Rod and Denise Nikkel

Greg has a very good point in that the stirrups carry a decent percentage of weight from the ball of the rider's foot, ahead of the heel/hip/shoulder line that runs through the rider's "contact area". (Is that a politically correct enough term for butt?) In any case, it is important to remember that the weight of the rider is distributed over the entire surface of the bar that is in contact with the horse. This is the purpose of having a tree in a saddle in the first place. It is different than riding bareback where the weight is concentrated right under the rider. Rod

This tree has been sold.

Brian, Beautiful work! We checked out your website - saddles first of course. They are gorgeous. But then we looked at your engraving section, particularly the knives... Wow... I don't have any other words for them and Rod was too busy drooling to talk...

Jennifer, Thank you for posting the pictures. To start let me say that I am not writing this treatise because we know everything and have all the right answers. But I do want to let you know the areas we check when fitting a saddle from the viewpoint of a tree maker. Hopefully some of what we say will help you as you look and maybe some of the others on this forum that know a lot more about what is available “over the counter” so to speak will be able to give you some suggestions too. First, our “read” on your horse: The overall impression is that your mare is not a big horse but, as you said, extremely wide and flat backed side to side. She looks to have “average” rock in her back, meaning that rock won’t be something you especially need to be concerned about. She is quite muscular in the “wither pocket” area behind the shoulders which also are not overly flat and will need watching. She has lower withers so gullet clearance won’t be a concern. She is not super “downhill” in build, which is good, especially as she is still only four and will continue to level out some more over the next couple of years. (As an aside, there is no formal definition of “downhill”, so people define it based on different criteria depending on what they are trying to evaluate. As tree makers, we want to know how a saddle will sit on the horse, so we look at the levelness of the side of the horse where the bars are going to be sitting. We realize that changes in muscling and fat will change the shape of the back, but how level it is will basically stay the same, so that is how we define the term for our use.) Being as barrel shaped as she is, you need to accept that she will not hold a saddle in place quite as well as a more A shaped horse does, but with a good fitting saddle you will not need to be constantly readjusting the saddle either. And she nicely falls into a body type of horse that, while not super common, is not rare either. So there is hope!! Going back to our basic two rules - #1) don’t dig in anywhere and #2) have as much surface area as possible within the bounds of rule #1 - and comparing them to the factors that affect fit, here is what we set as we build trees and what you can check for as much as possible: 1.) Spread or width between the bars. Your horse is very wide and as such can handle a lot of width between the bars. There are a number of different ways different makers state this, but on her you will be looking for the widest spread not only at the front of the fork at the gullet but also at the back of the fork and at the cantle. Widening the front without widening the back by the same proportion will lead to problems, so check the underside of a number of saddles of different “sizes” and compare. 2.) Angle of the bars. This one will be very important for your horse as she is very flat. If the bars are too angled, you will break Rule #1 by having the equivalent of the legs of an A digging into the sideways C of her back. This is why your semi-QH tree is perched on top of her. Again with her you will want the widest angle. Production trees usually correlate the spread and the angle of the bars, so as the width between the bars increases so does the angle. Thus the “Full QH trees” have the widest spread and the flattest angle that each maker produces, and this is what you will need for your horse. When checking a saddle on her, run your hand under the bottom edge of the bar to make sure it is not digging into her. You can’t really check the top half of the bar on a finished saddle very well except by trying to run your hand down the channel in the front and the especially the back. What you are looking for is that most of the bar width is contacting with just the edges lifting off. A tree that is too narrow or has too narrow an angle will not contact along the top section of the bar. 3.) Gullet clearance won’t be a problem with her low withers. The old “two fingers clearance” rule is a good one to go by. Extra clearance isn’t a problem. 4.) Bar length should not be a huge concern either. She is not a big horse so you don’t want really long bars. Just make sure when you check a saddle that the back bar tips lift off her loin a bit. If they contact when the saddle is not weighted they will dig in when you sit in it. Also check to see if the skirts are blocked well – formed to conform to the shape of the bottom of the tree, including curving away at the edges of the bars - and not left as just a flat piece of heavy leather which sticks out front and back of the bar. If they are not blocked well then the skirts can actually hold the tree up off the horse at the back or more commonly rub the loin. 5.) Length of the front bar tip. When you first put on a saddle, set it a little ahead of where you think it will end up and then shake it from side to side. It will slide back into position without you pushing it back. Then check under the front bar tips. It is hard to explain because the shoulder blades can slide under those bar tips a bit and be OK if they are shaped properly and give enough relief. So just because the shoulder blade seems to be touching the bar tips it doesn’t mean that it is a problem. But what does the front of that bar tip feel like? Is it blunt like the end of a 2 x 4 or curved? It doesn’t have to have a long length of curve, but it needs to be enough. Her movement will tell you what “enough” is. Also, it is important that the skirts be blocked to follow that curve. The tree could have enough relief built in but if you have thick leather going straight forward (and a lot of saddles sold today are unfortunately made this way) then the skirts will rub on the shoulders and cause you problems even if the tree is OK. 6.) Rock, again, shouldn’t be a big problem with her. Feel under the bar to make sure that there is no gapping under the center of the bar (bridging) and that the back bar tips don’t dig in. You also shouldn’t be able to “rock” the tree on her back like a rocking chair. 7.) Crown or profile of the bottom of the bar needs to be checked for her. Because she is so round, you don’t want a round profile to the bottom of the bar or it will be like trying to get two tennis balls to match in shape and you will have too much pressure in the center of the bar. There is no measurement as such for the amount of crown but you can compare a bit by checking the underside of different saddles. You are looking for the flattest bar side to side for your horse. 8.) Twist. Rarely do we find this to be a big issue and I wouldn’t expect it to be a problem with your horse either. It is also not easily checked in a finished saddle. Lots of words to say that your horse fits into the muscular Quarter Horse style of body build which is what the Full QH style of fit was designed for. However, as we said in the our first post, one “full QH” tree will fit very differently than another “full QH” tree from a different tree maker, so you still have to try them on, ride them a bit and see how solid they are on your horse (a good fitting saddle will not move around) and if there are any pressure points. We’re curious as to how what we have said matches up with other tree and saddle makers opinions. And hopefully others here who have used more of the production trees will be able to help you compare between brands.

