Saddle Tree Question

[BOB BRENNER]

Here is a question that may open a big can of worms. This question has been on my mind for many many years like a itch I can’t scratch. While at the Sheridan leather show this year, I was ask if I used wood trees covered with fiberglass and resin, to which I said I had switched to them several years ago. With that answer I was told you can’t use them because they will not flex like a rawhide covered tree, especially when roping. I have heard that statement made by other saddle makers for years and I have not understood the explanations. So, the question is: Will a rawhide covered tree flex and if so, why???

Bob

[BondoBobCustomSaddles]

Bob, Like you, I have also wondered about that. I also use rawhide covered trees, however, I have built a couple that were fiberglass reinforced under the rawhide to add strength to the bars which were made especially thin, on Buster Welch style cutting trees. Never had any problems with the saddles or horses, and that has been twelve or so years ago and they are still out there being used heavily. One was actually made 15 years ago, and is still being used on the horse it was made for, with no adverse issues to the horse.

Bob

[Troy Burch]

I come from a long line of team ropers and ranch hands. We and pretty much everyone I know prefer double rawhide trees. They'll hold up to heavy use such as pulling and yanking steers around, or the occasional big bull that has to be put in a trailer in the middle of a pasture. There's nothing wrong with the others if your riding cutting horses or not putting the saddle under extreme stress. Nothing worse than a mad bull on the end of a rope and a busted tree. The rawhide will hold the saddle together if the tree breaks long enough to get out of the situation. Doesn't happen much but once will make you a believer. Troy

[BondoBobCustomSaddles]

Bob, There you have an answer that makes sense. Just another example that lends credence to the adage, "made the old fashioned way".

Bob

[BOB BRENNER]

Thanks for the replies. Let me rephrase the question. I have been told that a tree needs to have flex or “give” in it when roping or you can cause problems with the horse. Cowboy, ropers and saddle makers have said to me that the flex or “give” is needed disperse the force of roping on the withers of the horse.

My question is: How do we know a rawhide covered tree flexes and a fiberglass covered tree does not?

Troy, Understand. Many moons ago I threw a loop on a big bull, heard a pop and saw my swell bouncing behind the bull.

Bob

[Troy Burch]

Bob, I don't know enough about saddle building to have an inteligent conversation about it, but it seems to me fiberglass is much more brittle than rawhide judgeing by how boats, lawnmowers and such bust when bumped into. I allways thought the treebars put the pressure on the withers and kidneys of a horse not the covering. The wooden tree is not going to give and the covering is simply to strengthen the tree.

[rdl123]

I would think that the issue would be one of fatigue resistance - I would be surprised if a fiberglassed tree or a rawhided tree does not flex to some small degree when you have a bull hit the end of your rope. The issue would then become which material handles repeated stress better. When an item is repeatedly loaded with force/stress and then unloaded does it develop stress fractures?

I know when I used to build wood longbows that fiberglass or rawhide was often used on the leading edge of the bow to prevent the wood from splintering when the bow was drawn - So both materials offer high tension type stress resistance. Time and heavy use would be the ultimate judge.

Just my 2 cents.

R

[oltoot]

You should visit a tree maker sometime. The wooden pieces are not joined rigidly. The 'frame' gets it's structural integrity from the smooth fitting of joints and the generations of trial and error that have gone into development of designs. (Horns are attached rigidly to swells). Then the rawhide cover holds everything together with great strength and some rigidity allowing just a bit of flex and rebound and thus withstanding forces greater than possible with unyielding resistance. It works better as that cover is better assembled and not comprimised in the process of saddle making. Now then to 'fiberglass'. Not all synthetic coverings are created equal nor are they applied all in the same manner. So one cannot compare rawhide covered with all synthetics collectively. For valid comparison, One specific treemaker's product must be compared to another's. For me, I have a traditional treemaker that I trust (Quality Mfg) and I can't get very interested in shaving $50 off the price of a $3,000+ item so I don't spend the time and money it would require to do those valid comparisons and just stick with the tried and true. JMHO

[rktaylor]

As an engineer, I find this discussion extremely interesting. I would bet a large steak dinner that the tree will flex regardless of the covering. The real question is how much and is it enough (assuming it needs to flex). As Ron pointed out, fatigue failure is a function of cycles. If it goes through too many stress cycles, you could see your swells bouncing through the pasture attached to a smaller bull. I have spent most of my career conducting research and testing equipment or components. I guarantee we could answer the question of how much a tree flexes, but I wonder if it is one that is worth answering. I would like to tour a tree manufacturer though. I think that would be very interesting.

