The day that I become financially involved with an anchor manufacturer is the day that a lose my status as an "independent" anchor tester. Maybe, that is ok.
Interesting test, my man. I have a suggestion for a test, not sure if you've considered this before; I'd like to see the Mantuc M1 tested with a series of four or five 5/8" diameter holes driilled in the face in an evenly-spaced pattern, with each hole perhaps 2-3" away from the base of the shank. My theory is that when an achor is under tension there's a possibility of a layer of water beign trapped between the seabed substrate and the anchor face, and that this leads to a premature release due to the low-friction nature of the trapped (and pressurised) water. This is, I think, the secret to Excell's success- that they have perforations in the load-bearing facets. The perforations (I believe) allow the trapped liquid to escape, ensuring a good (high-friction) substrate-to-anchor face contact and therefore, better holding. This might be proven via the puncture of holes through the face of the Mantus.
Jock, Check out my videos # 58, and # 67 from 5+ years ago. I drilled holes in the fluke of a Manson Supreme and found this to have a large, positive affect on the anchor. Yes, the Sarca Excel was the inspiration for this idea.
Hi Steve, in your Rocna modifications test video, you left the rollbar on the anchor. Have you ever tested a Rocna anchor with its rollbar removed? Thoughts on what its behaviour might look like theoretically?
Great test. I think an improved camera mount allowing closer camera placement while eliminating twisting would improve video quality. Imagine a single pivot joint where the camera can swing only left/right above the anchor. This mount would clamp to the anchor shank and would utilize a float to look down. I would be happy to model this in CAD and 3D print it. Thoughts?
That sounds interesting, but I see potential problems with a camera mount that has RIGID components: -Increased chance that the camera system influences the performance/behavior of the anchor. -High risk of damage to the mount during violent seafloor events. -Increased likelihood of camera damage (in 5+ years and many hundreds of sorties, I have only lost 1 camera) -Much more difficult/cumbersome deployment procedures.
What is your opinion of sizing up one anchor size. EG.... my 18000 lb boat calls for a 21 KG ultra anchor, what say you to sizing up to the 27KG anchor ?
I was wondering if you knew If a Viking 15 test looms in the future? With such a big gap between the 15 and the 20 it would make an interesting test. Or is there no reason as the performance could be basically extrapolated from the 10 and 20 tests? Inquiring minds
Good stuff. I appreciate how you pursue answers and seem genuinely interested in the finer points of how things work.
Oh man! This was unexpected results. Very interesting!
Thanks, another very worthwhile test
Great test and very good explanations.
I’m asking myself, why there isn’t a manufacturer asking for your expertise to improving their products.
The day that I become financially involved with an anchor manufacturer is the day that a lose my status as an "independent" anchor tester. Maybe, that is ok.
@@flygoodwin Never ok to sell out values for money.
@@dustman96 I sure hope your are a Patreon like myself :)
@@jakobkesselberg5912 Not a regular patron, but I have contributed. I am poor because I haven't sold out, and I'm ok with that.
That's pretty darn impressive performance for a 12 lb anchor!
Very interesting, thank you for all your work
Excellent ! Thank you
How about bolting a M1 roll bar onto the M2 ? Great work on all your tests.
Interesting test, my man. I have a suggestion for a test, not sure if you've considered this before; I'd like to see the Mantuc M1 tested with a series of four or five 5/8" diameter holes driilled in the face in an evenly-spaced pattern, with each hole perhaps 2-3" away from the base of the shank.
My theory is that when an achor is under tension there's a possibility of a layer of water beign trapped between the seabed substrate and the anchor face, and that this leads to a premature release due to the low-friction nature of the trapped (and pressurised) water.
This is, I think, the secret to Excell's success- that they have perforations in the load-bearing facets. The perforations (I believe) allow the trapped liquid to escape, ensuring a good (high-friction) substrate-to-anchor face contact and therefore, better holding. This might be proven via the puncture of holes through the face of the Mantus.
Jock, Check out my videos # 58, and # 67 from 5+ years ago. I drilled holes in the fluke of a Manson Supreme and found this to have a large, positive affect on the anchor. Yes, the Sarca Excel was the inspiration for this idea.
@@flygoodwin Two minds, eh?! Genius mate! Thanks for the tip, I'll take a look!
Hi Steve, in your Rocna modifications test video, you left the rollbar on the anchor. Have you ever tested a Rocna anchor with its rollbar removed? Thoughts on what its behaviour might look like theoretically?
Great test. I think an improved camera mount allowing closer camera placement while eliminating twisting would improve video quality. Imagine a single pivot joint where the camera can swing only left/right above the anchor. This mount would clamp to the anchor shank and would utilize a float to look down. I would be happy to model this in CAD and 3D print it. Thoughts?
That sounds interesting, but I see potential problems with a camera mount that has RIGID components:
-Increased chance that the camera system influences the performance/behavior of the anchor.
-High risk of damage to the mount during violent seafloor events.
-Increased likelihood of camera damage (in 5+ years and many hundreds of sorties, I have only lost 1 camera)
-Much more difficult/cumbersome deployment procedures.
I wonder how anchors without roll bars, would work if a roll bar was added?
What is your opinion of sizing up one anchor size. EG.... my 18000 lb boat calls for a 21 KG ultra anchor, what say you to sizing up to the 27KG anchor ?
If your boat, bow roller, windlass, pocket book, and sense of aesthetics can handle the larger anchor, then go for it.
I was wondering if you knew If a Viking 15 test looms in the future? With such a big gap between the 15 and the 20 it would make an interesting test. Or is there no reason as the performance could be basically extrapolated from the 10 and 20 tests? Inquiring minds
I've got a full plate, so plans for a Viking 15 test. Yes, extrapolation should give good info.
Thanks for the great, important work. Could you test a cheap Chinese copy, 49lb CQR? They have to be one of the most used anchors around.
Testing anchors in a series configuration could be interesting. I've heard that tandem anchors don't do so well.
Dustman, you heard correctly. They do not do so well. See my "Tandem Anchoring" video # 94.
Has anyone added a rollbar to a 45 pound CQR made in Scotland
First to comment 🙂