Best all-around gullet width and bar angle for QH rig

[ponygirl]

Hi all! I am just getting into leather working, but this looked like a good place to post a saddle fit question. I am having a ranch cutter made that i'll use to start and ride many different horses, so it's impossible for me to use Dennis Lane or another system to build the saddle for a horse or two. I'll generally ride horses that are fit, not too fat. Right now I've got a wade on a 90 degree bar with a 6 1/4 gullet that fits many horses nicely. However I'm thinking of going with a 6 1/2 gullet on a 91 degree bar for this new rig, so that it can fit a few horses that I might squeeze in the wade.

For those more experienced than I, What gullet widths and degree on the bars have you found to work best with a wide variety of QH built horses? I'd like somehthing I can get maximum use out of, using a thin blanket for the thicker built colts and a 1" pad on the thinner built ones. Let me know whatcha think! Thanks much

[jman]

Not to confuse you, but a wade's fork slope foreward and at 90 deg. it will be wider than and 91 deg. upright fork of a cutter. Also just by altering the profile of the bars, one can change the so called gullet with- when in fact it did not change the trees fit at all. I would suggest finding a tree maker who really can help you with a tree based on a total different way of measuring for a tree than just by gullet width and fork angle allone.

Ps. There is almost no difference between 90 and 91 deg. on a saddle tree

J-Man

[bruce johnson]

Welcome to our little corner of the world.

The tree makers can all chime in here, because they each do things a bit differently. I read that somewhere. There can be several ways they determine the bar angles, and most of the time once the tree is built you can't compare the bars from one tree maker to another and accurately measure them. So to get more spread you almost have to compare the trees from the same maker. Denise can weigh in here, but the spread difference between a 90 degree and 93 degree from them is not all that much and their bar patterns are pretty deep. I don't think going from a 90 to a 91 will even be determinable. Adding the wider wdith will make more difference.

If the Wade is working for most of them and you need to get wider, the choices from the same tree maker with the same bar pattern would be either the 6-1/4" 93 degree setup or a 6-1/2" 90 degree to stay with using gullet width as a measuring point. I'd probably lean toward a 6-1/4" 93 degree for a wider rig for colts. I don't think a lot of colts will fill a 6-1/2" and hold it up very well. That 6-1/2" would be a mature horse setup for me, and not all of them at that. Then you'd get to decide on the bar angles for that setup. Now I'll duck and let everyone else toss out an opinion.

[Rod and Denise Nikkel]

Ponygirl,

In all honestly, I don't think there is a best all round size for Quarter Horses since there is so much diversity in the breed. For some ranches and sections of the continent, a handhole width of 3 3/4" (getting rarer all the time, but still present) or 4" x 90 is best. For other areas we are building a lot of 4 1/4" x 95 now, with the middle variables (most common being 4 1/4" x 93) being used a lot as well. And we have gone wider and flatter on occasion. If you are riding a bunch of different horses, having a couple different saddles - one narrower with less angle and one wider with more angle - and different thicknesses of pads is what you need. (You can't just get one really wide one and expect to pad up for the thinner horses. A saddle that is much too wide will cause just as many problems as one that is too narrow, even with padding.) If the one you have now is the "narrower with less angle" saddle, then I would suggest you go a bit wider and flatter with your other one. But you can't compare bar angles (the numbers are meaningless between makers - explanation here) or gullet widths (the measurement can be varied between trees, let alone makers - explanation here) by the numbers, so to make sure you get the differences you want, you need to know who built the first tree and get a second one from the same maker. Hopefully you can track down who or which company made your present tree.

Actually, you are the best type of candidate for using the Dennis Lane system regularly. You will be riding a number of different horses with just a couple of saddles. Which one of my saddles will fit them best? What thickness blanket should I use? You'll be thinking questions like that. If you have the DL system, you will figure out which of your saddles works best with which numbers (therefore which shape) and how much padding you use to get the best fit for that shape with that saddle. Then when you start riding a new to you horse, you just need to card the horse and you will know which saddle will work the best and how much padding to use to start with. You can change it as you need it, but it will give you a very good starting point right off the bat.