Randy

[Northmount]

As an engineer, I find this discussion extremely interesting. I would bet a large steak dinner that the tree will flex regardless of the covering. The real question is how much and is it enough (assuming it needs to flex). As Ron pointed out, fatigue failure is a function of cycles. If it goes through too many stress cycles, you could see your swells bouncing through the pasture attached to a smaller bull. I have spent most of my career conducting research and testing equipment or components. I guarantee we could answer the question of how much a tree flexes, but I wonder if it is one that is worth answering. I would like to tour a tree manufacturer though. I think that would be very interesting.

Randy

Take a look at http://www.rodnikkel.com/content/building-a-saddle-tree/ to see how a tree is built. Rod and Denise are members here.

Tom

[dirtclod]

Something that nobody has said anything about is the makers that use a rasp to rough up on a rawhide tree. I've seen some that were pretty cut up. Personally i never understood the roughing up on a fork. I know they say it makes the glue stick better. But on the other hand the fork cover really doesn't do anything as far streingth and if it's glued and nailed it's not going anywhere. Very few fork covers i ever took off come off easy even if they weren't roughed up. In other words roughing up a rawhide tree defeats the purpose of having the rawhide on it to start with because roughing it with a rasp will make it weaker because of the cuts in the rawhide and the lacing / stitching. IMO

Edited May 29, 2014 by dirtclod

[Troy Burch]

You should visit a tree maker sometime. The wooden pieces are not joined rigidly. The 'frame' gets it's structural integrity from the smooth fitting of joints and the generations of trial and error that have gone into development of designs. (Horns are attached rigidly to swells). Then the rawhide cover holds everything together with great strength and some rigidity allowing just a bit of flex and rebound and thus withstanding forces greater than possible with unyielding resistance. It works better as that cover is better assembled and not comprimised in the process of saddle making. Now then to 'fiberglass'. Not all synthetic coverings are created equal nor are they applied all in the same manner. So one cannot compare rawhide covered with all synthetics collectively. For valid comparison, One specific treemaker's product must be compared to another's. For me, I have a traditional treemaker that I trust (Quality Mfg) and I can't get very interested in shaving $50 off the price of a $3,000+ item so I don't spend the time and money it would require to do those valid comparisons and just stick with the tried and true. JMHO

lol, I told you I couldn't carry on an inteligent conversation about it. All I know is for the many years I've been abusing them rawhide trees work better for me. Thanks oltoot, you makem and I'll ridem

[BOB BRENNER]

oltoot, I have heard what you said "...allowing just a bit of flex and rebound..." for years. What do you base your conclusions on?

Randy, What principle or methodology are you using in your determination?

Thanks,

Bob

[rktaylor]

Bob,

I am not sure I understand your question and don't want to write a three paragraph response and miss the target. Are you asking:

How did I arrive at the comments in my post like: "a tree would flex regardless of the covering"?

or

What methodology would I use to measure the flex in a tree?

Randy

[oltoot]

First and second hand accounts of tests using straps and hand winches to exert forces and rulers and magic marked spots on top of horns and cantles to measure response. Give a solid pull and it moves a little, release the pressure and it comes back to original measurement. Sonny Felkins of Quality Mfg is an irrepressable tinkerer and has been ever since he had his first tree company in Moab, Ut in the early 70's, and has tested every different combo that he uses or has considered using. BTW he has started offering a tree with the same custom wooden 'frame' and a synthetic covering that meets his high standards and is cheaper. He still features and I still prefer outstanding traditional wood and rawhide trees. Then a lifetime of anecdotal accounts of use of traditional materials vs "new" ones. History reveals that every few years somebody has had a "new and better" idea for tree making. That includes different ways to make rawhide covers or the wooden 'frames'. For instance, it was long ago learned that long staples or nails were better than screws or lag bolts that resulted in a completely rigid 'frame'. The rigid ones failed catastrophically more often than the nailed or stapled.

AND let's just leave some of it to the mysteries of time. I'm sure that modern engineering could come up with a product that would be superior in many ways, BUT in all ways? Remember to be comparable it would also have to hold screws, nails, tacks well, but not too well. it would have to stand up to repair and modification. AND it would need to be capable of being assembled in an almost endless variety of combinations of sizes and configurations to suit horse and/or rider, all for a reasonable price.

[BOB BRENNER]

oltoot,

Thanks, I figured that would be your answer, as I talked to Sonny several years ago and he gave me the same answer. Makes sense and I agree. The problem as I see it is that this test only indicates that the tree has the properties to flex and therefore, does not suggest that the tree will flex during use. The test was static. During actual use everything is dynamic with other factors and forces being introduced that may or may not cancel out the results of the static test.

