How are trees sized?

[Margaux]

Sorry for the redundancy, I posted a reply, but this seems more like a new topic.

Here it is again on fresh turf:

Let's say that you have a perfect profile of a horse's back, and are going to order a tree based on that data.

How is the tree made to take into account that there will be some leather, fleece, and saddle pad in between the tree, and the horse.

Obviously that distance is normal (perpendicular) to the tree (or horse's back), and that normal direction is sometimes down, sometimes slanting back and down, sometimes in and down, etc.

i.e. it's pretty complicated.

How do tree makers take these complex directions and distances into account?

Thanks in advance, Margaux.

[Rod and Denise Nikkel]

A lot of people seem to have the idea that in order to fit a horse, a saddle tree must be a mirror image of their back. May I paraphrase your question to make sure I understand it. Are you asking, "How do you make a mirror image of a back plus skirts and padding when you only have the image of the back to work from?" Is this correct?

If so, then the answer is that we are not trying to make a mirror image of the horse's back. If you do that, you will end up with pressure points and interference with the horse when he moves. What we are doing is fitting the basic shape of the back and keeping the two rules:

1.) Don't dig in anywhere (build in adequate relief on the edges and tips).

2.) Have as much surface area as possible on the horse without breaking rule #1 (have the basic shape right so you don't create pressure points by having too much rock, too little rock, too much crown or just too small a bar for the weight of the rider).

This is why you don't need 52 different varieties of tree fits, nor do we want to have a saddle specially made for every individual horse. There is a range or segment of horse shapes that can use one "size" of tree without breaking rule #1, but they will have varying amounts of surface area in contact with the horse. So while some of those horses have a more ideal fit than others, the tree will still work OK on them IF you have enough surface area on your bars to start with. You can run into problems with rule #2 when the PSI gets too high due to very small bars that may not break rule #1, but that is not as common a problem. When you get outside that range of horses, you break rule #1 (too narrow a tree and the bottom edges of the bar dig in, too wide a tree and it falls forward and puts too much pressure on the inside of the bar edge up front, etc. etc.) That is when you need a different tree.

But you can have a tree that works well for a horse, and the way the saddle is built on it can mess up the fit. Or you can have a saddle that would work well and the way it is placed on the horse (and held in the wrong place via breast collars, etc.) messes up the fit. Or you can place a good saddle properly on a horse and the padding can mess up the fit. Or you can place a good saddle in the right place with good padding on a horse and the rider can cause pressure points by the way he rides. The tree maker has no control over any of these things (unless he also builds the saddle). If a tree fits a horse well with a ½" or 1" pad, it will work OK with 2". If it is on the edge of the range of good fit with a 1" pad, it may not work with 2" of padding. But if a guy decides he needs 4" of padding, he better not complain to us that the tree doesn't fit. That is above and beyond the realm of the allowance we can, or will, build into the tree.

At least, that is our take on the question. Others may think differently, of course…

[Margaux]

R&D,

Thanks for the reply. It was not exactly what I was asking.

It is clear that you cannot make the "mirror" image of the horse's back without accounting for, and we know that we want maximum contact with minimum pressure, no pinching, must allow for movement of the horse, and it's clear that odd/incorrect saddle construction and/or screwy padding will mess up the tree fitting properly.

I'm looking for the "how", and I don't see that explaination in your kind reply.

My question is HOW do tree makers take measurements that they make, or from Dennis Lane's system (of which I am a fan), and turn that into the proper tree?

Do they ask the owner how much padding he typically uses?

Do tree makers take the templates defined by Dennis and make inverses allowing for padding/leather/fleese and fit the tree to that?

Is this all "art", or is there an objective procedure for determining the proper tree?

On a new side note:

You are saying that you do not want a custom saddle ("...nor do we want to have a saddle specially made for every individual horse..."), and that confuses me.

I do want a saddle fit to my horse. If I want the best saddle for my horse, it seems like I would like it made for my horse, not one kinda like him.

Can you clarify that point or straighten me out?

Thanks again for clarification to any/all who have experience with this.

Margaux.

[daviD A Morris]

.....You are saying that you do not want a custom saddle ("...nor do we want to have a saddle specially made for every individual horse..."), and that confuses me.

I do want a saddle fit to my horse. If I want the best saddle for my horse, it seems like I would like it made for my horse, not one kinda like him.

Can you clarify that point or straighten me out?

.....

Margaux.

Margaux,

This a question that frequently arrises and I keep coming back to the analogy of footwear for people: Does everyone in your family wear the same size shoes? probably not, and yet - Has anyone in your family had a pair of shoes handmade especialy for just for them? Probably not. The only place this analogy fails is in the fact that saddles outlast horses. People sell horses and horses die (unfortunate but true) and then want to use their $4000 saddle on another horse. Not many people share shoes around like we do with saddles! If you are an elite athlete then you might get footwear specialy made for you, just like if your horse is competeing in $50,000 cutting or reining event you might spend an extra $1000 making sure his gear is going to give him every advantage.