I am posting, with permission, bits of some e-mails we have been exchanging with a saddle maker. So, lets try the survey here. What have you all heard as the definition of “shovel cantle” and what area of the country or world did you get it from?

Jennifer, Your problem, unfortunately, is a very common one. There are a number of factors in play. The big one is that fitting a saddle to a horse is like buying women’s clothing - the numbers and terms really mean nothing at all between makers and you have to try it on to see how it fits. That is just the bald truth. Within one maker’s trees, the semi-QH will be narrower and have a steeper angle than the QH, while the full QH is wider and has a flatter angle than the QH. But between makers, there is no correlation, and hand made tree makers don’t even use the terms. Also these terms say nothing about the amount of rock, the twist or the crown (amount of roundness) on the bottom of the bar, yet these all affect the fit. The fit for the horse is basically, though not totally, determined by the tree, and most saddle companies don’t tell you where they get their trees. So you might be trying a bunch of saddles with different names on them that are built on the same trees and you wouldn’t know it. And some production companies call their trees “hand made” because they do have human beings putting together the pieces and sewing on rawhide. So what’s a customer to do? Your frustration is based on a very real problem. First off, cost of saddle does not necessarily translate into its quality. For the price range you quote, you can get either a middle to upper middle level production saddle built on a production tree, or you can get a hand made saddle by an individual craftsman if you know where to look, but most commonly built on a production tree at this price. Bump that price to $3200 to $3500 and you can get yourself a hand made tree in a plain saddle built specifically for you from some incredible craftsmen (a number of whom are on this forum). Or you can drive down the road to a western store and spend a lot more for a production saddle on a production tree, often the same tree the lower prices saddles are built on. Since most people don’t know the difference they just keep buying more and more expensive production saddles trying to get something better when they could actually spend less money and get something truly hand made for them. The catch is - you need to wait. For some reason those tree makers take months to get a tree to the saddle maker, and the experienced and good saddle makers have a bunch of saddles on order ahead of you. At the store, you can take it home today. As far as I see it that, plus lack of knowledge on the part of the customer, is what sells the top end production saddles. So there is the trade off. But back to your horse. Your description puts a picture into my mind of what your horse looks like, but is what is in my mind really the shape of your horse? This is one of the primary problems facing saddle and tree makers: As of yet, there is no way to easily communicate shape of a horse’s back, though it may be coming if Dennis Lane’s system works as it seems it could. And now we have digital cameras, etc. that make sending pictures so much easier which is really helpful to truly know the shape you are trying to fit. With your horse standing square and her head at a normal working level, could you post some pictures of your horse? These are what we would like to see: 1) From the side, showing the whole horse including her feet, preferably with a person in the picture 2) from the side a closer view of her back including the front of her shoulder to her hip area 3) angled from about 45 degrees from the front and 4) from the back so we get a few different views of her back where the saddle will fit and 5) from behind but a bit above so we had see down the midline. Putting tape across the back at different places and along the side of her back about 3 1/2" down from her topline also helps as it lets us see the curves better. Shadows and some colors make it hard to see the change in contour in some pictures and the tape helps this. Picture 1 tells us about levelness of back, length of back and how the front leg and shoulder line up with the withers, as well as giving us a visual gauge on the size of the horse if you tell us how tall the person is. Picture 2 shows us more closely the musculature of the back and the shape we are trying to fit. Pictures 3 and 4 give us more information about the amount of rock in the back and how the shoulders join into the rest of the back. Picture 5 gives us a visual on the width and angle of the back and how that changes from front to back (twist). These types of pictures plus the different methods of doing back drawings are all helpful for a person who can’t see the horse to figure out what shape they really are. Just to be clear, once we all see these pictures, I don’t think anyone will be able to tell you to “go get this saddle or this tree and it will work”. Nor is Leatherworker’s purpose to have individual horse owners posting pictures of their horses trying to figure out saddle fit. Like I started out saying, you have to try them on to really know how they fit. But in asking for these pictures, I am hoping to be able to point out what areas we look at when we are trying to figure out saddle fit and get other’s ideas on what they look for. Your question is a great platform for this discussion. Thank you for asking it.