Randy,

Thanks, How did I arrive at the comments in my post like: "a tree would flex regardless of the covering"? Is the question.

The only way I can see to test this is a computer model, as how would one put all the equipment needed on a horse, saddle, and rider in the roping arena.

Bob

[Rod and Denise Nikkel]

Interesting discussion, and Rod and I had a good conversation about it. For those not wanting to read a dissertation, you can skip to the end for the short form of our opinion (for whatever it is worth) on the matter.

Here’s the long version. First, this isn’t the first time this has been discussed on this forum. This old thread from 2008 has some pretty good thoughts in it and is worth reading. http://leatherworker.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=3313 The picture that is now gone showed Robin doing the test he describes and the tree flexing to touch down. He describes that tree as having thin bars and lightweight rawhide. He also said he didn’t feel it was a good thing in a roping tree. None of our trees will do this, nor do we want them to, but it shows (showed) that it can be done.

Second – does a rawhided tree flex? Sure. So does a fibreglass covered tree, tall buildings, steel beams and concrete. Everything flexes to some degree, though often it takes very sophisticated equipment to measure how much. To figure out what really happens on a horse may very well be impossible. However, there are other questions about this that maybe should be considered.

Do we want a tree to flex and if so, how much? If the question is bend or break, then yes, we would want bend. (I’ll get back to that one.) But if the question is flex to move with the horse, our answer is no, we don’t want that. We haven’t changed our thoughts from what we wrote six years ago. How can something that flexes enough to “move with the horse” not sag under the rider’s weight, putting excess pressure in the center of the saddle? The advent of the “flex trees” has shown this is the case. Here’s a blog post with the proof of that: http://www.rodnikkel.com/content/saddle-tree-blog-from-shop-and-desk/checking-out-a-flex-tree/

Do we want a tree to flex when roping? The idea that the tree will take some of the stress and not transmit it to the horse may sound good, but you don’t want a lot of flex then either. Good bars are designed to have edge relief, etc. so there are no high pressure points on the horse. Now, if the tree gives, where and how much pressure is it putting on the horse? Something that flexes a lot when the cow hits the end of the rope could have a lot of “dig” on the edges of the bars in the direction of the pull. That is NOT when you want your horse to be reacting to pain! You want that pressure spread out as much as possible over the entire surface area of the tree.

But when you hear experienced saddle makers like Pete Gorrell talking about how they see problems with the ground seats being pulled away from the fork in well used saddles, you realize that there has to have been some movement over time for that to happen. So, assuming the wood component of the trees were identical (which is an impossibility because every section of every piece of board is different), which covering would stand up to repetitive strain best? You can’t bend fibreglass very far or very often before it breaks and loses all strength at one time. However, you can bend a piece of rawhide back and forth and back and forth and back and forth, etc. etc. etc. for a long time before you see wear on it. And it loses strength gradually with repetitive strains. It takes a LOT of pressure to totally rip it, if it is good rawhide of a decent thickness. (We grant that “chicken skin” tears much more easily…)

In fact, people sometimes don’t realize their tree has broken because the rawhide holds it in place. Here’s the description of what we discovered on a tree we had in to duplicate where the rawhide had held the bars together when the wood appeared to have been broken for a while: http://www.rodnikkel.com/content/saddle-tree-blog-from-shop-and-desk/things-to-see-on-a-broken-saddle-tree/ Now, do you want to be riding a tree like this? No. It will “flex” in the middle and those broken bar ends will put a lot of pressure on a horse’s back. But is that better than having the whole thing disintegrate underneath you when you are holding a bull? You better believe it. Just don’t ride it again the next day…

Another example of how well rawhide on its own flexes is our experiment in driving over one of our trees early on in our tree making career. It was a tree we decided wasn’t up to snuff and we weren’t going to send it out, so we decided to see what it would take to break it. The front end of a half ton didn’t do it, but the front end of a loaded five ton moving truck driven over the center of the bars flattened them to the ground with nasty cracking sounds. After the truck drove off, those bars were back to their original shape. The stitching had given in a couple of places on each bar, and it was scuffed all along the bottom edge of the bar, but it was back to normal. And push and pull on that tree as we might, we could not make it budge. (We soaked it for a few days to get the rawhide soft enough to remove and discovered that the yellow poplar we had made the bars from had cracked longitudinally in three places on one bar, twice on the other, through the screw holes where the bar attached to the fork where the wood is thinnest. The cracks didn’t extend all the way to the back of the bars.) The rawhide had flexed down to the ground and come back to shape, and still was more than strong enough to hold its original shape. Fibreglass would have been broken and finished. So yes, in cases of extreme stress, we feel that rawhided trees will tolerate more flex than fibreglassed trees.

