Re: Another "Next Generation" anchor enters the market...
Originally Posted by SloopJonB
P.S. is the real Bruce noticeably better than the Lewmar copy? Details please.
Link to the 2006 Sail Magazine test of anchors. The claw didn't do well at all, they suspected that it might be because of the different geometry of the Claw as compated to the Bruce. Then again, the real Bruce didn't do well in a very well designed test from 1995. Maybe the Bruce really does suck and we believers are just in denial. Mine has held in 30kts sustained with gusts in the 40s several times.....
2006 Sail Test: http://www.alberg37.org/Project%20DB...AnchorTest.pdf
From the article:
The Claw is Lewmar’s version of the Bruce to the ocean floor. Bruce no longer make yacht Claw doesn’t share the original geometry anchor which has been around since 1972. anchors, hence our testing this version. The of the Bruce design? Were the Claw’s fl ukes Used by cruisers the world over, it was Claw is made from a single piece of high-grade simply not sharp enough to penetrate the developed to secure oil rigs steel and stows well on the bow-roller. harder clay-like sand? We recorded similar We were surprised that it was one of the results at 7:1 scope. The beach-pull trials worst performers in our tests. The maximum showed the Claw ploughing a longer trench resistance at 5:1 scope was 886 lb – for a brief down the beach than most. spike before breaking out. The tension graphs Our conclusions were that the fl ukes of showed that the anchor never penetrated the Claw weren’t sharp or weighted enough properly, setting and releasing rapidly or simply to penetrate.scraping the bottom. Was this because the Price: £58.35
1995 US Sailing test: http://www.ussailing.org/safety/Anchor/anchor_study.htm
I have a sauna on my boat, therefore I win.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by MedSailor; 03-18-2012 at 11:23 PM.