Apparently only for saddle makers... Here is a picture of Rod. I'll be with him.

This is a precision tool made out of stainless steel used for precise, symmetrical layouts. It is made so that using a 0.5 mm mechanical pencil straight up and down will make your marks precisely where you want them in relationship to the markings on the square. You can start with the square and not only have a perfectly square T, but mark precise distances on either side of the vertical, and up the vertical with just one measurement. It can be used to make a line totally perpendicular to one you already have laid out, and mark precise distances on either side of the vertical line. The 90 degree square is square and can be used to make precise 90 degree angles using the 1/16” markings to get it perfectly lined up. With this square you don’t need the center to be present to know you have your marks even on both sides. I am looking both to see if there is much of a market for this, since it doesn’t seem that such a tool exists. Other than saddle tree makers, do any of you know of a situation where this type of tool would be well used? Do any of you want such a tool for your own use? Back before the crash I asked a similar question and Regis was able to connect me with his son at American Precision Fabricators who made me a beautiful prototype. He is now willing to make a few of these if anyone wants them. Cost will depend a bit on how many I order due to the shipping, but will probably be in the $70.00 US range (these are precision made) plus shipping. If anyone is interested, please PM me.

Grumpyguy, Most tree makers we know get their rawhide from Hereford ByProducts in Hereford Texas. The last phone number we had for them was 806-369-0951. My understanding is that "bullhide" is just a designation for the thickest hide you can get and says nothing about the age or sex of the animal used. And all of it is split. To get a thicker hide you need to make your own, which a number of tree makers, ourselves included, do. Then you know you are getting true BULL hide. But the prebought stuff is also very commonly used. For straight hides, not processed... Sorry, can't help you. We have the luxury (?) of a place about 95 minutes from here that is medium sized. They kill about 50 animals a week - big enough that we can often, but not always, get what we need, but small enough to be willing to keep them separate for us. We are nice to them because without them we would be up the creek, but I think they get well paid for the hides compared to what they get from the tannery too. By the way, we have finally managed to get our backlog to a handleable level so are again taking on new customers.

Keith, The minimum neck size we make on a wood post horn is 2 1/8" in the wood. (We make it larger for horns with larger cap sizes to balance the look.) This is just what we are happy with for strength (using laminated hardwood for the entire horn). A 3 1/4" horn cap is only 3" in the wood, so 7/8" difference in total. We tried to make a few at 3" (2 3/4" in the wood) and that left very little room for shaping. As well, the smaller the horn cap, the less distance there is for the horn to slope down from the front to the back, making the back of the horn taller relative to the front than on larger horn caps. The result ends up looking a whole lot like a pop can stuck on the top of a fork, especially once you get the horn wrapped. Some people like that look - and even order the horn with no dome to accentuate it - but most people like a bit more shape to it. So that is where the 3 1/4" measurement comes from.

Jim, The smallest we make a wood post horn cap is 3 1/4". Not huge but not tiny either. As to tradition - there are a lot of cowboys wearing pink at the moment and, even more surprising, saddle makers are actually starting to TALK to each other, so never say never... All it would take is one top roper to use one and it would be the new fad...

Wild idea that we thought we would throw past the ropers here. Calf ropers want to get the horn low to the horse’s back to cut down the leverage. A wood post horn can be lower to a horse’s back with the same clearance because you don’t have to make the gullet as thick as you do when you have to accommodate screws to attach the horn. You can put a wood post horn on a swell fork. For those of you involved in the sport: Would there be a reason, other than tradition, why a wood post horn would not work well on a calf roping saddle?

