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!

Another "Next Generation" anchor enters the market...

75K views 290 replies 65 participants last post by  TakeFive 
#1 ·
TEST VIDEOS/ NEWS | MANTUS ANCHORS

Looks like there's a new Mansocna on the market. This one claims to be superior to all the others (who doesn't), but it is novel in that it is a roll-bar type anchor that disassembles for stowage. The spade is a "next generation" anchor that has this feature, but if you're of the roll-bar faith this might appeal.


I don't see any evidence of 3rd party testing yet and one can never trust videos/tests done by the maufactuter, but I'll stay tuned. It also seems like it's pretty heavy by their recommendations chart. Don't know if that's design inefficiency or if they're just hugely conservative with their size recomendations. They could also be recommending "2 sizes up" in order to edge out the competition in upcoming tests.

MedSailor

PS Being a disciple of the almighty Bruce it's a big pet peeve of mine when they test the "bruce" against their anchor using a Lewmar Claw. I couldn't tell if they were using a Bruce or Lewmar, but I do know that neither makes a 25lb anchor like they claimed to test.
 
See less See more
1
#2 · (Edited)
Med, they are probably using a 10Kg - 22# but I've seen them called 25# in certain "non-metric countries" (that shall remain nameless. ;))

P.S. is the real Bruce noticeably better than the Lewmar copy? Details please.
 
#3 · (Edited)
P.S. is the real Bruce noticeably better than the Lewmar copy? Details please.
I think so.

From The Bruce Anchor Group website:
"At first glance the genuine Bruce anchor and the look-alikes that have flooded the market appear to be the same anchor. Close inspection will reveal that the look-alike is different in a number of disturbing ways. If you line up a row of the look-alikes you will find further disturbing features: whereas the genuine Bruce anchor has the same geometry throughout the anchor range, the look-alikes have shank angles that vary widely throughout the anchor range and even between same-size look-alikes... Would you leap from a plane with a haversack on your back because it looks like the real thing and comes at a rock bottom price? Remember an anchor is a safety device upon which the survival of you and your boat may ultimately depend."

What they say sounds convincing to me. Shank angle is one of the most important aspects of anchor design. The original patent Danforth has a fluke angle of 32deg. Why thirtyTWO degrees and not 33 or 31? Why would the shank angle vary so much between knock-offs or between sizes of Lewmar Claws. Did Lewmar spend millions of dollars of testing and find better angles? I would wager not.

The Bruce Anchor Group spends a mint on R&D to make their anchors work. Most of their business is holding oil-rigs to the ocean floor. Why do they need to spend so much on R&D Because what we ask of them is difficult to achieve. They must set quickly in all bottom types, hold on short scope, self-reset from an oblique angle, be easy to retrieve from above... etc etc. The design of anchors is exacting. Otherwise any old hook on a rope would set quickly in all bottoms, Minor changes can and do make massive differences in performance. Personally I would never anchor overnight to a look-alike anchor, only one that has passed some 3rd party tests and/or done the miles of experience on many boats in the real world.

MedSailor (faithful follower of the cult of Bruce):D
 
#4 ·
That bolt together anchor kind of scares me. Maybe it's meant as a back up to be carried in emergencies, but I wouldn't consider it for a main anchor (those bolts holding the roll bar on look designed to snap off).
I'm also a Bruce guy. I've looked at the Lewmar claws and there seems to be a big variance in shank angle and also fluke curve when you compare a couple of the same model on the floor (and they just look like they're made of melted down tonka toys).
 
#6 ·
If Bruce themselves no longer manufacture small boat anchors where do "genuine" Bruce anchors now come from ?
 
#7 ·
Bruce hasn't changed their consumer anchor design for the betterment of us all because they stopped making consumer anchors. Too many people flocked to the Lewmar Claw. Who's to blame them, it was 1/4 or less of the price and who really knows if it's different enough to drag you onto the rocks.