I wish there was an easy answer for your question, but there isn't. If there was, then that would be the standard size made for QHs in North America. The fact that there is so much variation available tells you that it is needed. Maybe others will chime in with their favorites.

Edited April 22, 2009 by Denise

[ponygirl]

Hey all!

Thanks for the Dennis Lane Advice, I'll have the maker send my the system. Ad for padding up for thinner horses, I did mean all the colts, only the ones where the wade was squeezing em, but they didn't quite fit the wider rig. I looked at a Vinton cutter today thats a 6 1/2 gullet on 93 degree bars which looked like just bit wider than my wade, perhaps thats the way to go. I was hoping this saddle might also fit some older horses. I have a really old visalia with a 6 inch gullet on 88 degree bars that I put on the real thin built ones that my wade doesnt fit. I was hoping this new saddle might round out of saddle selection to accomodate a slightly wider horse (not mutton withered however... I see these 7 inch gullets everywhere... I'm not sure what horses they're going on, but they don't fit any QH around here.)

Jman, I didnt realize that about wades in particular relative to cutters. Good info to chew on.

The tree maker i'm working with will make the tree according to the Dennis Lane system and my wade tree is actually a poly tuff cable rigged tree. I don't want a cable riggin on the cutter so that leaves out the option of using the same tree maker. This tree will be handmade wood/bullhide.

Bruce - do you think a 6 1/2 gullet would be too wide on older colts (say 5yo)?

I know i'm just rambling now... just trying to throw all the info I can think of out there. Thanks for the help!

[bruce johnson]

PG,

I guess I am thinking 2-3 year olds when you said starting colts, so a 5 to me is getting mature and a 6-1/2 could sure fit the wider ones. If you do the card system, base things on that and not my generalizations.

Denise and David can share the math, but on the different fork styles and angles changing with the pitch of the fork - some makers account for that and have formulas they use to ensure the bars sit at the same angle with different fork slopes. I am sure not all of them do it.

[jwwright]

Ponygirl......As stated already......it is hard to discuss these differences, because many times the differences between tree makers is great as far as numbers = fit. If you wanted to tell us who is going to be making your new tree, some of us may have experience with that particular tree maker's work,and could offer insight as to how you might procede to get the results you desire.

As for the Vinton saddle you mentioned, I do have some experience with them. They used Bowden trees back when I rode one of them, and they probably still do. The Vinton cutter that I rode with a 6 1/2" gullet width worked well on a lot of colts, at least not causing any issues for the type of work they did. JW

[kseidel]

Hey all!

Thanks for the Dennis Lane Advice, I'll have the maker send my the system. Ad for padding up for thinner horses, I did mean all the colts, only the ones where the wade was squeezing em, but they didn't quite fit the wider rig. I looked at a Vinton cutter today thats a 6 1/2 gullet on 93 degree bars which looked like just bit wider than my wade, perhaps thats the way to go. I was hoping this saddle might also fit some older horses. I have a really old visalia with a 6 inch gullet on 88 degree bars that I put on the real thin built ones that my wade doesnt fit. I was hoping this new saddle might round out of saddle selection to accomodate a slightly wider horse (not mutton withered however... I see these 7 inch gullets everywhere... I'm not sure what horses they're going on, but they don't fit any QH around here.)

Jman, I didnt realize that about wades in particular relative to cutters. Good info to chew on.

The tree maker i'm working with will make the tree according to the Dennis Lane system and my wade tree is actually a poly tuff cable rigged tree. I don't want a cable riggin on the cutter so that leaves out the option of using the same tree maker. This tree will be handmade wood/bullhide.

Bruce - do you think a 6 1/2 gullet would be too wide on older colts (say 5yo)?

I know i'm just rambling now... just trying to throw all the info I can think of out there. Thanks for the help!

Ponygirl,

You are using degree of bar angles as if they are a constant. They are NOT! As has been stated many time on this forum, there is no industry standard and all tree makers do things different. A 93 deg bar from one tree maker may be very different than a 93 deg from another maker. There is no angle cut involved in the mfg of the poly trees as they are injection molded. There were no specific angles used ( or at least published or discussed publicly) when the old Visallia Co. was in business, and therefore no way to determine an 88 deg angle for that saddle. The Vinton cutter you looked at would have a Bowden tree, and what he calls a 93 deg bar is much different than say one made by Rod Nikkel. There is a great deal of mis-information being spread throughout the horse world regarding this subject.