Over time and around the world there have been many different designs for saddles. Right now in North America there are three main ones: English, Western and Australian. For some odd reason, we tend to see saddles in terms of trees… The English saddle has a tree made with metal, wood and webbing. The panels under the tree are what contact the back and are stuffed to fit the horse. It has traditionally been used when you were using the horse to travel, or, as is currently the case, when the point of riding is to enjoy riding. Both hands are used on the reins and the rider spends a lot of time concentrating on their riding and the horse, either as they ride for enjoyment, jump or work to get precise movements from the horse as in dressage. The Australian saddle was developed from the English saddle and traditionally had the same type of tree. But the Aussies have much more land than England and they used horses to move and work cattle over those distances. When working cattle you don’t necessarily have the option of going where you would prefer and your concentration is divided between the cattle and the horse, so they developed the knee rolls to give them more security in the saddle. However, since they didn’t rope cattle as North Americans did, there was no need for a horn. Lately, we have learned that there are now Australian saddles being made with a wood and rawhide tree, similar to a Western saddle, but made for their shape. The Aussies on the forum have much more knowledge about that than we do. The Western saddle design came up from Mexico where it had been used as a “working saddle” for use with cattle. It was made of wood (four pieces – two bars, the cantle and the fork) and was often covered in rawhide. The front originally was made from the fork of a tree turned upside down so the horn was the trunk and the branches separated to attach to the two bars. Thus “fork” as a name. The horn was there for roping. Today, Western saddles are used for many activities, and the style of the saddle often goes with those activities. The shape of the fork can be a slick fork, an A to upside down U shape but the widest part is always at the bottom of the fork, or a swell fork, where it widens out in the middle and comes back in to connect to the bars. These are made in many shapes, and the shape is basically personal preference, though there are reasons for those preferences for certain activities. The horns can be metal (lots of different types) or wood. The wooden horns have to have a much larger neck to be strong enough to rope with compared to a metal horn. There are different styles of roping, but you can use any type of horn for any style of roping, though there are advantages and disadvantages of each depending on what you are doing. If you “tie hard and fast”, your rope is tied to the horn so when the steer hits the end everything stops. Or you can “dally”, meaning that you wrap your rope around the horn after you catch the animal and you hold it there. (Note: care is needed to avoid finger and thumb loss.) Dally ropers have the advantage of being able to let their rope slide, bringing the animal to a more gradual stop. The larger the horn diameter, the more surface area you have for the rope so the less number of dallys you need to take to hold an animal. Thus, a larger necked wooden horn has an advantage for this style of roping. If you are competing in a timed event, gradual doesn’t make you any money, so these ropers will put rubber on their horns to hold the rope faster. Ropers working on the ranch where you are trying to keep the animals gaining weight often prefer to use “mulehide” on their horns to allow the rope to slide and be gentler on the cow. (Here is a link talking about mulehide. http://leatherworker.net/forum/index.php?s...mp;hl=mulehide) Most of the top of the saddle is personal preference. A “roping saddle” is just one built stout enough to take roping, though often certain fork styles predominate. All the different sizes and shapes for forks and cantles can be mixed and matched, and they don't have to have anything to do with the way it fits. Any type of fork and cantle can be made to fit any type of horse. As for fitting you, that is the saddle maker's job and they shape the groundseat - the seat undeneath the last piece of leather you see called "the seat" - the way they feel is best to fit you and how you ride. Again, the groundseat shape and the fit for the horse are independent things. If you are buying a saddle for pleasure riding, go for one you like the looks of. Sit in it to make sure it fits you and take it for a test ride to make sure it fits your horse. This goes for English, Western or Australian. Then enjoy riding!!

There will be a Saddle Makers Gathering from 1 to 5 pm, Tuesday, May 20th by High River, Alberta. It will be an informal get together to talk horses, saddles and trees. Dennis Lane, along with DaviD A Morris of LW fame, will be present and will demonstrate his Back Profiling System. It will be held at Key Ranch - Keith and Denice Stewart's arena. Price is $40.00 to cover the cost of the event. For directions or other questions, please PM Rod and Denise Nikkel or Steve Mason.