But, can you honestly compare between trees? Not really, because every piece of wood is different, every piece of rawhide is different, and there are multiple kinds of fibreglass and other synthetics which are all different, and how they are laid up makes a difference to how they hold up as well. It honestly comes down to the quality of the materials – wood and rawhide or other covering – and those vary dramatically between makers. We believe that rawhide will hold up longer and better than the synthetics. We know that rawhide can hold up for over a 100 years (lots of old saddles with rawhided trees are still around) but it will take another few decades to know if fibreglass stands up the same…

So for those who skipped to the end to read - we don’t believe good quality wood/rawhide trees should or do flex under regular riding, though rawhide does have the ability to withstand long term, repeated stress (ie. heavy roping) better than fibreglass coverings do. At least, that is our opinion on the matter, and so that is what we will continue to use.

[Rod and Denise Nikkel]

Another post to respond to a few things in previous posts, just because…

We and pretty much everyone I know prefer double rawhide trees.

When you use real bullhide of good quality and thickness, you don’t want a double covered tree. Good thick hide on its own will be 1/8” thick, and ¼” of hide is real overkill… The only reason to double it is if the company uses relatively thin hide. Then it may be worth it.

The wooden pieces are not joined rigidly. For instance, it was long ago learned that long staples or nails were better than screws or lag bolts that resulted in a completely rigid 'frame'. The rigid ones failed catastrophically more often than the nailed or stapled.

We would have to disagree with this. Every tree maker we know attaches forks and cantles solidly to the bars. Even if it is with nails or staples, they mean it to be solid. It doesn’t matter how close your joints are, if you don’t attach them solidly, all the stress of pressure is on the covering, and we want the wood to take some of that stress as well. The whole thing together is what makes it strong.

We agree that if you drill a hole through something and attach a bolt, you have weakened the wood and it is more likely to fail, but we can’t see that using screws rather than nails or staples would make it fail catastrophically. We’d be interested in what kind of testing led to that conclusion. If the wood is so poor that it would break by screws pulling out of it and, then the nails or staples would have been long gone . Nails and staples will pull out easier than screws, but they don’t go back in again. Then you have a loose tree where the bars can move relative to the fork, and that can hurt a horse (different angles, pinching, etc.). If the idea is that something solid will break where something that is loose will withstand the strain, we have to disagree. We screw everything together with top quality screws into good quality wood. Additionally we also glue our forks & cantles, so there really is no movement possible. We have yet to have any fail catastrophically. In fact, if the bronze horn gets bent in two directions and all that happens is some cracks in the wood, nothing broken through, we figure they are plenty strong enough… http://www.rodnikkel.com/content/saddle-tree-blog-from-shop-and-desk/we-told-you-it-would-be-good/

AND let's just leave some of it to the mysteries of time. I'm sure that modern engineering could come up with a product that would be superior in many ways, BUT in all ways? Remember to be comparable it would also have to hold screws, nails, tacks well, but not too well. it would have to stand up to repair and modification. AND it would need to be capable of being assembled in an almost endless variety of combinations of sizes and configurations to suit horse and/or rider, all for a reasonable price.

Totally agree with you oltoot!

Thanks for the referral to our website, Northmount. Just wanted to note that the way production/factory trees turned out in high numbers and the way our trees are built are quite different. Here's a few videos we have found that shows trees being made in various ways.

We don't understand Spanish but we sure would be interested to understand what is being said! Especially at the beginning is where the tree construction is being shown. I believe Precision Saddle Trees builds the trees for Circle Y saddles.

Here's a couple short ones that say they come from Steele Saddle Tree Co.

And here's one showing Ben Swanke and K.T. Monson hand making saddle trees very similar to the way we do it.

Edited May 31, 2014 by Rod and Denise Nikkel

[rktaylor]

Bob,

I think Denise answered the question better than I can. My statement that it will flex is because everything flexes. I remember as a young engineering student the first time I learned (not sure I believed it at first) that steel flexes. We build stuff out of drill stem in Oklahoma, because we can't get anything heavier. I would offer a couple of examples of flexible items that we see all the time in pre-stressed aluminum semi trailers and prestressed concrete beams. Ever see one of the trailers empty and then loaded.

