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!
Status
Not open for further replies.

Anchor testing - West Marine

8K views 32 replies 13 participants last post by  camaraderie 
#1 ·
No need to open another debate about the SAIL anchor testing - just thought this would be of interest to all. This is a table containing the summary comments as published in the 2007 West Marine catalog:



Since West Marine was the organization really behind this testing, it is interesting to see their own comments. Bearing in mind they sell some of the anchors included.

Now, no graphs.

No arguments requested, take it or leave it.
 
See less See more
1
#2 ·
Is WM going to be carrying the Rocna?? I'm asking because I've been asked about mine, and have to tell them that they have to have one shipped in from BC, Canada.
 
#8 ·
I would have to ask......<O:p</O:p
What were the bottom conditions? Bottom conditions are not stated in the results.<O:p</O:p
I have never had a problem setting my claw in Sand and Mud, but in this test it failed to set.<O:p</O:p
This is not the true to life results that I routinely experience.<O:p</O:p
My personal experiences do not agree with the above test results.
Therefore, me personally, I do not hold these results in high esteem or value. (Just my opinion).
 
#11 ·
sailortjk1 said:
I would have to ask......<O:p</O:p
What were the bottom conditions? Bottom conditions are not stated in the results.<O:p</O:p
I have never had a problem setting my claw in Sand and Mud, but in this test it failed to set.<O:p</O:p
This is not the true to life results that I routinely experience.<O:p</O:p
My personal experiences do not agree with the above test results.
Three test locations, all sand, at three scopes: 3:1, 5:1, 7:1. Sorry, I assumed people were familiar with the SAIL testing. It's been discussed enough.

The test is a bar raised high. It shows poor anchors in a harsh light. I don't think any apology should be made for that. One day you might experience conditions that will force you to wish you had given such information more credence.

equitiman said:
Why don't they make the Bruce anymore? I thought it was a very popular anchor?
The most likely reason appears to be the numerous cheap copies available, and the apparent preference from consumers for said cheap copies as opposed to the higher quality genuine Bruce.

If you believe a survey currently going on over at a certain British forum, Bruce is now one of the least popular anchors, with even the newer Spade and Rocna enjoying more preference amongst the market. CQR remains top-dog.

RickBowman said:
I have the same opinion. It is only a guide. I don't trust any anchor, why else would I leave the anchor watch feature actived at night and or have an anchor watch?
Perhaps that indicates less than ideal experiences with older anchors, and that the testing is actually telling the story behind your feeling of insecurity at night - and that it might be an idea to try something new?
 
#12 ·
Craig Smith said:
Three test locations, all sand, at three scopes: 3:1, 5:1, 7:1. Sorry, I assumed people were familiar with the SAIL testing. It's been discussed enough.

The test is a bar raised high. It shows poor anchors in a harsh light. I don't think any apology should be made for that. One day you might experience conditions that will force you to wish you had given such information more credence.
I let my personal experiences be my credence.
<O:p</O:p
You have been selling/promoting your anchors on various threads on this site over the past year or so, its no secret what your motive is.<O:p
<O:p</O:p
I have anchored in conditions in which I thought for sure that I would not hold; 6- 8 foot seas, open water, 30 foot depth, 20+ knot winds, and I held just fine. Guess what, big surprise here, it was not a Rocna.

<O:p</O:p
We set the hook just to test our anchor in extreme conditions. Sat there for over 4 hours, no drag.
<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
I don't need a test from West Marine or anybody else to tell me what to use. I let my experiences dictate to me what works.

<O:p</O:pNo need for you to speak to me in a condescending tone.
You want to sell anchors, I'm simply stating what works for me in my experinces.
<O:p</O:p
 
#13 ·
The so-called West Marine "test results" chart Mr. Smith has posted, is simply a slandered and biased regurgitation of the same old crap he's been hawking for years. West Marine never published that chart - I have the catalog right here at my desk. In fact, they do not sell Rocna anchors and probably never will.

Something stinks in New Zealand and it's not shoe polish.
 
#14 ·
TrueBlue said:
The so-called West Marine "test results" chart Mr. Smith has posted, is simply a slandered and biased regurgitation of the same old crap he's been hawking for years. West Marine never published that chart - I have the catalog right here at my desk.
This is ridiculous. Here's the original.



West Marine can write me a nasty letter if they want, I'll have some decent excuses.
 
#15 ·
sailingdog said:
Is WM going to be carrying the Rocna??
It is quite surprising to note that after doing so wonderful results..
West Marine decided to take the representation of.. the Manson SUPREME!!

It is also interesting to see the comments from Yachting Monthly :
(Yachting Monthly - Any Questions: Bubble anchor)
The December 2006 issue of YM contained the magazine's biggest ever anchor test.

One innovative anchor - the HydroBubble - stood out.

So somebody may be wrong?? Craig Smith when he says the Rocna was # 1
or Yachting Monthly??
 
#16 ·
Mr. Smith- How would one go about procuring a Rocna anchor, say as a sample, to conduct more extensive "real life" tests to dispute tjk- ??? I'm sure he is all wet and just slightly misguided. I think I could locate a suitable test boat of a moderate length, maybe 34ft. or so, for testing purposes of course.
 