There are varying degrees of fit, from perfect to just-good-enough to get by with. I have a pair of work boots (off the shelf quality and price) which I wear around my home and workshop area, have done for over a year, no problem, the fit is just good enough for the purpose. A couple of months ago I went to a freinds ranch to skin a dead cow for the rawhide. I had to walk about 1 to 1-1/2 miles in total up and down a very steep hill. Those same boots chewed the hell out of my feet, I had blisters fore and aft, and couldn't wear those boots again for another 2 weeks. Now the major difference between that situation and what can happen to horse is that, I have the choice of putting on the boots and the socks, and the choice or when and where I walk in them, a horse is slave to the whims of its owner/rider, and the horse can't speak the same language and say, hey this saddle was fine while we were trail riding on the flat but now we are tripping steers (or whatever) it is hurting like hell!

My opinion is that unless your horse's back is some very extreme shape then there will be trees out there that will fit him/her pretty good and they will also fit a bunch of other horses of the same shape.

look forward to hearing more from you Margaux as you are not the only one asking these questions and it gives us the oportunity to share this with everyone.

regards

dam

[Margaux]

Hi daviD,

Or is it Divad?

You make several points.

One is that you don't want your saddle too close to perfect, since that may not fit another horse when the original dies.

That doesn't seem logical.

Why would a saddle not perfect for one horse be better for another random horse, than a saddle which is perfect for the first horse?

Random is random.

You also seem to have a contradiction in there.

You say that you don't want a perfect fit, yet your boots let you down.

Had you gotten the correct boots made for YOUR foot in the first place, would you have gotten the blister from a couple miles of hiking. (BTW, don't you use kilometers down there? yuck yuck)

I think you have made my point.

You had a problem with your non-custom boots right? If you had a custom pair of boots made, wouldn't you want the be able to walk up and down (or do you walk down and up down there?) for a couple kilometers without getting a blister?

If you did have those custom boots made and did get blisters from a short hike, wouldn't you be, well, disappointed?

I know that I can go to Valley Vet and get some off the shelf saddle for my horse, or go to KMart and get a pair of off the shelf tennis boots for myself. But they are both compromises, and in my opinion, poor compromise, as your blisters can attest.

But if I get a custom saddle, or a custom pair of boots, I expect them to fit right.

I expect to ride or walk without problems.

Don't you?

More to the point:

I understand that you can find a saddle that fits "pretty good" as you say, and that I can find a pair of shoes that fit pretty well also.

My original question was: Why don't you want the saddle to fit right?

Your point seems to be that you don't want it to fit right because it's either too hard or too expensive. I get that.

But that is a financial compromise, not a decision which is in accord with my thinking, or desires.

Also, if you can find "pretty good" fits for saddles/trees, then why use Dennis Lane's system at all? Why not just have 4 or 5 (8 or 10?) different trees and call that good enough?

We are trying to to BETTER. Not just use off the shelf.

Is the whole idea behind getting a custom saddle to get it to look right? Or fit right?

I want both.

If I can't have both, I'll go to Valley Vet and pay $500. (US mate).

In short: I disagree. I want a custom saddle to fit like a custom saddle, and I want custom boot to fit MY foot, like custom boot should.

I care less about the looks, and more about the fit, but I want both.

I don't want it to be "pretty good" I want it to be "damned good".

That's why I'm interested in Dennis's system. There is the potential (not yet realized) for that system to make great trees for my foot. Oops, I mean my horse's back.

I'm still interested in hearing from the tree makers to hear how they account for the pad and fleece and leather when using Dennis Lane system. Nobody has addressed my basic question yet.

I think they don't. I think they think "good enough" and move on.

I think they don't use Lane's system correctly.

Anyone? I hope I'm wrong. Let me know!

BTW: I wish I were "down under" right now, it's zero degrees here in Colorado tonight. That's right, there is no temperature.

Best wishes from up-over,

Margaux

[SITTINGUPHIGH1]

Good point Dam. Things to concider when getting a saddle. Walking shoes or long distance running shoes. Trail running shoes or pavement running shoe. They make them all. Most people never get out of walking shoe. I had sandles made for my feet years ago. They made the out side shape of my foot and the arch to fit my feet. The rest was done by the special rubber they used that with in weeks shaped to my feet. The most comfortable feet ware I ever had. Funny thing I had broke my lower right leg 2 years ago. Now the sandle hurts my right foot to ware it. Things change over time.

That's a good question Margaux. If I was building a saddle tree to a horse type and didn't have a templete to follow. Would I have to compensate for the leather, sheep skin and pad. Lets say at least a inch or 2. I would think it would effect the wither pocket the most.

RANDD. I can see your point on the saddle tree. No pressure points on the saddle tree. I notice the top bottom part of the saddle tree bars are not cupped like the horses back. Just the wither pocket. The fact that the horse is moving a cupped tree bar bottom would make two pressure points on the outside edges. Trying to get a balance between fit and no pressure point is the job. Would you say the angles of the bar should stay in sink with the horses back?

