Anchors: New Generation vs. Northill

rev, 7-26-2024

 

Commercially irrelevant, but I thought this might interest you.

I've been using a Mantus 12-pound break-down version (early production) because it was the only NG anchor that would fit my shallow well. However, the angles don't suggest very high holding power. It has done well in soft mud testing (Fortress sponsored tests), I believe, because the large roll bar is really helpful in soft mud; the fluke angle is not better, but the huge roll bar functions better in soft material, presenting the fluke to the bottom at a favorable angle. At least that is what I think I am seeing. The holding sand fits better with the low angle projections of (75-100 pounds/pound).

 

 

But Mantus 12-pound break-down mechanism will often jam with sand and shell. The 2-pound version was bad for this, but gwith the smaller size it was easier to force, and just the same, I generally I left it in one piece in the tender. The Northill Utility, on the other hand, never jams and can be assembled in about 5 seconds every time. I like that. It is easy to see the Northill as an old fashioned yachtsman's anchor, but remember that this was developed as part of the war effort to develop seaplanes. Modern engineering went into the design. It just looks old fashioned.

Today I tested the hold power in soft/med mud, four reps each, long scope and short scope:

Anchor (12-pounds)       Long scope (12:1)        Short scope (3:1)

Mantus                           310                                100

Northill                          330                                 90  

 

 

Correcting for scatter, they are basically the same. The big surprise, for me (other than equal holding) was how deep the Northill went. It buried more shank than the Mantus and the stock was 12 inches deep. I've never seen the stock bury in sand, but I never pulled it anywhere near failure.

 

 

If you look at the projected area in the attached photo, they are very close, with ~ 25% more area for the Mantus. When the stock of the Northill is fully engaged (it pulls down well into the mud), the fluke of the Northill is deeper, in firmer mud. The stock does not help it dig, but it does provide a lot of stopping power. The Northill fluke angle is steeper, more like Manson. Finally, the Northill sets in less distance. It seems these factors roughly offset.

 

 

• I did this just for me. I now know the Northill is suitable... though I had used it many times on my Stiletto 27, back before NG existed. It was the best shell and weed option for a light boat.
• The Northill remains VERY popular in the fishing fleet. I can see why. I still use it when fishing over jointed rock bottoms; no modern anchor holds as well and as reliably.
  
• It can foul if the tide goes 360.
• If it rolls over it should reset fast; the other fluke is clean.

I find it interesting that such a different shape can yield results that are so close. Just interesting. 80-year old technology. If there were only some way to get rid of the exposed fluke. Lots of things have been tried.