Here is our understanding of what makes a Wade, a Wade. The Basics: 1.) It has a wooden horn. If it has a metal horn, it is NOT a Wade, regardless of what it is called. 2.) The stock thickness (thickness front to back of the block of wood the fork is cut from) is longer. Most metal horn trees have a stock thickness of 3 ¾” or 3 ½”, while the Wade is traditionally 5”. We don’t know if this was the original stock thickness, but it has become the standard now. However, we commonly build what we call “Modified Wades” with stock thicknesses from 4 ½” up to 6”. (This is where some of the other names may come in. For instance, as far as we understand it, a “Ray Hunt” Wade has a 4 ½” stock rather than the traditional 5”.) The way we see it, the thicker stock is needed to have enough wood available for larger horn cap sizes and to balance the “look” of a larger horn. 3.) A Wade is a slick fork, not a swell fork. Again, we don’t know the exact shape of the original tree, but now it is pretty variable. You can order different fork widths from very slick to almost swell. This may also the source of some of the other names. Rather than giving them a numerical width (which really doesn’t mean anything as there is no real place to measure a slick fork), someone gave them different names to distinguish the shapes. 4.) It has a thin gullet. Because it has a wooden horn, there is no need for the thickness that is necessary for the length of screw used to hold a metal horn into the fork so the gullet itself can be made thinner. This means that for the same amount of clearance at the hand hole, the horn is closer to the horse’s back, reducing the leverage when roping. (On our trees, this is almost an inch difference.) 5.) THE FACT THAT A TREE IS A WADE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW IT FITS THE HORSE. Can I emphasize this any more??? You can get the same low clearance with other fork styles if you order them correctly, and other than a longer bar tip to accommodate the thicker stock, there is no “standard change” that makes the fit of bars attached to a Wade fork different from the fit of bars attached to any other style of fork. Most hand made tree makers we know have one or maybe two bar types total. This “bar type”, for us anyway, has to do with the shape of the outline of the bar. (The absence of a back stirrup groove can be another factor influencing “bar type” if the tree maker chooses to build them that way.) The width and angle at which they are placed and the amount of rock, twist and the curve of the bottom of the bar are all completely independent of the shape of the outside of the bar. I would assume that if one were using duplicating machines in producing the bars, it would not be easy to change these in an independent manner, so one “bar type” may fit in a specific way while another may fit differently. But this is all because that one maker builds them that way, not because the “name” has anything to do with the fit. And, as may have been mentioned once or twice, every tree maker does things differently. Hand making bars individually gives you the flexibility to change every one of the variables independently. The fork style or horn type you put on a tree HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BARS with the exception of a longer bar tip on the Wade bars. And we even cut this back to “normal” when requested for bulgy shouldered horses. Further Explanation: 6.) Because it has a wooden horn, the diameter of the horn must be greater to be strong enough to handle roping. This gives more surface area per wrap, which is an advantage when dallying. If you tie hard and fast anyway, there is no advantage of a wooden horn over a metal horn. We don’t know the specs of the horn on the original Wade, but the height of the horn, pitch of the horn cap or cap size are all variable now. 7.) Along with the thicker stock, which of course means a longer gullet lip, comes a change in the angle of the top of the fork. If the same angle were used on a 5” stock as the more common 3 ¾” or 3 ½” stock, it would look like it were running severely downhill simply because it goes out further, and would be more likely to contact the wither. The angle is changed so the gullet lip is raised compared to the angle on a metal horn tree. This also gives more clearance at the gullet lip, since you have lowered the gullet lip by decreasing the gullet thickness. 8.) There is no such thing as a set “Wade bar” that is consistent between makers. Most “Wade bars” have a longer bar tip to accommodate the extra stock thickness of a Wade fork. This is the biggest difference. They are often also a bit deeper or, in other words, the bars themselves are a bit wider. Since these saddles are meant to be all day using saddles, this is a benefit as it distributes the pressure over a wider surface area. This would be the only reason they may be seen as being better for long rides. Honestly though, if the length of ride is a factor in what bar you order, something is wrong with the bars you don’t order!! Any good fitting tree should be able to be used for long rides.

Just a note on width at the “waist” of the tree. If the bars are identical, as you get a wider fitting tree, the width across the “waist” will naturally increase accordingly. The increases generally go by ¼” increments, so overall that isn’t a lot, but it is there. And the wider angles increase that measurement too. (This means the horses it is used on are also wider, so that also has an effect on the rider’s leg position.) To compensate, we (I don’t know about the other makers who do things differently ) narrow the bars in the middle slightly to make them approximately the same width regardless of hand hole width or angle. And if the bars are individually handmade, then ask your tree maker to narrow them up if you want that. It is as simple as marking the pattern differently for us, and we do get that requested, often with the statement “Its for a lady…” attached.