Here's a thought experiment. If I can weld up a Masocna look-alike would you buy it from me? Those things cost hundreds of dollars! I'll make you one for $99.00

TDW, Bruces are hard to come by now. I got lucky and saw a neighbor unshacklilng his 66lb beast in favor of a Manson. I offered him $250 for it, and he sold it to me for $150. They can still be found at swap meets, craigslist etc.

As for the bolts holding the anchor together, why would that bother you? Properly sized bolts of the correct steel can be stronger than what they're bolted into. After all, it's bolts that hold your chain plates into your hull, and thus keep your rig upright right? Some boats even have bolts holding their keels on....

MedSailor
 
#10 ·
snippy ....

TDW, Bruces are hard to come by now. I got lucky and saw a neighbor unshacklilng his 66lb beast in favor of a Manson. I offered him $250 for it, and he sold it to me for $150. They can still be found at swap meets, craigslist etc.

snippy ....

MedSailor
Med,
Any idea when Bruce stopped manufacturing small ? Interests sake only as we have one on our girl. Have to say I love the thing. Sets like a rock in fact. Overall I prefer it to the Rocna we had on the old girl. Only negative I find is that it sometimes likes to come up backwards and I have to give it a whack with boathook to spin it round.
It was factory fitted but to be honest I have no idea if it is the real deal or a copy. Must check that out next weekend. I admit I simply presumed genuine.
 
#8 ·
Put me in the bolts should not be on an anchor... camp. TO be fair, those don't seem like they would affect holding if they sheered.

BUT... you are introducing a LOT of variables.

They are strong IF they are of high Quality
IF the vendor doesn't switch them out on you
IF you check them for corrosion
IF they never see a side load

As to your other points, no, my rig is not on bolted chainplates. My Chainplates are 1/2" Steel that is integrally Welded to the hull :)
 
#9 ·
It seems very similar to the new "cheap" Spade. I don't see that one on that test, nor the Spade for that matter.:D

They say they have tested against the "reliable" anchors in the Industry". Didn't they consider that the Spade is a reliable anchor in the Industry:confused:?

On the other hand that "cheap" spade had disapeared from the market as if it had never existed. Is this the same anchor?

Regards

Paulo
 
#14 ·
Med- you got a bargain, I paid $400 for our used 30kg (66lb). The reason I don't like the looks of the bolts on the roll bar are because if the bar caught on something solid it would put a side load on those two (why didn't they put two on each side?) bolts that hold it on. It wouldn't take much to snap them with the leverage of the roll bar.
TDW- It's been at least 5 years since Bruce discontinued making small anchors. They still make the huge ones for offshore drilling rigs as far as I know.
I've been using a Bruce for over 20 years here in the PNW on two different boats, never had one drag and have only had three occasions where it didn't set right away (once in heavy eel grass and two on solid smooth rock-never did get it to set those two times).
 
#15 · (Edited)
I suppose the bolts on the roll bar could be vulnerable (not really if properly engineered) but then again the roll bar isn't supposed to be a load bearing.

On closer inspection the shank does intersect the fluke closer to the tip, much like the "Sword" or the "Ocean" both made by spade anchors. I wonder if the "Sword" or "Ocean" is the cheap spade that paulo was referring to.

Yeah, that $150 66lb genuine Bruce is some of the best return on dollar investment I've ever spent. Lets see, moorage for my boat runs $75/night and I've already spent around 100nights laying to it in the last 4 years.... Yeah, I'd say that's good value. I kept the 44# genuine Bruce that came with the boat too now that they're scarce, just in case I loose the big one. Although, if I lost the big B I'd probably pony up and try out a Spade. I hear good things.

It seems like it's been a couple years since a big anchor test has been done. Aren't we due for another one to stir the pot?

MedSailor
 
#18 · (Edited)
Test any anchor on dry land before trusting it on your boat. Danforths we made with too wide an angle, flipped on their side and dragged easily, until we reduced the angle. Then it dove in securely. Less than 32 degrees still works , one degree over 32 degrees reduces holding power by 50%. Any more, and it will flip on it's side and drag forever without biting in.
Looks like the anchor shown has the same problem as a Bruce and many others. Get a rock the right size in and it will drag forever. A plow or Delta will let the rock slide out to one side.
I hope to try a roll bar instead of ballast on the next delta I build.
I also hope to make it collapsible. A huge , grossly oversized, collapsible anchor in the bilge can be great insurance in a hurricane. With an alternator , I can easily weld it together when I need it , instead of bolting it.
 
