I have also attached other magazine charts from this test which Rocna has chosen to ignore as well, which also prove that Rocna did not "win" this test.

By the way, what is an Anchorsmith?

Best regards,
Brian
Fortress Marine Anchors
 

Attachments

#27 ·
Rocna RINA certification fraud

Recently on Rocna's web site until the fraud was exposed:

Rocna classification and certification

The Rocna anchor range has RINA type approval and SHHP classification. Its facilities are RINA approved and individual anchor certification can be provided on request. RINA is a member of the IACS and the Rocna classification will be accepted by all other notable societies including Lloyd's, DNV, Bureau Veritas, ABS, and others as equivalent with their own rules.

What Rocna CEO Steve Bambury admitted on the Anything Sailing forum:

We've now completed all of the seabed testing, proof load testing, welding testing and material testing required to obtain certification of the design of the Rocna itself and the manufacturing facility. It's now a matter of all the reports being processed by RINA for final certification. We will of course be publishing the certificates as soon as they become available.

Here is the follow up comment from Maine Sail, who exposed this to the thread on the forum:

So above YOU STATE and ADMIT you DO NOT yet have the actual "certification" but your OWN web site says it "CAN BE PROVIDED".. I don't know about where you come from but here in the US that is considered a pure UNADULTERATED LIE !!!!!!

Not to mention the many times Craig has claimed "RINA" or "RINA Obtained" which you've now admitted you don't technically have "yet"...


If you wish to see the actual post, it is 353 on this web page below:http://www.anything-sailing.com/show...s.-Rocna/page9

Rocna cannot produce any form of a certification from RINA, quite simply because one does not exist.
 
#30 · (Edited)
Rocna cannot produce any form of a certification from RINA, quite simply because one does not exist.
Brian, that would seem to be the case, but that doesn't mean the Rocna anchors have failed to pass RINA's testing or are deficient in some way - simply that their marketing jumped the gun by a year or three. ;)

As someone who was involved in the "discussions" you refer to over at A-S, the summary of facts as they ended was:

1. Rocna used to manufacture in NZ and Canada and have since shifted operations to China.

2. Rocna obtained a statement from RINA in 2010 confiming anchor samples across their range met the requirements for SHHP seabed (holding-power, etc) tests. These tests were carried out in 2008.

3. Rocna do not (yet) have certification for their Chinese manufacturing facilities. Perhaps there are issues over there? No-one knows.. although there was a post or two about some kind of law-suit which may or may not have some bearing on the Certification delays.

Therefore, although it is clear that Rocna's Chinese-made anchors do not have RINA Certification (yet), whether or not the NZ/Canada ones ever did is unknown: although the question was asked, no response has been given to date.

Yes, it does seem Fortress are the only one of the "Big 3" SHHP anchor manufacturers out there that can confirm Certification (good for you!)... but the Certificates on your web site are still out of date, even though you promised you'd update them!!! :p :rolleyes:
 
#35 ·
This sensitivity as to whether Rocna has done a little fibbing on their website is just....odd?

Ford used to fry people in their Pintos and then hid the data for years. Folks still buy Fords.

Microsoft has engaged in some questionable marketing. They could buy Rocna ten times over with just their legal fees. Most of us still run Windows.

At least a third of the ads on television are for products that don't do what they say. Another third at least fib a little...ever notice how many insurance companies are going to save you money?!?!huh?!?!

Compare a little Rocna fibbing to a human extremely well done in a Pinto and it doesn't seem so bad, does it?

Until Craig, whatever his affiliation is, kill someone, let's just compare anchors and pick our fave.

Forums are funny. On the Fender Stratocaster guitar forum if you want to get things riled up just start a thread on the effect of body wood on the tone of and electric guitar. Gets ugly.

I figure, why should I get upset over some guy across the county, who I'll never meet, having a different opinion than me?
 
#36 ·
I'm with you siamese.

I think one either sails, or argues about the minutiae of some pointy chunks of steel on every forum on the planet. Kind of hard to do both.

And I'm pretty sure the "Give a Damn Threshold" has long been passed.

Of course, I could be wrong. But that's almost...

