Buying a Fortress anchor... mistake or not?

[mike]

Because we're going to be going out on our first overnight trips soon (a short 25 mile jaunt to nearby Pearl River hopefully this weekend, and a 4 day trip to Cat Island and Ship Island off the Mississippi coast in a month), I'm assessing our anchor situation. The boat came with two Danforth-style anchors that seem too small for overnight anchoring, and I want to replace one of them right now with something better.

I spent a long time last night reading the anchor thread here from a month or so ago, and although I really like the Bulwagga, I think I'm going to pass on it for now in favor of a Fortress FX-11, which is supposed to hold very well in the sand and (more likely) mud we're likely to encounter.

The man at West Marine said it's a very good anchor, but also suggested I consider a Bruce, due to the fact that a Danforth-style might fail to reset if something gets lodged in the flukes after a wind or current shift. But right now, I'd prefer to have something that will fit in the anchor locker, and is not too unwieldy.

Any thoughts on this selection? Any substantial reason not to get a Fortress? Am I making a big mistake by not just sucking it up, paying the extra money, and trying to hunt down a Bulwagga (if I can even find one, they might still be in short supply as reported in the above mentioned thread)?

Thanks!

--Mike

[Timm Miller]

Its the best Danforth style anchor there is....period. I even had great luck with a 13 lbs. Hooker that was cut down to fit the locker........if there is a wind shift, it would have to be one hull of a blow to yank the anchor out once it has a good set......make sure to set it correctly by putting tension on the line with the motor in reverse for about 15 secs at 1/3 throttle.

[craiglaforce]

I've always had good results with the 13# superhooker (danforth style) anchor. Once it is dug in well I can't see it coming loose unless you get hit with a wind or current reversal, then look out because it will likey not reset due to mud fouling in the flukes.

If you expect to anchor in an area with reversing tidal flows then maybe something that has a decent chance to reset itself might be preferable. Either that or maybe anchor with 2 anchors set up and downstream respectively. Both led to the bow.

I'm not sure why a fortress anchor is any better than a superhooker other than it is lighter to handle. As long as they both dig into the mud, have the same angle, and present the same fluke area to the mud when loaded, and do not bend, they should perform the same.

That being said, I think you can adjust the fluke angle on the fortress so maybe that is a positive if that is something you might want to do.

Regarding bending strength, I would expect that Steel is actually stronger than aluminum, so it might handle a higher ultimate load before bending, unless the aluminum was made thicker to compensate.

Of course either anchor should some have chain at the anchor end and a stretchy 3 strand nylon rode to absorb shocks ( I prefer 1/2 inch) others like 3/8". THey both give a lot of stretch, and 1/2" is easier on the hands when retrieving.

You might also want to pick up a couple of rocker stoppers and rig them with several lbs of weight each to help reduce roll at anchor.

The you might want to think about rigging the boat on a fore-aft anchor bridle to keep the boat from sailing back and forth a lot.

The best thing I've found is to really search for a protected anchorage to keep the boat motion to a minimum.

I only use the anchor locker to store the anchor rode (it keeps it nice and moldy) and hang the anchor from the rail on a PM 1 or 2 anchor hanger from Windline.

THe anchor should be well secured to prevent it from accidentally going overboard. I use a heavy black rubber truck tarp strap wrapped around the anchor and the rail.

THe rode bitter end should be secured to something solid. I have mine on a shackle attached to the mast raising eye strap near the hatch.

[Paul S]

Because we're going to be going out on our first overnight trips soon (a short 25 mile jaunt to nearby Pearl River hopefully this weekend, and a 4 day trip to Cat Island and Ship Island off the Mississippi coast in a month), I'm assessing our anchor situation. The boat came with two Danforth-style anchors that seem too small for overnight anchoring, and I want to replace one of them right now with something better.

I spent a long time last night reading the anchor thread here from a month or so ago, and although I really like the Bulwagga, I think I'm going to pass on it for now in favor of a Fortress FX-11, which is supposed to hold very well in the sand and (more likely) mud we're likely to encounter.

The man at West Marine said it's a very good anchor, but also suggested I consider a Bruce, due to the fact that a Danforth-style might fail to reset if something gets lodged in the flukes after a wind or current shift. But right now, I'd prefer to have something that will fit in the anchor locker, and is not too unwieldy.

Any thoughts on this selection? Any substantial reason not to get a Fortress? Am I making a big mistake by not just sucking it up, paying the extra money, and trying to hunt down a Bulwagga (if I can even find one, they might still be in short supply as reported in the above mentioned thread)?