#19 ·
OK, here's a question. I picked up a 33# Manta claw for $13 when the local West Marine shut down (yes $13 that's not a typo).

Looking at the Manta chart I figured it would be a good upgrade from the 22#Danforth on the bow now. My boat is a 30' Catalina, 10,300lbs unloaded and the 22# Danforth is supposed to be rated for boats up to 38'.

Manta Size Chart
16.5lb Claw Anchor for Boats 24'-30'
22lb. Claw Anchor for Boats 31'-35'
33lb. Claw Anchor for Boats 36'-40'

Reading this thread got me curious. The size charts for the Lewmar are the same as the Manta, but the charts for the Manson Ray are quite different though it looks like the same design. Is this just a case of Manson being more conservative or is there some real difference?

Manson Size Chart
22lb. Ray Anchor, 18' to 25' Boat Length
33lb. Ray Anchor, 25' to 30' Boat Length
44lb. Ray Anchor, 30' to 40' Boat Length



BTW, no windlass so whatever I put on the bow comes up by hand. :rolleyes:

I figure either the Danforth or Manta should be enough anchor for my boat, but from reading I understand the Bruce style anchors are quicker to reset.

Thoughts?
 
#22 ·
Not ever had our 'Bruce' require resetting I can't say whether they do it quicker or not. I have very rarely experienced real dragging once anchor was set but in both cases I can think of I'm prepared to put the blame on not enough scope. When our CQR dragged in sand it simply never set at all.
Once I've had at least 3:1 plus depth of water plus allowance for freeboard and all chain I've not had any problems including the old CQR.
 
#20 ·
Anyone notice that the bolts are not only on the hoop, but also holding the shank to the fluke?

Those are the bolts that would concern me.
 
#26 ·
I actually find anchor recomendations to be grossly undersized, and would always go up at least one step. The problem is that big anchors are expensive, and everyone buys on price. So manufacturers recommendations are the minimum you can get away with...

In addition most anchor recomendations are made for 50kn of wind... Since the force imparted by the wind goes up with the square of wind speed, what will work in 50 may not hold in 60, and will be grossly inadequate at 80kn. So unless you have somewhere to run too in the event of a major storm, a bigger anchor is always better.

This is why for sizing I recommend the biggest anchor you can get back on board, like the Dashew's I am convinced an anchor isn't big enough until people start laughing at you. I also recommend minimal amounts of chain, and putting that weight back into the anchor. The cantenary effect in major storms is a myth, but massive anchor weight isn't.
 
#27 ·
I actually find anchor recomendations to be grossly undersized, and would always go up at least one step. The problem is that big anchors are expensive, and everyone buys on price. So manufacturers recommendations are the minimum you can get away with....
Why would a manufacturer recommend an undersized anchor? It's in their best interests, both financial and reputation-wise to recommend MORE than you really need.
 
#28 ·
Most recommendations I have seen are only for 40 knots of wind. Some anchor manufactures do have recommendations for 20 and 60 knot winds too. With most saying if you have a higher windage rig, ie catamaran or big power boat, to upsize also.

In the meantime, if you think the recommendations are too small, Try out this factor if I can type it correctly for the minimum anchor per the local race rules, and minimum of anchor and chain, or all chain!

(LOA/17) 3rd power for max anchor. For my 30' boat, that is 5.5 lbs IIRC, ie (30/17) = 1.7x1.7x1.7 IIRC

min metal total is X squared/80 or 11.25 lbs for my 30' boat,

with adequate sized diam rope at min 150' in length!

