Gentlemen, I know anchors are a hot topic right up there with politics and religion, but please keep civil.
One thing I don't understand and Paulo maybe you can help me. You said that you didn't understand why Mantus performed tests on their anchor since they are an "interested" party. I'm unclear as to whether you have a problem with them testing the anchor or the methods that they used. If it's the fact that they tested it, I'm really confused because why wouldn't any manufacture test their own product and continue to test to make sure that it behaves as it should? Otherwise, there'd be a heck of a lot of disbanded QA departments. If it's the location with that particular bottom that is the problem, I would hope that Mantus has done other tests in other circumstances and that this is but one of them. Since the Mantus posts says "we continue to test" than I'm going to assume they do.
I just want to be clear on your argument against it. Thanks!
Sorry, I am a bit full of this anchor war thing, with manufacturers that make unsubstantiated claims and I did only saw your request for clarification now. All this thread is a sign of it, with its title, implying that Mantus is a "next generation" anchor and not a new generation anchor with performances comparable with the other new generation anchors, but so far better that we should be talking about a "next" generation anchor.
Of course all serious manufacturers test their anchors against the best anchors on the market as part of their development process but they don't make their results public and wait for independent testers, on sail magazines, to do independent testing. Any public testing sponsored by an anchor brand should be looked as suspicious since they are an interested party.
I said that serious brands should test their anchors as part of the development process with the best anchors on the market and even regarding that I found the test posted rather odd because they did not include the two best anchors on the market, the ones that had performed better in all serious tests, the Steel Spade and the Steel Rocna. They tested an aluminium Spade that has no comparison in what regards a Steel Spade particularly in what regards setting on hard ground and that's just the only type of ground the anchors where tested, a particularly bad bottom.
Besides I have to say that all this is really naive, as if the setting of a given anchor on a hard and difficult bottom was the ultimate test for the best anchor. of course, I want an anchor that sets well, and many do that, including the Mantus, the Rocna, the Spade, the Delta, the Kobra, the Mansom among others. What really matters to me is after being stetted in a decent bottom (mud or sand) is the holding power. If I am protected from the waves can I hold on and stay there safely with a 40k wind? 50K? That's were the anchors that I mentioned have very different performances, being by far the best the Spade and the Rocna.
I want to know that I will have plenty of advise before dragging and that I will only drag well after most of the other boat on anchorage start to drag
The other point as important as the holding power (assuming a good setting) is how the anchor reacts against a complete change in wind direction and again the Rocna and the Spade comes out among the best.
Regarding these points, that are fundamental and are tested in any serious anchor test, regarding several bottoms, nothing was said on that test and notwithstanding it is presented as a definitive proof that the Mantus is a better anchor than any other
Let me just add that I anchor over a hundred times a year, sometimes waiting strong winds to go away, and I know by know what I should look at on an anchor regarding its performance and setting well is just a point and one that is done properly by many different brands of anchors