My other frustration is that I am not confident I know what bottom types
each anchor is most suited for.  Or perhaps a better way to put it is what
bottom types each anchor is unsuitable for.  Can you suggest any references?

 
Hi Doug
 
Sorry about taking so long to get back to you, I had it all typed up and it got erased. Didn't calm down enough to try again until now. I'll post it to T&T too, in case someone can add or contridict anything. Best to hear both sides.
 
The guidelines that I follow are: anchors for sand hold best with a 32 degree fluke angle; for mud, a 45 degree fluke angle. But, it gets a little more complicated than that. Mud only has 1/3 to 1/6 the holding power of sand, so even if the anchor has a 45 degree fluke angle, the anchor has to be several sizes bigger, when used in mud, to have the same holding power as the same design would require in sand.
 
If the anchor has a 32 degree fluke angle, it has to be even bigger for the same holding power in mud. Don't even bother trying to anchor in sand with an anchor with a 45 degree fluke angle, they set poorly and hold even worse, no matter how big they are.
 
Your Bruce, Delta, Danforth and most others, if sized as their sizing chart suggests, in my opinion are "sand" anchors for use in up to 30 knot winds with moderate protection from seas. If you were to use those designs in mud in 60 knot winds with moderate protection from seas, then they would have to be at least 4 sizes bigger than what their sizing charts indicate and bigger would probably be better, especially if the bottom was very soft. Use this guideline to evaluate the anchors that you now have.
 
My observations suggest that this aspect of sizing anchors is often neglected, allowing many anchors to drag since they are not big enough to have the holding power, in the bottom that they are in, that they need.
 
For the Luke anchor, 2 lbs/ft is okay, but 3 lbs/ft would be better, if using it in very soft bottoms. It is a great anchor for vegetation and if only wanting one for use in mild conditions, 1 lb/ft should do. However, check with the Lukes and discuss sizing with them. It's a great anchor as a storm anchor for use in just about any bottom, regardless of what Frank says. If you are staying 100% of the time in sand or mud, there are other anchors that might do the job with somewhat less weight and be more managable.
 
SuperMax anchors and Fortress anchor are a great choice for areas that have sand and mud as they are adjustable to either 32 or 45 degree fluke angles. SuperMax anchors are sized, according to the manufacturer (Andy Peabody- Creative Marine) to be strong enough in both straight-line pull and for bending loads for 60 knot winds in mud, so you don't necessarily have to jump sizes since that is already been done for you. Best to check with Creative Marine, first, though.
 
Fortress makes for a good second anchor as it can come apart, making it easier to stow. Sans windlass, but with back problems, it might be a better choice as a main bower for you guys.
 
Let's take your boat- even though it is a 23' sailboat, let's jump to the load on the ground tackle for a 25 footer in 60 knot winds with moderate protection from seas- it can have 1900 lb load on its ground tackle. (Why bother with mild conditions, as just about anything will work!)
 
With Fortress anchors, perusing their sizing chart, in sand with a 32 degree fluke angle, an FX-7 might be adequate. However, in mud, if a 45 degree fluke angle is used, it will need to be bigger- FX-23- to have the same holding power as the FX-7 does in sand. If the fluke angle was set at 32 degrees and used in mud, the size would have to be a FX-55. Since you can adjust the FX series and since mud and sand are prevalent in your area, the FX-23 would seem be the minimum size to get.
 
But holding power is only half the story, the anchor also needs the strength to resist the load, not only in straight-line pull, but when side-loaded, too. If you puruse the Fortress chart, you'll see that the FX-23 has a WLL of 2000 lbs, adequate for straight-line pull.
 
But... bending or side-loads can cause an anchor to bend or break with as little as half of the load that it can carry in straight-line pull. So, to resist bending loads, the anchor should be twice as strong as it needs to be for straight-line pull. Maybe that explains why you see so many bent anchors. The Fortress anchor with a WLL of 4000 lbs is the FX-55. This isn't a problem as their is seldom problems with too much holding power, if you were to use it in sand.
 
The "spade" type anchors have good reputations, but I've no experience with them. The SuperMax is suppose to out-hold the spade anchors. Please don't argue that point with me, but if you must, direct your arguements to Creative Marine, they were involved with the testing.
 