 
#39 · (Edited)
After enduring a long running attack on their product in boating forums around the world by Rocna, Manson appears to be first in line to report the results of independent steel tests of Rocna's Chinese anchors vs their own:

Manson Anchors: Supreme Anchor high standards
WOW !!!!!! Let me be the FIRST in-line to eat my own words then.. chomp Chomp.....

The words I am eating. I've been wrong before so this would not be the first time..:(
Maine Sail said:
While I do actually agree with you Criag that the metallurgy incident is a fabricated farse I still don't think it has been "proven" to the doubters through a couple of photos.
Hmm... Seems fairly well substantiated now and perhaps not a "farse".. They even have a photo of the receipt where and when they bought the Rocna's to test.

Steve/Craig please note the DATES and how fast this testing was conducted... We're still waiting for your "proof".. Manson purchased the Rocna's for testing on 3/30/2011 and the testing certificate was dated 4/8/2011 a touch over a week is all it took....

The Tested Anchors (Photo Courtesy of Manson Anchors)



I guess Manson got sick and tired of waiting for Rocna to "man-up" to their challenge and we now apparently know why Rocna chickened out.....

The Manson Challenge To Rocna

"If you would please bring down your anchor, we can test it on our calibrated and certified test jig. We have tested it against ours. We have videoed those tests. However in the interests of posting something that you will not say is made up, I welcome you to come here and we will video your face as we do the tests so the readers can see what eating your words after years of misinformation looks like.

Any time you would like to test your anchor we are here. Any time."

Craig Smith said:
Certainly nothing from Manson, the quality of their copies is abysmal.

***
it's often just edge-welded so the space between the sheets is effectively hollow. In addition to a ridiculous lack of strength, this has massive other implications.
Perhaps a public apology to Manson is in order here Craig?
 
#38 ·
The results from Rocna are not bad. The Mason is only slightly better in what regards tensile strength but I doubt that the small difference has any real meaning in real situations.

The problem here is an attitude problem, with Rocna claiming to be "the ultimate solution" and Fortress claiming to have the "World's best anchors" and Spade claiming to be the "most reliable anchor" and Mason claiming to be the "world's finest anchor".

This is ridiculous and a bit of modesty would suit them all. Test results had shown that all 4 are very fine anchors, much better than old models and better than the others of their generation. We could look at the test results to see where each one excels (we can see that all have ups and downs).

For the ones that are interested I would also point a complete and more recent test (2009) made by the French. 11 anchors were tested (the Rocna was not) the Spade, The Fortress and Mason were tested among others.

Catalogue - Test et comparatif ANCRES Voiles et Voiliers 2009 - Sea Tech and Fun - Spade - (Version PDF) -5

Voiles et Voiliers : Equipement - De 150 à 890 euros, 11 ancres au banc d'essai : Toute la vérité sur les ancres

Here you can find a kind of resume of many tests made in French, but the numbers a speak for themselves. We can see that in soft mud the best is not any of the 4 but the Delta:

Hisse Et Oh - Divers bancs d'essais d' ancres
 
#40 ·
Have we determined that Craig doesn't really speak for Ronca? Anyone who has read his comments a while knows he isn't going to say sorry etc
 
#41 ·
I don't know but around here there was a place called Anchor Welding in Farmingdale NY on route 109 that well welded anchors in massive quantities that look a lot like the Fortress

While the owner passed away and its gone i was buying stuff there 40 years ago and i never saw a test or one break :)
 
#44 ·
I get the war between worlds, but it's really hard to follow when any of this matters to the consumers use of the anchor. A judgement could be made on ethics vs. enthusiasm, but I'm trying to stay focused on the product hanging off my bow and it's effectiveness for the purpose. It almost gets more confusing, the more one looks in to it.
 
#45 ·
Maine I agree with with minne. This may be some huge issue to you but it's not to the general public. Like Siam says above, each of the manufacturers is claiming global superiority with their product when any mook knows that's crap. This whole thing is all a matter of small degrees when it comes to the cost and capability of an anchor.

To me the manufacturers that have jumped on and whipped up this Wagon of Whine in the forums are giving their brands a serious black eye. I personally don't buy from whiners.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top