Troy, We agree completely that the tree maker has to be consistent in how he builds the bars. That, to us, is essential in a good tree maker. They also need to know when and how to change something and for what reason. Thank you for the good explanation on how you set up this method of checking evenness. In this case, we have the rigging and pictures of it tacked back onto the tree to prove how far it was out. Not only was the right side further back than the left, but it was also lower down. That is why the string worked out almost even. The length of string it lost in being farther back it gained in being lower down. As well, in comparing the two sides of the rigging, they were anything but identical. In fact, the second saddle maker who tried to square it up had to build a new rigging because this one couldn't be forced to be square, which is how we ended up with it. It was going in the garbage bin anyway. With a straight rigging, the saddle worked great. Prior to that it had caused major problems whenever it was ridden despite having had two different trees in it. We know this is a common and good method to check evenness from side to side, but we just wanted to point out that the string can still be the same length if whatever you are checking is out evenly in two directions. Something that obvious should scream so loud you don't need the string, but it seems that there is the occasional person that wears ear muffs, or blinders…

As I was thinking and typing, Greg chimed in and probably said it better and faster. But since I hate to waste all this time and effort, here it is anyway… With all the different points used, I don’t know that anyone can ever tell what the “official” rigging position is on any saddle other than the maker themselves. Sort of like “is it a 90 or 93 degree bar tree?” You can’t tell from the finished product. There are too many variables involved with them both in how they are built. Definitely the lowest point on the bar is a totally artificial point as it relates to the horse. It is just a very easy to identify point on the tree, and as such can be used as a reference point if wanted. It also will only be useful in comparison between trees within one type of one tree maker’s bars unless they are made in a similar manner. But within those boundaries it can be used. I think we are agreeing here, though seeing things in maybe a different way. Extreme “tipping forward” would be the back end of the tree lifting off the horse, but long before that, “tipping forward” would cause a decrease in pressure at the back of the tree and an increase on the front, with the largest difference in pressure being at the front tip of the bar. Any rigging placed ahead of the point where the front of the bar pad starts curving out from the “deepest” part will have that effect. The further forward, the greater the effect. As the shoulder blade rotates back (in the unweighted phase of the stride) the top back edge will slide under the front bar tip of most trees. The idea of having enough relief or flare in that bar tip is to allow this to happen. It is not that there is no contact with that area at all unless the shoulder blade is back, but that there is a low enough amount of pressure that it doesn’t impede the movement of the shoulders. If the front of the tree is held down tightly by a very forward placed rigging, too much pressure will on be that front bar tip to allow free shoulder movement. This is why we feel that the shape of the bottom of the bar needs to be considered in rigging placement. Greg, could you define "true spanish position" please?

In reading through these posts, here is the list so far for what people use as their basis for the "full" rigging position. Center of the horn Measurement back from the front tip of the bar Lowest point of the bar Center of the base of the horn Back of the base of the horn Center of the fork Center of the front bar pad There was a thread on this before the crash that, if I recall, had some more ideas as well. Obviously, saddle makers are no more "standardized" than tree makers in how they do things. For what it is worth, from the perspective of a tree maker: Using anything but the bars themselves as a reference point for rigging position will introduce a whole bunch of variations. We can make a wooden horn or put a metal horn on the same fork style. This makes the center of the horn vary relative to a specific spot on the fork. We can make vary where we set a metal horn on the fork, or where we place a wood post horn on a fork, and how we shape it as well. This makes the back of the base of the horn vary relative to a specific spot on a fork. (We have even been asked to set it ¾" ahead of normal to provide some needed extra "belly room" for dallying.) We can stand a fork up or lean it ahead. The center of the fork relative to a specific spot on the bars will then be different, and this also affects all the horn references. All of these changes can give different reference points for "full" even when used on identical bars that will sit on the horse in an identical place on its back. It is the shape on the bottom of the bars that is crucial in determining where on the horse's back the bar will sit, especially the front bar pad area. If the front bar pad is designed to fit behind the shoulder blades, then the "roundest part" or "deepest part" of that area will determine where the bar fits relative to the shoulder. (This "roundest part" can be more difficult to determine on bar pads that are flatter rather than rounder, but the shape does affect where the bar fits.) And that "roundest part" is as far forward as you would ever want a rigging to go – if that far. Further forward, and you will be pulling the front of the bars down, acting to tip the saddle forward and more likely affecting the movement of the shoulder blades as they rotate back. Even that far forward can cause problems for a lot of horses. In checking out a bunch of pictures of trees tonight, almost all the measurements from the horn and most of the measurements from the fork as described above would put the pull of the rigging too far forward on our trees based on this idea. How does the "roundest part" of the bar pad correspond to the front tip of the bar? Doesn't have to be, and isn't, consistent at all with different bar types and especially between makers. On our trees, there is a different between "regular" bars and "Wade" bars in that the bar tip for Wade trees is longer (from the fork cut forward) to accommodate the extra stock thickness of the Wade fork. But the "roundest part" is consistent compared to the fork cut between regulars and Wades. So using a consistent measurement from the front bar tip on our trees would vary the "rigging position" (compared to the bar shape) depending on bar type. Between makers, it would be all over the map. How does the "roundest part" of the bar pad correspond to the lowest point of the bar? Doesn't have to at all. The outline of the bar doesn't have to correspond to the bottom shape in any set manner. Every tree maker does things differently, you know. On our trees, it happens to. Because it was planned that way? Not by us, but probably by wise people in our "genealogy" of tree making who knew how to make things easier for a saddle maker. If it does correlate, it makes it a simpler way for a saddle maker to figure a rigging position. Basically, as far as we see it, the full rigging position needs to be based on the shape of the bottom of the bar since that is what determines how the pull from the rigging will affect pressure from the tree on the horse's back. And that shape, of course, varies between tree makers, which gives saddle makers an excuse for varying how they do things too. A story about the "string from the center of the cantle" test: We have pictures of a rigging on a tree that passed that test beautifully – string to same spot on the rigging an even length. Unfortunately the actual rigging was ¾" farther forward on one side than the other and also off an equal amount up and down. A case where it appeared that two wrongs made a right, but the horses sure didn't think so! So while it can be a good check, in our experience it shouldn't be the only one that is used.