Most anchor manufactures are in the 15-25 lb range for a 30' boat like mine. Depending upon the style etc. Danforths seem to be a bit lighter in recommendation vs a claw/spade style. Aluminum danforths are as light as 7 or 11 lbs for my boat manufacture recommended.

Marty
 
#30 ·
Most recommendations I have seen are only for 40 knots of wind. Some anchor manufactures do have recommendations for 20 and 60 knot winds too. With most saying if you have a higher windage rig, ie catamaran or big power boat, to upsize also.

In the meantime, if you think the recommendations are too small, Try out this factor if I can type it correctly for the minimum anchor per the local race rules, and minimum of anchor and chain, or all chain!

(LOA/17) 3rd power for max anchor. For my 30' boat, that is 5.5 lbs IIRC, ie (30/17) = 1.7x1.7x1.7 IIRC

min metal total is X squared/80 or 11.25 lbs for my 30' boat,

with adequate sized diam rope at min 150' in length!

Most anchor manufactures are in the 15-25 lb range for a 30' boat like mine. Depending upon the style etc. Danforths seem to be a bit lighter in recommendation vs a claw/spade style. Aluminum danforths are as light as 7 or 11 lbs for my boat manufacture recommended.

Marty
When Bruce made recreational anchors their web site spec'd a 10 kilo (22 LB) working anchor and a 20 kilo (44 LB) storm anchor for my 22,000 Lb Columbia 43.

I've seen people successfully anchor a 30 footer in a sheltered cove with a 2 1/2 kilo Bruce.

Unless you are a world cruiser, sizing your anchor for over 50 knots of wind is just creating work for Osteopaths and physiotherapists.

Of course, around here, there are hurricane holes everywhere. :)
 
#32 ·
Sloop,

I have a 7.5kg bruce/lewmar knock off. 15' of 1/4HT chain and 1/2" rope IIRC. works well so far in some 25-30 knot winds. Somebody makes a 7 lb version, have toyed with one of them for my race anchor with 4' of 5/16" chain, IIRC that is the 1lb per foot size. Then going to 20-25' of chain on the 7.5, or going to a 10kg. Not sure really that a 10 would help much around here if I add some more chain frankly. Delta makes/made a 9 lb fastset which has been the one I have really toyed with. Lewmare makes an 11 lb bruce too. Could do that with 3' of 1/4 also. I do have a 5 lbs bruce, that has held me in some 10-15 knot stuff. I actually use that for a race buoy. But it did better than an equal lb danforth in equal winds while setting buoy. i also do not have to worry as much about resetting with the bruce when the tide wind shifts, like a danforth.

marty
 
#50 ·
About ten or twelve years ago we dragged our 33 pound genuine Bruce nearly 1/8 of a mile while the anchor remained set and this was at 9:1+ scope. This was on a 30' boat in very good holding mud. She just did not have the sheer holding power /surface area to deal with the 45-55 knot winds for that boat.. The Bruce is/was a great design but in my experience up-sizing them by TWO sizes is much more in-line with how they actually hold. Much has been written on properly sizing Bruce style anchors.. It is not necessarily the weight of the anchor but the surface area biting into the mud that matters...
 
#33 ·
I use a 30 Kg bruce with 70 mtr. of 10mm chain and my 35" Bonito does not drag wherever I drop the hook. Works for me and I am not about to experiment with a anchor that look like it came out of a mecano set.

Michael
 
#34 ·
I use a 30 Kg bruce with 70 mtr. of 10mm chain and my 35" Bonito does not drag wherever I drop the hook. Works for me and I am not about to experiment with a anchor that look like it came out of a mecano set.

Michael
I think you just nailed the primary reason people are not jumping up and down on this one. It may test well on holding on different surfaces, but needing another piece of hardware that needs constant vigilance and maintenance to ensure all the bolts are tight would scare me away from this being a primary anchor.

It might be OK as a backup, but it better be priced accordingly.
 
