I guess the 'skinned' look of the finished foot is a matter of taste. Impressive looking work though. How long does it take you to do a job like that Justin?
Gary, they aren't called big lick horses because of how the feet taste when you lick them. Nice job as usual Justin!
Mikel I just do a handful of them. Kind of nice to do something different once in awhile. Gary the owners sand there feet and paint them black for the shows, that's what the blue looking stuff close to the coronary band is. I didn't do much but dress it a bit, and then used a buffer to box the pad. Probably had an hour in that job, welding the bars in and a new leather pad. This one takes a bit longer cause he paws if left alone so he gets done 1 foot at a time and goes in a stall if I go to the truck. Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
Justin would a toe weighted shoe do that job like a hackney shoe? and is there a reason for the nails grouped like that and did you jump weld the clip good stuff
Really nice job, not too many want pads and clips down here anymore..Cant pass the DQP with the clubs here..
Designated Qualified Person..no pads, no shoes wider than 3/4 unless Plantation shoes.. and it is really Drama Queen Police..
Looks good, Justin. As a matter of preference, I prefer the heels/back of the shoe touch an imaginary line dropped from the back of the bulbs to the ground. Over the last several years I've seen more shoes with the welded in bar as pictured, especially on some of the Arabs and Part-Breds where the stock dimensions are constrained.
Rick are the stock restrictions set for wieght issues or others..and if so do you see in the future this bar welded in could bring a new written rule
the stock dimension rule was an attempt to cut down the need to pull shoes and weigh them after championship classes. They even distributed a handy little gauge to check width and thickness. I'm expecting a new rule to prohibit welding additional material soon. As soon as a rule is written 3 folks already have figured out how to circumvent the intent of said rule... It would be best, if they removed all the Arab shoeing rules, folks will go nuts for a while and then, maybe, people will shoe their horse the way it goes best (which might be lighter and shorter than what they do now.
Not to mention having to weigh them any time they were cast in the ring during a class. What they didn't account for is the fact that if the slot in the gauge is the exact width as the maximum permitted dimension of the shoe, then the shoe is going to fail when measured. I mildly disagree.
The concept was to allow bigger footed horses to be able to wear a shoe that would properly support them. Imagine, for example, as a farrier, trying to fabricate a 14 oz(old weight restriction) shoe for a horse that wears a size 3 shoe. While we did it, the result was often less than satisfactory. I don't think the 'toe bar' shoe will cause a change in the shoeing rules. Afterall, bar shoes are already legal so long as the bar does not protrude below the ground surface of the shoe and is within the dimensions that are legal (in the case of the Arabian rules, that's 1 1/8x3/8). Putting the bar up by the toe does a couple of things. In and of itself it puts more weight forward of the center of rotation of the DIPJ, and the space between the front edge of the bar and the back edge of the web of the shoe at the toe, packs with dirt and adds even more weight at the toe. Then, when you add a 'scoop' to the foot surface of the shoe at the back edge of the web, that creates a bubble in the ground surface of the shoe which affects the dynamics and at the same time allows more dirt to fill the void on the foot surface of the shoe which creates more weight at the toe. By the time you add pads and wedges, you can create quite a heavy package. For some horses this works very well, for others, it 'nails them to the ground'.