The Dennis Lane profileing system at least gives the tree makers a standard to gauge the horses shape. But then you have the individual interpretation of what bar fits that shape. That individuality sets each tree maker and subsequent saddlemaker apart from others.

Many of the extra wide gullets are designed for extra thicknesses of padding and some have wider bar spreads from front to cantle to straddle wider on a horse. They certainly do not work under traditional uses.

In order to give you proper advice, we need to know specifics of what your intended uses may be. When you refer to colts, we all have different ideas of what that refers to. Geographic location also plays a major part in the kind of horses you will encounter most.

It is difficult to get a saddle that fits mature horses properly to fit young colts in the 2 - 3 year old range properly. Also performance bred horses will have different conformation than say ranch bred horses; especially as colts.

It seems discouraging just reading my own post! It is really not that impossible. Most horses can be fit satisfactorily with two different trees and a few different pads. The big wrinkle is the colts. They just don't fit the molds for mature horses.

Respectfully,

Keith Seidel

[jonwatsabaugh]

As the old semi-quarter horse, quarter horse, and full quarter horse nomenclature affixed to saddle trees became completely obsolete (I thought it was nonsensical in the first place) so has the idea of designating 90, 93 degree bars etc., become useless in my system of constructing trees. Over the years while studying different trees from some good makers, as Kieth stated, I found that from one maker to the next, there could be a difference of 4 degrees and they all considered these trees to have 90 degree bars. Don't get me wrong, these were all good trees just inconsistent in the front angle. Call me obsessive-compulsive, but this drove me about half nuts(most think I am anyway!). There are two factors, I found, that will contribute to this change in angle. First as Bruce stated, the forward pitch of the fork and secondly, the thickness of the bar at the bottom. To overcome these issues I developed my own system of construction. I call it building from the bottom up. By this I mean that the bars are shaped on the bottom side, fit in a precise jig and then the front and cantle are fit. This is a reverse procedure from most makers methods. Throughout the development stage, careful thought of DL's card system was considered. The result, a very precise and predictable method of tree construction. The legs on my fronts now could be cut anywhere from 93 to 101 degrees depending on a number of factors. Don't let those numbers scare you, the bars are not splayed out to those severe angles. They are cut that way to accommodate a number of factors. The angles are determined by the horse's profile and not any angles cut on the tree parts. My hat is off to Dennis and his tireless work in the development of his system. The cards are very handy, however, if you follow his placement instructions you can make your own patterns for your horse and have what you need for tree fit. I do have a couple of base line standards I start with based on body type.

Jon

[ponygirl]

Whew, all this measurement inconsistency is making my head spin!

The maker is Louis Carrillo out of Texas. He will be making the tree and the saddle.

So to be more specific.... I start horses under saddle midway through their 3yo year. I am currently in the northeast (Vermont) but will most likely be moving to one of the Rocky mountain states this fall when I finish graduate school. Many QH here have too much TB in them for my liking. I am more interested in a saddle that will fit an average ranch QH (not the halter bread ones that are HUGE, or the ones with tons of TB in them, somewhere in the middle). Optimally this new saddle will fit horses that are older colts (I guess when I say colts I think of not finished). So perhaps 5 yo and up animals. My apologies for the confusion there.

I got the angles on my visalia type saddle (it's not an actual Visalia Stock saddle, that would be far too expensive to stick on a colt! lol) by measuring it. The angle on my wade saddle was provided to me by the maker, Sparky Wallace. He said the Poly Tuff wade tree I've got is a 90 angle with a 6 1/4 gullet. No sure where he got that angle from if Poly Tuff doesn't provide one.

I now understand that not all angle masurements are the same, or even meaningful.

I guess I'm still real puzzled on how to get this tree built so that it works most of the time. Perhaps I should just describe the horse types to him and let his best judgement prevail. My own personal horse is a little on the shrimpy side. The wade fits her well with a 1" pad. I don't want to build this new saddle to fit her per se, so it would be silly to measure her with the DL system.