Now, I have only built one saddle. I don't build trees. And if I ever find myself attached to bull some very poor decisions have been made to get me to that point. So I am far from an expert on the matter, but I do have an opinion and an internet connection. Since you started this thread, I have tried to visualize what happens within the saddle while it is on the horse. I agree with Denise in that I can't see any value in the tree flexing (at least easily). Maybe when we talk about flex, we are talking about absorbing the shock when something large hits the end of your rope. Its better to give a little than be completely rigid. At least I think it is. I think this leads us back to some of the initial points made on fatigue. Fatigue of any material is related to stress cycles. Typically, I would like to base my conclusions on some scientific data, but I don't know if I can find any on rawhide. My gut feeling is that rawhide would handle more stress cycles than fiberglass. Thus having a longer 'service life.' That's just my opinion, but two weeks ago when Sonny gave me the choice between rawhide and fiberglass, I chose rawhide.

As far as computer models or even measuring what happens dynamically on a horse, you bet it can be done. I have a colleague who raises bucking bulls and we discussed methods for measuring the tension in a bull rope and the pressure points it puts on the bull while bucking. We didn't do it, but I thought we had a pretty good plan. In the end it just seemed like an academic exercise that would not lead to useful knowledge. This leads me to me one of the statements in my first post. Is it a question worth answering? Even though the wood in each individual tree is unique and then the covering adds another level of uniqueness, we could determine whether the coverings make them different. Now the question becomes, How many trees would we need to determine this? Having spent a lot of my career doing research on things that are hard to control, I would guess somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 with each covering. That's assuming we could all agree on a standard methodology that is repeatable. My experience is that getting this agreement takes significantly longer than the tests. As fun as it might be for me, I don't think I could generate any new knowledge that would improve saddle tree construction.

So it leaves us with anecdotal discussion and the collection of extreme observations. Which, in the end is more fun than an academic discussion. Trust me, I have had a lot of both.

Cheers,

Randy

Edited May 31, 2014 by rktaylor

[Big Sioux Saddlery]

Amen to Dirtclod's response above about rasping the rawhide! The less you disturb the rawhide, the better. Take apart a few 20 year old saddles and you'll see why. On the flex issue, I know I can manually get a little flex out of a hide covered tree, but not out of a fiberglass or Kevlar tree. Formal research and testing would be interesting. . . I do know which tree I'd rather build on, strength, durability and flexing aside. Fiberglass and Kevlar coverings aren't much fun. Gotta predrill most of the nail holes, can't staple into it (the mention of staples may start a feud, but I do believe there is a place for them in saddle making), and the stuff makes me itch like crazy.

[oltoot]

Dirtclod,

I and some others agree and don't rough up very much but in defense of the rough bunch, most trees arrive with a THICK coat of spar varnish applied by dipping in vats, often multiple times. The varnish adds moisture protection but doesn't do much if anything for structural integrity so vigorous roughing of the varnish but not breaking the top grain layer of the rawhide looks destructive but really isn't. The biggest baddest offender that I have found in many saddles comes from cutting the stirrup leather slot in the ground seat and scoring the rawhide cover at what is often the weakest part of the whole assembly, the top side just across from the slot in the tree. Coincidentally, this is what Arizona bars overcome. Ask the engineer, sometimes its not just the mass of the piece that determines its resistance to certain kinds of stress but its shape and orientation to the stress (rigging placement and conformation) So although this aint rocket science its a lot harder than falling off of a log.

[Billy H]

Hi Rod and Denise!

You two always have great stuff to read and think about--- Thank you. Regards Billy

[Billy H]

Oltoot,

It is very obvious you have lots of experience and bring up some great points about saddles. Sure appreciate that----- Billy

[rktaylor]

Oltoot is correct about the cross sectional area, shape and orientation affecting the strength of a member. I won't bore you with the terminology. Think about 2x4 and 2x6 boards laying flat. There is a difference in strength but not that much. Turn the two on edge and the difference becomes greater. Notch one of these boards when it's laying flay and then see what it can support. I think that's what he is talking about when he mentions scoring the rawhide at the stirrup slots.

Randy

[Rod and Denise Nikkel]

We also agree that roughing up the tree is less than desirable. The varnish is the water proofing and scuffing will remove that even if the rawhide isn't damaged, which it often is. Finding varnish that glues will adhere to well these days is another story...

Also agree that the back of the stirrup groove is the weakest point of the bar, and we've seen too many trees where the rawhide was scored there as well, and that removing the back stirrup groove (making the bar the Arizona type) will increase the strength there. However, so will increasing the quality of wood and rawhide used, and we will not make Arizona bars because of the negative effects on fit for the horse. Removing the back stirrup groove has more effects than just increasing strength. We have explained more in the past here: http://www.rodnikkel.com/content/saddle-tree-blog-from-shop-and-desk/of-arizona-bars-and-why-we-won-t-make-them/ (I am not trying to promote our website, but I just don't want spend a lot of time rewriting what we have said before, more than once...)