Thanks!

--Mike

We got an FX-11. Have not heard anything bad about it. Which is why we got it. We have 200' 1/2" + SS chain + the FX11 in the anchor locker of our M with room to spare. Have not had a chance to try it out though. But it does look well made. Very impressed with it, plus it is so light.

Don't think it is a mistake. I don't think you can go wrong with a danforth. Used one for 12 or so years on our powerboat. We never found a bottom it didn't like.

Paul

[Chip Hindes]

Its the best Danforth style anchor there is....period.

Maybe, but according to Practical Sailor, you're not saying much. In their tests, none of the Danforth-style anchors (PS calls them "lightweight") including the Fortress, rated much better than any of the others. Not a surprise. Without a label, you would be hard pressed to tell the difference. Except that the Fortress is aluminum, and should be easier to handle.

For some unexplained reason the Fortress has a crowd of proponets who swears by it, but please spare me the anecdotes. I'm only passing along what PS has published.

As I recall, the Bruce got some qualified good marks, but the PS recommendation was that you purchase at least one size larger than recommended by the manufacturer. The other winner was the Claw.

[Jack O'Brien]

I've had good luck with a real 8# Danforth and (2) danforth-style 9# Hookers in sand and mud. I've also seen these slide and drag on grass in the keys and drag in mud with reversing tidal current. "Someday" I will get a Kingston Quikset plow-type, a roller/holder on the bow and a windlass so I can set and retrieve from the cockpit.

[Paul S]

Its the best Danforth style anchor there is....period.

Maybe, but according to Practical Sailor, you're not saying much. In their tests, none of the Danforth-style anchors (PS calls them "lightweight") including the Fortress, rated much better than any of the others. Not a surprise. Without a label, you would be hard pressed to tell the difference. Except that the Fortress is aluminum, and should be easier to handle.

For some unexplained reason the Fortress has a crowd of proponets who swears by it, but please spare me the anecdotes. I'm only passing along what PS has published.

As I recall, the Bruce got some qualified good marks, but the PS recommendation was that you purchase at least one size larger than recommended by the manufacturer. The other winner was the Claw.

The weight difference is big, compared to my old one (smaller size actually). Plus you can take it apart (if you want - storage?) quickly is kinda nice. But I can't imagine taking it apart on a regular basis. My no-name danforth was great. It doesnt surprise me that PS didn't rate the fortress higher. I just wanted a ligher anchor. If it is 'better' than my old one, that is fine with me too. Just an added bonus.

Paul

[Frank C]

... our first overnight trips soon
... although I really like the Bulwagga, I think I'm going to pass on it for now in favor of a Fortress FX-11
... also suggested I consider a Bruce, due to the fact that a Danforth-style might fail to reset
... right now, I'd prefer to have something that will fit in the anchor locker, and is not too unwieldy.
... Any substantial reason not to get a Fortress?

Mike,
Although I'm a Bullwagga fan, I think the aluminum fluke is a perfect choice for your first "real" anchor.

In choosing either the Bruce or the Claw, they certainly appear identical. IMO, I wouldn't pay double the price for the Bruce. More significantly though, either of them would need to stow across the bow, so you need a hanger or a bow roller. If you're going to install a bow roller, why not just get the Bulwagga? Further, if you were concerned about the anchor resetting itself, well that's the forte of the Bull.

OTOH, since a backup anchor is always a good idea, an aluminum fluke that fits in the anchor locker is a great choice since it can always serve later as a backup. Either a Guardian-G11 or FX11 would be fine (both made by Fortress) .... both are aluminum, both will fit fully into the 26X locker. Again, I cannot see how the Fortress is worth double the price of it's companion product line, the Guardian.

Finally, I used a G11 to raft 2 Macs overnight, and it never dragged a bit. In a sand or mud bottom it's a terrific choice. Strangely, I never had the steel Danforth set as quickly, nor hold so well. I'd suggest the G11, about $55 at Boatersworld.com.

[dclark]

I have the FX-11 and it has worked well. The light weight is a big plus. But it won't fit in the anchor locker of an X. It does come apart fairly easily and there is even a bag you can buy to sotre it in. But like Paul said, I can't really see doing that. It hangs well on the pulpit. If you don't have an anchor roller I'd strongly suggest adding that first.

[ronacarme]

Anchor locker contains rode.