Interesting that Vinton uses a Bowden tree. I've heard great things about these trees. Perhaps I should ask Louis if he is familiar with them.

Thanks again for the great discussion!

[Rod and Denise Nikkel]

Perhaps I should just describe the horse types to him and let his best judgement prevail.

Ponygirl, I would say that is your best course of action. Every treemaker knows how they want to fit a particular style of horse and what they need to do to get that fit. Being too specific with specs without knowing how that maker's trees fit could get you want you don't want, whereas giving them the freedom to decide their specs for a type of horse is more apt to get you what you do want.

As far as measuring your old saddle, we wrote Bar Angles, Why the Numbers Are Meaningless Between Makers to help people understand why that doesn't work. Unfortunate, but true.

[PiconPunch]

I am new here and found this little board and have been reading it alot lately. I have just recently been comparing different saddles and trees and ones that will fit most horses. I ride usually high withered appendix quarter horses and they just dont seem to make production saddles to fit them very good. I currently have one custom saddle that fits just about any horse I have ever ridden and it has a 6" wide gullet and not sure what bars it it has but it fits nicely. I have another saddle on order and I did ask the maker what would be the best for high withered horses and at the same time something that would fit everything. His reply was a 6" gullet and northwest bars in the tree. There doesnt seem to be much info available to the general public about bar angles except the QH, Semi QH, ect. I do have to wonder what a saddle with a 7" wide gullet fits. I have a production trophy saddle I won with full QH bars and a 7" gullet and it doesnt seem to fit anything real well at all. What is the difference between say, AZ bars, Ellensburg, Wade, and Northwest bars? All information would be of help. Thanks

[Rod and Denise Nikkel]

At the risk of giving you information overload, check out this old thread on Bars and Bottoms. http://leatherworker.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=12763

As a quick answer to your question on bar types: First thing - they vary between tree makers. Nothing is standard. Some of the names have to do with the shape of the outline - how much overall surface area there is. Some makers have specific amounts of rock and twist to go with the names they call their bars. Others (ourselves included) use measurements to make those changes. The only thing that is really consistent is that Arizona bars only have a front stirrup groove, no back groove. This was started to cut back on breakage at the stirrup groove, but it means you either have a lump at the edge of the stirrup leather or a section of the bar that doesn't have contact, cutting down usable surface area, by trying to avoid that lump. We won't build them because we feel it will adversely affect fit either way. While there is a more common shape often associated with the Arizona bar, some makers offer "Arizona bars" as an option within their other bar types. In other words, the other bar outlines and shape but with no back stirrup groove. The "Wade bars" generally have a longer front bar tip to accommodate the thicker stock on a Wade tree and have a larger overall surface area. "Northwest bars" also have an overall larger surface area to distribute the rider's weight better than a lot of the other types. Both of these last two have been used more on ranch saddles that are used for long hours.

[PiconPunch]

At the risk of giving you information overload, check out this old thread on Bars and Bottoms. http://leatherworker...showtopic=12763

As a quick answer to your question on bar types: First thing - they vary between tree makers. Nothing is standard. Some of the names have to do with the shape of the outline - how much overall surface area there is. Some makers have specific amounts of rock and twist to go with the names they call their bars. Others (ourselves included) use measurements to make those changes. The only thing that is really consistent is that Arizona bars only have a front stirrup groove, no back groove. This was started to cut back on breakage at the stirrup groove, but it means you either have a lump at the edge of the stirrup leather or a section of the bar that doesn't have contact, cutting down usable surface area, by trying to avoid that lump. We won't build them because we feel it will adversely affect fit either way. While there is a more common shape often associated with the Arizona bar, some makers offer "Arizona bars" as an option within their other bar types. In other words, the other bar outlines and shape but with no back stirrup groove. The "Wade bars" generally have a longer front bar tip to accommodate the thicker stock on a Wade tree and have a larger overall surface area. "Northwest bars" also have an overall larger surface area to distribute the rider's weight better than a lot of the other types. Both of these last two have been used more on ranch saddles that are used for long hours.