One of our customers has one of our trees that has ended up being too small for their needs and is now for sale. 8" Wade 7 1/2" gullet height, 6 3/8" hand hole height 4" hand hole width, 90 degree bars 14" seat length, 7 5/8" thigh length (measured from front point of cantle horizontally forward to back of fork) 4" high x 11 1/2" wide "Taylor" cantle with 3/4" dish at medium (37.5 degree) angle 3" high x 3 3/4" cap horn at medium (27 degree) pitch Price is $550.00 US plus shipping within the US. Please PM us and we can put you in contact.

Jon, One thing some of our customers like is a small bevel on the cantle - 3/8" down and about 1/16" to 1/8" back. I think this started for us in duplicating an old tree which had it and the customer liked it so much that he ordered more the same, as have some others. It is small enough to be unnoticed on the finished saddle. They use it for Cheyenne rolls to get a better break and on straight up bindings to get the binding that little bit further back and cut down wear. Just another idea, especially since you can make it the way you want it.

We're planning on going this year too. After all, this year is last year's "next year" so we better do it.

On the whole, rock really isn’t that complicated. It is just a term (one of a number that are used) that means “the curve in the bar from the front to the back”. That is not an even curve by any means, but the term itself is a very general one and the concept is very straightforward. As to the specifics of shape, again I come back to the basic fundamentals in building bars: #1) Don’t dig in anywhere, and #2) Have as much surface area on the horse as possible inside the bounds of #1. So you don’t want the saddle to consistently bridge, because that will cause soreness at the front and over the loin which can have severe ramifications. And you don’t want excess rock where the length of the bar, with the exception of the edges and ends where relief is built it, cannot contact the back. In that case the rider’s weight will only be carried in the center of the bar and over time that central area will get sore because of increased pressure over too small a surface area. If you have a bare tree, put it on the horse, rig something to strap it down, and walk the horse around. You will find that as the horse moves there are times the tree is bridging slightly on one side as the center of the back falls. There are times of the rear of the tree on one side is lifted off and the front and center of the bar have all the weight. Turn him in a circle and you will see even more exaggeration in what is carrying the weight and what isn’t. Getting the shape to match exactly all the time just is not possible, not just because the bones move (and they do to a certain extent) but because the muscles are contracting and releasing all the time – which is what you want. So the amount of pressure under any particular area of the bar is always changing, which is a good thing. What you don’t want is constant high pressure, nor do you want intermittent very high pressure. As the horse moves and his muscles contract, they will bulge a bit. This will lift the bar compared to when the muscle isn’t contracted. So you want to make sure that along the top and bottom edge there is enough rounding that the edges won’t dig in when the muscles are not contracted. Yet we want enough surface area to the bar so that when the muscles are contracted there is enough contact area that the PSI in that area isn’t too high. On our bars, while the whole bar is rounded to varying degrees depending on which section of bar we are looking at, we build in the “relief” along the outside half inch or so of the top and the bottom edges. (Our bars are moderately thick which also increases relief.) We lift the back bar tip, say the last 2 inches, so that it won’t poke the horse in the loin no matter how he moves, though the underside of that area will contact the horse some of the time. We position the bar to start behind the shoulders with enough relief built into the front bar tip (again, the front couple of inches) to allow the back of the shoulder blade to slide under it when it is rotated farthest back. This happens when the leg is extended – which is an unweighted part of the stride – and thus does not cause high pressure. If the leg were weighted with the bar on the shoulder blade, that would be another story. But other than the edges and bar tips, we expect the full bar to be in contact with the horse most of the time as he moves, though the pressure changes from minimal to more under the different parts of the bar with every movement. Overall, when building trees you are always looking for a balance. But it is not like you are walking a tightrope over Niagara Falls. The analogy is more like you are walking along a 6” wide line painted on the floor. Sometimes in trying to get too specific in one area, you can cause problems in others, so you always need to keep the big picture in mind.

