Ross tell me how the "low profile " keeps the sole and frog in contact anymore than a 3/4 x 1/4 shoe ?
if this shoe flexes the nails must move , they dont "flex" so you must have problems with risen clenches or is it so flexible it only flexes where there is no nail .
Thanks for the information/write-up/ <some deletia> How was this increase measured and how much increase was noted? Front, hind, both? How does that compare with the horse running barefoot? In what respect? Is that always a good thing? Please elaborate on what 'performing barefoot" consists of and how you measured that while the horse was wearing the razers. Why would a competent farrier amend to any drum runner's hoof, an appliance that was not rounded and safed? What size nails were used and why were larger ones a choice with other shoes?
Narrow web of the rim allows the foot to drop into the ground I may have not stated that quite right. A barrel race is a forward moving timed event anything that improves traction and forward movement is a plus. In my opinion to many shoes are two wide and do not allow the foot to drop into the ground for traction and proper foot function of the frog and sole. The foot rides on top of the ground. one thing I am a little concerned about is the rounded blunt toe of the hind shoe. I believe the the hind foot is more pointed for a reason. To be able to dig in the ground for more forward movement. So the horse can have a complete stride. I have never liked the square or blunt toes for "healthy" speed event horses. Mabey the narrow rim will compensate for this..The rim is less then 3/4 inch.
so the section is 5/8 then , you only use small nails in that section anyway so what makes this claim a good selling point ?
Ross No one will dispute your claims but its the way you make them. It isnt gospel and you cant back it up. Designing an experiment to back up your claims would be complex but not impossible. I don't doubt your creds But your opinion on what you speak with authority is more lacking than you think. Please don't think that's a criticism because its not. The benefits of bare foot against shoeing that experiment hasn't yet been designed. Mr Butting brings up an interesting point. I saw some results of the biomech effect of the capsule when nailed up at a lecture by Dr Weller. Guess what it doesnt follow Lungwitz's (1891) model!! Expansion at the heel is reduced. If the shoe flexes and the nail stays rigid with in the capsule, and I site the vid that the master farriers have produced where the heels go through a shearing motion, then a nail bind may be the result.
This was my first thought as well. Then I thought "I'm just a hack, what do I know". Then I thought of a perfect solution to the problem: Flexible nails. Regards
I do not have any scientific video or proof but I do believe a hoof wall and and a nail will flex or give some whatever it is. Or maybe the flex comes plus or minus stretching from the laminae My beleive of that is shoeing halter horses with just setting the nail the cutting the excess off . The halter people did not want the clinches showing.Most were 4 nailed and survived many hours on an angled treadmill. And it may be my simple mind but if there was no flex in a nail then I dont think it would bend for a clinch. Just my thoughts.
Nails cant flex. They are too short. They will bend but not flex, the alloy is too soft. This Razer shoe is tool steel, like spring steel, which is why they won't flex if heated. A nail would have to be much harder and thinner to have any flexibility. They'd be a bugger to clinch too. This Razer shoe flexes at the toe, not the nail area, so there wouldn't be additional stress on the nails.
Bill to be able to produce that on;y flexes in the toe would make the shoe to expensive to use on a daily basis , i am not knocking the shoe just the BS that goes with its promotion , its just another shoe , nothing special
What are we defining a "flex" in a horseshoe? I ask because I would like to know that we are all talking about the same property, ie using the same meaning. Regards Ray
Rick If so, I need to know what these folks call flexible! Are we calling flexible, able to be used in many disciplines ( as he/she is a talented farrier who can shoe just bout anything), able to be bendable, able to be conformed to a needed or perceived needed shape (as opposed to say plastic ,which is quite bendable but is cut to shape and does not work well in the fire), able to be bendable and then able to bend back into original shape,if so ,which axis? If it should be able to be bent hot or cold , but looses any of its properties because it is heated ,is it still flexible? So Rick, what is "flex"? Thanks in advance Ray
In the interest of your market research, and in the context of the Razer shoe, I believe flex refers to the shoes ability to bend, and then return to it's original state/shape, much as a car spring does. Spring steel has "memory", and will tend to return to it's original state/shape, to some degree even after being heated, unless it is heated to what is called martensitic temperature and cooled very slowly, to the point of being completely annealed. Steel, even spring steel, can become distressed after being bent a number of times, at which point it will be easier to bend, of will even break, but in the case of a horseshoe I think the shoe would be worn out well before that would happen. It would be interesting to know what type of steel is used for the Razer, then we could better understand its properties. Regards
Not to mention how distressed the farrier becomes when s/he has to return several times to reset said distressed steel shoe.......... IME, the combination of a distressed farrier and distressed steel is not a good one....
Rick we have had many concussion problems with using synthetic and hardened steel shoes , once we return to ordinary steel shoes the problems disappear , synthetics show problems higher up after a couple of sets , particularly in the knees , steel shows in the feet first
Chris, are these your observations or can you lead us to controlled studies of these problems? I ve not heard this before or mention of it , not doubting, but questioning. Thanks Ray