Thank you so much for the info. Seems like I learn more all the time when it comes to saddles. I wish the whole generic thing, QH, Full QH and so one would just go away as it makes no sense and as a general rule I havn't found any of those specific tree specs that fit many horses to begin with.

[David Genadek]

Gullet width is a measurement used by people that really don't know anything to make it sound like they know what they're talking about. However, there is a very important underlying concept and should be understood by all horse owners, tree makers and saddle makers.

Measurements do not define shape.

In the attached picture you will see six different shapes. To make the shapes I cut six pieces of wire 24 inches long. So you can see in measuring them I can say they are all 24 inches but yet they are vastly different shapes. In the top row you will see a triangle, a circle and a rectangle. These three shades of very familiar to all of us when I say Circle you know immediately what shape I'm talking about because you know the word circle represents an data set of going that far equal distance from the center point. When hear the word rectangle you understand vaguely what shape it is going to be until you have a set of data that defines the height and width you really don't know what shape the rectangle is. the triangle takes even more information you need to know the measurement of two sides and an angle or two angles and a side to be able to properly define the shape. Trigonometry is a whole math designed to allow us to figure out the shape of a triangle. So there are three very simple two-dimensional shapes that take a lot of information to define what shape they actually are. How would you go about defining the shape of the three bottom shapes?

I have also attached a picture called bar comparison pdf of my most common bar shapes as you will be able to see my angle ranges exceed what others are discussing here and this is only the mid range of what I deal with. Last year I did trees ranging from 80° to 140°. The profiles in the PDF are actual sections of backs from real horses. The rectangles underneath are our attempt to find some type of ratio analysis to understand back shape. They do serve as a summary of the overall shape of the bar and its orientation in three-dimensional space.

When you're talking about saddle fit you're talking about very complex shapes, imagine a pyramid plunging its way up through a book binding. When you can see that then you will realize that making a big deal of gullet measurement is like saying the bottom three shapes in the shapes picture are 24". It really means next to nothing because measurements do not define shape. Another thing that is important to understand is that whenever you make a change in a measurement of a tree it also requires a adjustment of the overall shape of the bar. This is why the military failed with the saddles that had self adjusting angles. You can change the angles but if you don't also change the overall shape of the bar you will have problems.

David Genadek

01-12 2009_Bar no 3 thru no 1 testing correlations.pdf

01-12 2009_Bar no 3 thru no 1 testing correlations.pdf

Edited January 9, 2010 by David Genadek

[PiconPunch]

Gullet width is a measurement used by people that really don't know anything to make it sound like they know what they're talking about. However, there is a very important underlying concept and should be understood by all horse owners, tree makers and saddle makers.

Measurements do not define shape.

In the attached picture you will see six different shapes. To make the shapes I cut six pieces of wire 24 inches long. So you can see in measuring them I can say they are all 24 inches but yet they are vastly different shapes. In the top row you will see a triangle, a circle and a rectangle. These three shades of very familiar to all of us when I say Circle you know immediately what shape I'm talking about because you know the word circle represents an data set of going that far equal distance from the center point. When hear the word rectangle you understand vaguely what shape it is going to be until you have a set of data that defines the height and width you really don't know what shape the rectangle is. the triangle takes even more information you need to know the measurement of two sides and an angle or two angles and a side to be able to properly define the shape. Trigonometry is a whole math designed to allow us to figure out the shape of a triangle. So there are three very simple two-dimensional shapes that take a lot of information to define what shape they actually are. How would you go about defining the shape of the three bottom shapes?

I have also attached a picture called bar comparison pdf of my most common bar shapes as you will be able to see my angle ranges exceed what others are discussing here and this is only the mid range of what I deal with. Last year I did trees ranging from 80° to 140°. The profiles in the PDF are actual sections of backs from real horses. The rectangles underneath are our attempt to find some type of ratio analysis to understand back shape. They do serve as a summary of the overall shape of the bar and its orientation in three-dimensional space.