16.5# Claw hangs upsidedown on port bow pulpit horizontal tube in front of the forward pulpit upright tube, with flukes extending laterally inboard and free portion of shank extending down and somewhat inboard, and crown (join of flukes and shank) outboard. Picture an inverted L-profile with ankle engaging the pulpit tube's top and outboard face, the foot extending laterally inboard and the leg free end extending down toward the deck. Rode extends from locker to the free end of the shank.

FX16 Fortress hangs upside down with arms fixed outside the stbd. bow pulpit horizontal tube and shank hanging down past the stbd. rubrail.
Lengths of split resilient black hose fixed on the pulpit tubes buffer the abutting parts of the anchors.

Stock free ends are clear of the bow cleats.

Quick release lashings fix the anchors in place.

[mike]

I have the FX-11 and it has worked well. The light weight is a big plus. But it won't fit in the anchor locker of an X. It does come apart fairly easily and there is even a bag you can buy to sotre it in. But like Paul said, I can't really see doing that. It hangs well on the pulpit. If you don't have an anchor roller I'd strongly suggest adding that first.

Eeeek! Several people have said that it DOES fit... are you sure it doesn't? Perhaps the G-11 fits, and people have just assumed that the FX-11 would fit too, but I do see on the Fortress website that the FX-11 is indeed a couple of inches bigger in each dimension. Hmmmm... well that changes things a bit. I suppose I could go with the G-11, but I really like the FX-11's steeper fluke angle setting for anchoring in mud. If I have to go with something that has to be stored on the rail or a roller, that pushes me a little bit in the direction of the Bulwagga.

--Mike

[mike]

Looking at the Fortress website, I see that the next size smaller Fortress, the FX-7, has greater holding power than the G-11 (and is about an inch smaller in physical size). While I liked the idea of having much more holding power than needed, if so many people are happy with the G-11, and the FX-7 supposedly holds even stronger (especially in soft mud), perhaps it's a viable option?

--Mike

[Paul S]

Eeeek! Several people have said that it DOES fit... are you sure it doesn't?
--Mike

It does fit in our M locker (it is in mine with rode/chain). I was under the impression the FX11 would not fit in an X. Are the X lockers the same size for all production years?

Paul

[Duane Dunn, Allegro]

There is really only one major difference between the Fortress and the Guardian. All the fortress anchors have two fluke angle positions. One is the same as the guardian for general use in sand and mud. The other which the guardian does not have is for soft mud. This is why the smaller fortress will out do the larger guardian in soft mud. They are using it at the higher angle setting.

For my taste I don't think I want to be messing with little screws and nuts out on the bow trying to put an anchor together. Little things like that just go splash to easy. All the other fortress differences are mainly cosmetic, fancy machining, tapered stock, etc. For my money the Guardian is just as good a choice.

I have both a 16.5lb Claw and a Guardian G16. The G16 will not fit in the locker, but I don't want it there anyway. Lockers are for rodes. The Guardian is on a bracket on the bow pulpit ready to go at a moments notice. The Claw is on a bow roller also ready for instant deployment.

If I knew I was going to anchor in Sand or Mud, my first choice would be the Guardian. The Claw does not do as well in these conditions, particularly in soft mud. It does not have enough fluke area. Then again, the guardian is nearly useless in gravel, rocks and weed fouled bottoms. The Claw thrives in these conditions. Unless you are certain you will never meet more than one bottom type, it pays to have different styles with different strengths.

Here's my setup

Then again, the Bulwagga seems to do the best job of being the jack of all bottoms. It has the penetrating weight to get through rock and weed, yet it has the fluke area to hold when the going gets soft. If only their 17lbs of metal was as cheap as the claws 17lbs of metal.

[mike]

I stopped by the boat on the way home this evening and measured the anchor locker. At its widest (the "base" of the triangle) it is about 24" x 27" (to the "point" of the triangle). The FX-11 is 22" wide x 27" tall. So, if it does fit, it's going to be a rather tight squeeze on the fore-aft dimension. I guess if dclark is correct, and it doesn't fit, I could go ahead and just hang it on the rail (looks kind of cool to have an anchor up there, I suppose). It looks like the FX-7 would be adequate, but I'd certainly feel more comfortable with the next size up.

In other news, I called the Bulwagga people today just to see if their anchors were still in short supply. She said they are completely out (at least of the 17lb. model) and will not have any more until hopefully the end of next month, so that's not going to work for me.

Also, I stopped by Boater's World today and noticed that they are selling the FX-11 for $99.99 (it's $119 on their website, and $139 at West Marine).

--Mike