Mort

[tonyc1]

After reading many articles over the last few months I've reached the conclusion that it's a miracle that so many horses have covered so many miles during the last 2 thousand years without all these theories and modern fitting systems, how did they do it?

Tony.

[D.A. Kabatoff]

Margaux,

you've asked quite a few interesting questions and perhaps the answers weren't presented in a way that makes sense to you. In turn, here's a couple questions for you... Which horse are you trying to fit... a two to three year old, a five to seven year old, a middle aged horse, an older horse? At what time of year are you trying to fit that horse... in the middle of winter when the horse isn't used much, in the spring time... in late summer after alot of excersise? These are the questions treemakers and saddlemakers have to answer everytime they make a tree and saddle. As for your custom shoes analogy, if you order custom shoes when your are 5, do they still fit when your are eight? Do they fit the same when your feet swell? If you go hiking with a pair of sneakers and carry a 30 lb pack, do they offer the support you need in different terrain with a load on your back?

The best answer to these questions is to fit the average. As Rod and Denise stated in their two rules, as long as nothing is creating pressure points and there is adequate bar surface to support the weight of the rider, this is the best you can hope for without having a whole bunch of saddles. And in fact, this isn't a problem because when you are talking about a well made tree and saddle, fitting the average will allow that saddle to be used not only on a variety of horses, but a single horse in a variety of conditions provided you have ordered the appropriately sized tree and the saddlemaker hasn't screwed up the fit. Incidentally, this is one more good reason to quit riding two and three year olds!

hope this helps some

Darc

[bruce johnson]

Margaux,

My take on this for what it is worth. Dennis and David have been to my place and seen my two horses. They don't card the same except for rock. Rod and Denise Nikkel have made two trees for my horses. I have ordered two more trees from them based on measurements from customer horses. I build saddles and I don't have the luxury of an individual saddle for each horse, and these customers don't either. What the cards do is let me tell Rod how much spread I need, whether the bars should be crowned or flatter, and what rock I need. I got specific for the wider horse, and it is within what I would consider tolerance for the other in my case. I can make up the difference with padding.

They aren't saying don't fit your horse. They aren't going to make a tree out of tolerance just to not be perfect. Make it for the horse you want. If the other horse is close, it still ought to work. If the other horse looks or measurements are way different, then you know that the same saddle isn't going to work on them both. That can be just as important to know for some people. There are all extremes of fitting (lack of a better word). Some rely on the treemakers and buy off the rack like you suggested from Valley Vet. Some treemakers will have more or less rock, flatter or crowned bars, and different spreads and angles. There are treemakers who get the rep within certain circles of their trees really fitting, and others will sore everything. Neither is correct. The bars that fit one of my horses (R12 rock with about a D11 withers - DocsStingerxPoco Tivio, head like one of Elton's swamp donkeys) won't fit what they might see in Wyoming. There is a treemaker that makes better production trees that fits my horse very well. His might not work on the flatter backed horses another guy sees.

But with the cards I can tell Rod or whoever that I have a horse with more rock. I don't have to say I need the rock that Sonny Felkins or Timberline has rather than the flatter Bowden bars for example, and hope he knows the competiton enough to guess what I mean. It simplifies the communication. If I didn't know what kind of bars that Rod or Dennis or whoever puts in as a "standard", I don't have to order one and say "Ooops, too much or not enough rock, or spread, or angle for this horse", and be out the cost of that tree. Once a guy gets comfortable with a tree maker and knows what they make, then it may not be as big a factor. Some of the old makers know who made what kind of bars and ordered from several different treemakers depending on what a customer might be riding. So and so's bars are flat and more rock, another guys are more crowned and less rock, etc.

The big bias against a lot of this, and it has a some basis is that you can make a perfect fitting tree for the horse standing at the post. As soon as he walks off, that geometry is constantly changing. Some guys will say that fit doesn't matter because of that. My thought is that is if it bites some at the post, it probably ain't going to get better when he moves. On the other end, you can fit one great, have the gaps or no gaps depending on your thoughts of that. Ride him a month and it all changes. Rest him two months and it is different. Put him in a stall and off the clover, etc. You are going to be close all the way through, but not perfect even for that horse very often. That is where the tolerances come in, and also where the tolerances of one saddle working on several similar horses comes in too. Now for the other side of this whole fitting thing for me personally. I think we pretty well fit the two wives and 75 or so horses I've had over the last 25 years with 4 saddles and the right pads. My first wife rode the same saddle whether she was running barrels, roping, or showing a bridle horse. She never sored one up that I could tell. I couldn't even tell you whose trees are in three of those saddles and can only guess at what they'd measure. That is real life, and lot of long riding folks have made that work too. My rambling thoughts, and dang sure not much of an answer.

.

[SITTINGUPHIGH1]

I agree with you Margaux.