When you're talking about saddle fit you're talking about very complex shapes, imagine a pyramid plunging its way up through a book binding. When you can see that then you will realize that making a big deal of gullet measurement is like saying the bottom three shapes in the shapes picture are 24". It really means next to nothing because measurements do not define shape. Another thing that is important to understand is that whenever you make a change in a measurement of a tree it also requires a adjustment of the overall shape of the bar. This is why the military failed with the saddles that had self adjusting angles. You can change the angles but if you don't also change the overall shape of the bar you will have problems.

David Genadek

Thank you so much for posting that. I learn something new all the time.

[steve mason]

Whew, all this measurement inconsistency is making my head spin!

The maker is Louis Carrillo out of Texas. He will be making the tree and the saddle.

this maker is not trustworthy, he recently put a saddle that was not made by him on ebay as his own.

[superstakes2002]

Hi Everybody

I got a saddle from this guy in texas Louis Carrillo the saddlamaker and its a great saddle

What problem do you have??Its a reiner saddle I have from him its SUPER !!!!!!!!!!!!

Mark E

Edited February 27, 2010 by superstakes2002

[Steve Brewer]

Hi Everybody

I got a saddle from this guy in texas Louis Carrillo the saddlamaker and its a great saddle

What problem do you have??Its a reiner saddle I have from him its SUPER !!!!!!!!!!!!

Mark E

Might be a nice saddle but he posts pictures of other peoples saddles and claims he made them.The Will James saddle that is on ebay I built last year and is setting in my shop right now.The Wade saddle was built by Robert Chavez.He claims to have built both of them,And the trees too.The will James has a Felkins tree init and I think the Chavez saddle has a Kerch tree.What he does on ebay is fraud.I am know in the process of trying to deal with his fraud on my saddle.

Steve Brewer

[equiss]

Whew, all this measurement inconsistency is making my head spin!

The maker is Louis Carrillo out of Texas. He will be making the tree and the saddle.

So to be more specific.... I start horses under saddle midway through their 3yo year. I am currently in the northeast (Vermont) but will most likely be moving to one of the Rocky mountain states this fall when I finish graduate school. Many QH here have too much TB in them for my liking. I am more interested in a saddle that will fit an average ranch QH (not the halter bread ones that are HUGE, or the ones with tons of TB in them, somewhere in the middle). Optimally this new saddle will fit horses that are older colts (I guess when I say colts I think of not finished). So perhaps 5 yo and up animals. My apologies for the confusion there.

I got the angles on my visalia type saddle (it's not an actual Visalia Stock saddle, that would be far too expensive to stick on a colt! lol) by measuring it. The angle on my wade saddle was provided to me by the maker, Sparky Wallace. He said the Poly Tuff wade tree I've got is a 90 angle with a 6 1/4 gullet. No sure where he got that angle from if Poly Tuff doesn't provide one.

I now understand that not all angle masurements are the same, or even meaningful.

I guess I'm still real puzzled on how to get this tree built so that it works most of the time. Perhaps I should just describe the horse types to him and let his best judgement prevail. My own personal horse is a little on the shrimpy side. The wade fits her well with a 1" pad. I don't want to build this new saddle to fit her per se, so it would be silly to measure her with the DL system.

Interesting that Vinton uses a Bowden tree. I've heard great things about these trees. Perhaps I should ask Louis if he is familiar with them.

Hello - I was wondering if you ever got your saddle from Louis? We had him make one for me close to three years ago now, the saddle was not well made so he promised to make me another if I returned it. as per my first specifications. It has been over 2 years now since that time, we are out a saddle and the money that we paid him to make it.....he has contacted me, but keeps telling me he will do it, but I don't think we will see money or a saddle from him again, and it was a lot of money to not get back! So, just curious if you got your saddle?

[equiss]

Hello to Ponygirl -

Hello - I was wondering if you ever got your saddle from Louis? We had him make one for me close to three years ago now, the saddle was not well made so he promised to make me another if I returned it. as per my first specifications. It has been over 2 years now since that time, we are out a saddle and the money that we paid him to make it.....he has contacted me, but keeps telling me he will do it, but I don't think we will see money or a saddle from him again, and it was a lot of money to not get back! So, just curious if you got your saddle?