Hi, Frank, Glad you found the forum. Nice work. What does ION mean?

Adam, Yes, there is information on this topic in the currently buried threads. But I believe they are getting closer to the surface all the time. Be prepared for a slug of reading when they do come back… One of the things that needs to be considered when getting a tree that fits a horse is the angle of the bars relative to each other. They need to match the horse’s back. A flatter backed horse needs a flatter angle to the bars. A more A shaped horse needs a steeper angle. This means that the bars will fit against the horse on the same “angle” as the horse is. So when you look at the bars, the curve from front to back (the rock) needs to be evaluated not compared to the ground, but compared to the horse. Thanks for the pictures. They help in explaining. The blue line would be cutting through the bar at an angle, and that angle would change with every difference in bar angles. Life is complicated enough without that, so red line on your drawing is how we evaluate rock. Does it make a difference? Actually, a little bit. Enough to worry about? Questionable. How the horse is standing and moving and using their body makes more of a difference, but at least this is one variable we can control. The shape of the bottom of the bar is independent of the shape of the top of the bar. The bottom is shaped to fit the curves of the horse. It needs to fit with contact down its full length, yet with relief built into the bar edges and the tips of the bars front and back so that it doesn’t dig in and cause excess pressure anywhere. If there is too much rock, pressure is concentrated in the center of the bar, or else, depending on a number of factors, the tree tips forward and the whole front half has excess pressure while the back half isn’t doing its share of weight carrying. So rather than picturing a bowl, I guess I would see rock as more like a saucer. The curves are gradual and mild, and although I guess technically there has to be a “low point” somewhere, it is not an easily definable place. And when you put it on the horse, that spot would be in a different place than a bare tree sitting on a table, and may vary a bit from horse to horse as well. As to how rock relates to the low point for the seat, that isn’t necessarily correlated. Ultimately that part is determined by the saddle maker, though a tree maker can make it easier or harder for him to put in a good seat. (What a “good seat” is we will let the saddle makers fight about discuss.) Depending on the length of the seat and the conformation of the rider (e.g. how much “padding” they carry on their backside) where that low spot goes may vary a little along the bar while still forming a very good seat. The rock in the bars still needs to match the horse regardless of where the seat is placed. There are no specific terms or numbers to describe rock. The best thing we came up with on our own was making a pattern with a flexible curve along the horse’s back under where the bar runs and sending that to us. Dennis Lane’s system has the same idea, but he takes his 3 ½” from the midline, but with the card perpendicular to the horse, not the ground. We are still working out how we can use that information in the way we build trees, but it is a much more consistent way to measure than the flexible curves. However, you need to have the horse standing square with his head in “normal working position”, because as anyone who has ever taken back drawings knows, that head and body position affect what you get in terms of shape for the rock. Overall, unless you have a mule or a horse that is extreme on either end, the variations in rock are relatively small. You don’t want a saddle that consistently bridges, and you don’t want one that has so much rock it has constant high pressure in the center of the bar. Anything else will not hurt your horse. There is a lot of variation in spinous processes and while there may be a correlation between topline and the shape of the side of the horse where the bar goes, I am not at all sure it is consistent. At least, we don’t have enough information to know what it is. So we have decided look at where the bar actually sits when figuring out amount of rock. We only use the topline for figuring out gullet and handhole height. If the question is “What do you fit – a damaged horse or a healthy horse?”, that is a very difficult question. If you look at a horse with a “sway back” and say, “I can change that by working the horse differently”, and get a saddle to fit the not so swayed back you are hoping to achieve, you will be using a saddle that will bridge on that horse now. The pain in his loin will cause increased splinting of the back, etc. etc. etc. and perpetuate the problem. You can run into other problems if you make the opposite choice. If the difference is severe, it may take two saddles. This is why we don’t want to “micro-fit” for one horse. The horse moves under that tree constantly and if you could read the PSI as he moves it would be changing every microsecond under every part of the bar. And unless you have spots that have too much constant pressure or way too much intermittent pressure, you will not hurt the horse if you get the basics right. So we work to fit a type or style of horse rather than one particular horse at one particular point in time.