#17 ·
"Comments from Yachting Monthly", what, a letter to the editor from HydroBubble? These are the same people that think that something has more floatation the deeper it sinks?

Try: Yachting Monthly December 2006 Editor's Log... "The revelation of our tests was the superior performance of the new generation of roll-bar style anchors from Down Under - the New Zealand-designed Rocna and Manson Supreme"...
 
#18 ·
T34C said:
Mr. Smith- How would one go about procuring a Rocna anchor, say as a sample, to conduct more extensive "real life" tests to dispute tjk-
But T34C, then you would be just like every other boater with a Rocna, or West Marine, or the NZ Navy, or the NZ Coastguard, or the magazines, and no one would ever believe you :rolleyes:
 
#21 ·
Craig Smith said:
But T34C, then you would be just like every other boater with a Rocna, or West Marine, or the NZ Navy, or the NZ Coastguard, or the magazines, and no one would ever believe you :rolleyes:
I would be happy to do the real life testing and happily report my findings back on this forum. I happen to be located near tjk- and could therefore provide nearly unrefutable evidence as to the anchors relevence in the northern hemisphere and the Great Lakes.

From a sales perspective, your problem is enumeratioon. No one is believing you, because not enough people are testing it and not enough people are using it.
 
#23 ·
I never stated anything against his anchor.
I only stated my personal experiences and the results I have received with a different product. I am very pleased with the product I currently carry aborad my vessel.
 
#24 · (Edited)
Mr. Chris Smith, please excuse me for being direct and honest with this...

I think about several things here.

1) I think you should start a blog or something instead of coming back here every now and then like a unwated sales man that does not stop ringing the bell. Please I understand you run a business and all that..but imagine how this site would be if Lewmar, Harken and all stared "fighting" for their products here., so a blog or redirect to a web page seem more appropriate.
This is I believe a reason why people start on the "defensive" against what you say...almost like the un-invited sales man. people in partucular sailors come with all kinds of experiences, made up minds and are naturally stuborn people, so the more you "fight" the more sailors will fight back...it will be like disscussing the sex of angels. They don't like to be told what to do...period.

2) Its is your God given right to claim and defend your product, just don't do it here...I don't know why you don't contact Sailnet and create a link...THEN, LIKE OTHERS...talk about your pruduct, freely and writte all you want defending your product.

3) I don't anchor much, but this fight has "driven" me naturally away from you and the anchor you sell

4) Please...at sales, no one likes to see a sales man defend his product by "decreasing" competitors qualities, even with tests done by others...I think its not ethicaly correct.

5) Your anchor might be very good, and the tests may show that...but there is a whole lot of attitude change needed on your part if you want to suceed.
Being so defensive, to the point of almost offending the potential customers does not help you...bad for business...very bad....I take my example...I looked at your chatr (well west marine's) and I was "naturally" more interested in the other anchors, simply because of your attitude....

Please note I have absolutely nothing against you or your anchor...just how your'e doing it..OK?

Sorry about me bing direct and honest...its a virtue...

Good luck with business...think about this...

Alex
 
#25 ·
Negative marketing is generally a bad way to do things..

Alain has pointed out that WM went with the Manson Supreme, but that anchor is by and far the most expensive, two to four times the price of many of the others.

Alain- Every anchor can drag... and many times the dragging is due to the anchor being either undersized or improperly deployed. You're even more guilty of being negative about other anchor designs than Craig is, and Cam, one of the moderators has already spoken to you about this same topic sometime last week.
 
#26 ·
Craig,
Thanks for the posting of WM's chart. I, for one, did not find it out of line. It has been my experience that anchors are like pick-up trucks. Every man has to defend his to the death, until he gets a new one and then is free to enumerate the many deficiencies of the last one.(g) With respect towards all, if not their anchors, personal experience counts a great deal, especially about such an important piece of gear. The trouble with testing, outside of lab conditions, is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to get consistant results. Even the type testing done by the magazines is insufficient. Notice the amazement amoung the WM staff at the difference in results from previous testing. A difference they are unable to fully explain.

Just because you are anchoring in the same spot during the test does not mean that each anchor dropped is going to fetch up in the same location or bottom conditions. Bottom conditions vary widely, even over a small area. There are too many variables to account for, most of them unseen, and hence unaccounted. That fellow testing anchors at low tide, with his pick-up truck, probably has as scientific an approach as any. I think all of the anchor tests should be taken with a grain of salt. We ain't exactly testing can-openers here.

A post I do find worthless, is the one by Alain. The only appropriate response to such posts is, "so what?" It would come as no surprise to find such posters informing us, "latest research finds anchors on Titanic ineffective". So what?

As alluded by tjk, personal experience, especially personal experience in conditions such as he described, counts a great deal. Of course, a big part of that is how the anchor was set and to what rode. Fellows, such as tjk, who probably could have been somewhere more comfortable instead of actually testing his anchor, deserve credit and respect. Like most seamanship skills, that are more often observed in the breech, anchoring is one that requires practise and the sense to note what was different each time. Most would probably prefer to keep a clean foredeck than gain that experience.

Lastly, in my experience, it is not a question of dragging. It is only a question of when you finally do drag. If you've never dragged, it's due to either not anchoring enough or luck. An anchor that readily resets should be a major consideration.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top