#35 · (Edited)
more preying Mantus



My
Name is Greg I am the founder of Mantus Anchors, i appreciate the discussion Mantus has generated on this forum. I would be more than happy to answer any questions.
In the matter of sizing WE ARE conservative with our recommendations!
An anchor is a piece of gear that lives depend on! Heavier size increases both: the holding power and the likelyhood the anchor will set.
Now I know Mantus is the best setting anchor on the market today, but of course the burden of proof is on us and we are in the process of submitting Mantus for independent testing. Still If you believe us that we did not alter or influence the videos, which we did not, than you will find our Test Videos on Mantus Anchor page convincing.
Greg
 
#39 · (Edited by Moderator)
I have a couple of questions about your anchor. First, what are the spec's, materials etc. of the bolts used to assemble it? Next, why does it seem to outperform the seemingly nearly identical "Mansocna" - sharpness? Blade angle? Lastly, why do you have the shank merely bolted to the fluke? It would seem intuitively that having the fluke slotted so it could slide over the shank (which would be T shaped at the end) and THEN be bolted would make it stronger. As it is, it appears the tensile loading on the shank/fluke bolts is the only thing holding it together.
 
#36 · (Edited by Moderator)
Hello Greg. The link you posted didn't work for me.

The results seem odd to me as the relative performance of the other brands does not align with independent testing over the last few years. That is odd.

I do like your chain hook.
 
#37 · (Edited)
Dave, thanks! I just fixed the link.
In reference to individual anchor performance in our tests, can you be more specific about what data cast doubt in your mind?
In general our tests show agreement with previous results. In really soft silty bottoms all anchors can set, so blade surface area decides the best holding. In this situation
Danforths/Fortress perform better than the lot, as these anchors offer bigger blades for the given size. In harder more challenging bottoms, setting ability becomes more important, this is where new generation anchors shine. We claim Mantus to be the best in its ability to penetrate hard packed soil. This setting ability not only effects initial penetration but also the depth it dives and ultimately, holding power. In more forgiving soils it is sometimes hard to show the difference between the more traditional anchors and the ones designed to penetrate. But an anchor is a piece of gear that lives depend on. It needs to work everywhere, all the time and that's what we have achieved with Mantus.
Greg
 
#38 ·
In reference to individual anchor performance in our tests, can you be more specific about what data cast doubt in your mind?
In general our tests show agreement with previous results. In really soft silty bottoms all anchors can set, so blade surface area decides the best holding. In this situation
Since you asked so politely ... *grin*

Caveat - I watched once through on my phone and paused at the graphs so I may have missed something.

I saw really outstanding performance from CQR in one particular bottom that surprises me. I saw generally low performance from Rocna that surprised me.

We got really pounded by TS Debby here and are still in recovery so Internet is up and down, slow when we have it. I'll be happy to look more carefully in a few days. Do you have a test protocol? Did you do 30 or more sets of each anchor in each location to get some statistical significance? I did like what I saw of your test set-up. If you meet professional academic standards have you considered writing a paper for a peer-reviewed journal? The real science would be cool to see from someone. I've been working on a protocol off and on for a couple of years that would allow truly apple-to-apples comparisons of multiple evaluations at multiple sites. I need a civil engineer or ocean engineer with chops for saturated soils to finish and publish. Anyway - that's a digression.

Best of luck with your product.
 
#40 ·
I bought one and I will let you know how I like it after our cruise in August. I have received it and it looks to be of good quality and the bolts don't bother me one bit. Half our world is held together by bolts. The wheels on your car are bolted on and nobody frets about those.
 
#45 ·
Oops - I was working on my post while you were posting.

The problem with truly scientific testing is the time and expense of execution.

While I have some doubts about the precision of your results it does look to me, superficially, that you have a product that should perform much like the other new generation anchors (Rocna, Spade, Raya, Manson Supreme) out in the world.

Best of luck to you moving forward.
 
#46 · (Edited by Moderator)
Greg,

Thank you for 'coming on board' to discuss this anchor with us! It looks interesting to me as a 'backup' or 'big backup / storm' anchor, even though I do have my reservations about the bolts.