So there you go- calculate the load that will be on your ground tackle, identify the type of bottoms that you will be anchoring in, pick your design, find out the holding power and WLL that the various sizes will have, then make your choice. Bigger is better than smaller, stronger is better than weaker and sooner is better than latter.
 
Sorry, I don't know of any  books that discusses anchoring in this manner, but maybe this will help. No doubt I've missed some important points, so if you have any other questions, I'll try to answer them. Jill says howdie!
 
Rudy
Briney Bug, Panama City, Fl

In that entire treatise, I saw nary a word about a vessels windage. It just
baffles me how you can just parcel out so many pounds per foot waterline
length without regard to the factor that exerts the most force on the anchor

• wind.

I honestly don't understand how a Luke anchor or any Yachtsmen-type anchor
can be used as a storm anchor in sand or mud owing to their small fluke
area. It is not a question of disbelief as you have said that it has held
you in storms. It is just my inability to comprehend the magic.

Ron Rogers

In that entire treatise, I saw nary a word about a vessels windage. It just
baffles me how you can just parcel out so many pounds per foot waterline
length without regard to the factor that exerts the most force on the anchor

• wind.

Hi Ron
 
My assumption is that you are talking about the Luke anchor? Those recommendations come from Luke, are long standing and, from years of folks using them, have been shown to be fairly applicable. How they came up with them is a question to direct to them. All I know is that in our experiences and observations, they work. Some "old time things" were worked out long before they had the ability to "scientifically test" everything. I suspect, in this case, they kept using bigger and bigger anchors until everyone noticed that the success point was reached. On the opposite side of the coin, many "scientifically tested" ideas fail for some reason or another. Interesting!
 
Rudy
Briney Bug, Panama City, Fl

I honestly don't understand how a Luke anchor or any Yachtsmen-type anchor
can be used as a storm anchor in sand or mud owing to their small fluke
area. It is not a question of disbelief as you have said that it has held
you in storms. It is just my inability to comprehend the magic.

I too had that question, but bought and used our first Luke on faith. From purely a "palm size" perspective, I am still in awe of its holding power. The only explaination that I can offer is that the flukes are situated at the end of long arms. It are these long arms that allow the flukes to dig deeper into the bottom where it is denser, thus providing more holding power.
 
Of coarse, fluke size is also important, but Luke anchors have moderate size palms. Anchors with smaller sized palms would need to be bigger. If you've ever stood at the surf's edge and dug into the sand with your fingers, you'll notice that even an inch of depth reveals that the sand is packed more dense and harder to dig into. It's my thinking that the Fisherman style anchors take advantage of this phenomenon.
 
In soft bottoms, the weight is what probably allows the anchor to bury deeper allowing the anchor to get down to a position where the flukes can dig into the better holding, denser material. Bigger palms would also provide better holding, especially in softer bottoms, thus the recommendation for 3 lbs/ft for soft bottoms which automatically provides an anchor with bigger palms. If the anchor where to be used exclusively in soft bottoms, you could use a lighter weight Fisherman anchor and weld on additional material to the palms to make them bigger.
 
At least that is the only way that I can figure it. If anyone has a better explaination, I'd sure like to hear it.
 
Rudy
Briney Bug, Panama City, Fl
 

Snip:"...I honestly don't understand how a Luke anchor or any Yachtsmen-type
anchor

can be used as a storm anchor in sand or mud owing to their small fluke

area...."

Ron,

It is easy.  Rudy uses his Luke to grab the stoutest cable he knows of in
the area and it holds very well like that.  After all, that's why they show
them on the charts.

Joe

M/V "Carolyn Ann" GH N-37

MTOA# 3813

AGLCA# 5485 (Gold Looper)

CarolynAnn-N37.blogspot.com

Joseph.pica@gmail.com

...uses his Luke to grab the stoutest cable he knows of in the area...
 
And boy, have we had some shocking experiences. I remember one time when even Jill refused to recover our anchor, and we even had a windlass. Some women can be such wimps!
 
Rudy
Briney Bug, Panama City, Fl