A few years ago I bought a Raya Tempest 800 to use on my trailer-sailer, a MacGregor 26X - this is a 7.5 kg anchor that's similar to the Spade, but it has a wedge-fitting removable shank that pulls up (from the underside) through a sturdy welded receiver collar in the fluke. It could be bolted in place with one through-bolt, but the shank's wedge fit into the collar took all the stress; you simply couldn't have pulled it out without tearing apart the slot in the fluke! I still have the anchor, as it is just big enough to use as a backup on my current boat, a Bristol 29.9; I would love to find a bigger one for my next sailboat, but poor JoĂŁo has Gone West.

(I tried to upload a diagram from JoĂŁo's old web-site, that I'd saved on my computer. It shows the wedge fit of the shank in the fluke's receiver. Unfortunately, SailNet didn't cooperate.)

The notion of bolting the shank to the top of the fluke is what I find disquieting about the Mantus. The bolts appear to be a weak link in the anchor. I am with Sloop Jon B in this - if the shank pulled up through a receiver in the fluke, so that it was held in place by a heavy collar of welded steel, I'd be very very interested in the Mantus!
 
#48 ·
There has been several readers expressing concern about the bolts and suggesting that bolts would be the weakest link.

The bolts are oversized with such margin that discussions regarding bolt strength are not really relevant. A single bolt is more than sufficient to deal with expected loads, even in a hurricane situation. Just think cleats on boats are bolted in, wheels on the car are bolted on. A grade 2 bolt has min yield stress 33000 psi, 1/2 inch bolt is good for approx 25000 pounds and we have 4 of them on our 35 and 45 pound models. These models are sized boats that weigh 15-20,000 pounds so you could literally suspend the boat of that bolt. For example expected loads on a 45 lbs anchor if properly sized for a boat are less than 10,000 even in the worst imaginable conditions. The chain, the cleat, or the shank hole will brake long before the bolts on the anchor will, not to mention the shank will bend. Now the reason we did not have the shank plate take the load is bc we found that a smooth bottom on the fluke is very important for penetration. Prototypes with shank slotted through the fluke did not do well in hard bottoms bc of added volume to drive through undisturbed hard clay for example. This is why Spade Anchor has difficulty in really dense soils, the nose has too much volume.
The nuts on our anchors are to be used with compression washers and grease and if you don't feel like ever taking the anchor apart until the time comes to re-galvanize it, than you can forget about the bolts after initial assembly.
We do offer a lifetime warranty on the anchor and all its parts.
I hope this alleviates some of the concerns raised about using bolts. Again remember bolts are on wheels of your car, attach rotors of the helicopter blades, there is a whole world bolted out there..... of-course size matters! ;)

I hope this conversation alleviates some concern about the use of bolts in the expected load path on our anchor.

However, the discussion on bolts and anchors ability to break down for storage is a tangent. The main point I want to communicate and hopefully convince some of you ;)
Is that Mantus Anchor's ability to DIG IN is unparalleled. This was the whole point of the design after all, otherwise there is no room for just another anchor.
Ok my rent is over.... Happy 4th everyone

Greg
Good answer, especially your point about added volume on hard bottoms.

I think what everyone is waiting for are indendant tests, on both holding and the bolts. You need to remember, we just went through a period whereby Rocna swore up and down of what strength steel they were using, yet when tested, it was found that they were lying. In fact, Rocna has now lowered their standards as opposed what was promoted for a very long time.

I'm discussing the Rocna fiasco because of the shadow of doubt that has been cast on any new anchor. That is just reality.

So, keep in mind that you are now claiming extraordinary holding power compared to other similar anchors. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, especially with the Rocna situation fresh in many peoples' minds.

May I suggest that the testing that needs to show will comprise of a number of things:

  • SHHP - A Lloyds certification would be very useful. For all size ranges.
  • Metallurgical specs that can be independently verified
  • Multiple independent anchoring tests. And yes, I recognize those may be difficult to arrange, but seeing the beach test is really not enough.

Good luck with your product, and please consider these points.

Others may expand on them. Your marketing to a skeptical audience. If you win them over by performance, you will have a winner.
 
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