Mac for an Arab

[CRB]

Anybody know where to get a Mac tree that will fit an Arab?

[mnhorse]

Try BOWDEN Saddle Tree Co, www.saddletree.com. They claim they will make a tree anyway you want it. Should be possible to get the cover & rigging done once you have a tree.
Richard

[CRB]

Thank you they will make me one.....

[patbailey]

I was able to use Macs on my Arabian mare for several years without any problems, but she has a thyroid disorder and was thus a bit wider than the average Arabian.
Patrick

It is impossible to have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition.- R. Kipling

[Pat Holscher]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by CRB</i>
<br />Anybody know where to get a Mac tree that will fit an Arab?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Generally, the second pattern of M1904 McCellen, which is most of them, are narrower than those prior. I'm sure you wouldn't want to use a saddle of an earlier pattern anyway, so there's no point in addressing earlier trees in regards to your question.

Others here can answer this question much better than I can, and Ron Smith has put up an excellent post here about fitting a saddle to a horse. You should read that. But what I'd note is that for a single purpose use, such as this, you should keep the horse in mind.

When you pose this question, the natural response here likely ought to be have you tried to fit a M1904 or M1928 carefully to the horse in question? If you have an original M1904 or M1928 and it works you might be surprised. They have a fairly narrow tree to start with, and Arabs are relatively narrow. The M1904 I have fits very well indeed on a Saddlebred I have. The same saddle wouldn't fit any quarterhorse I have access to very well (and of course, I'm not trying that). So you may be lucky, and the existing pattern may suffice.

If it doesn't, I'd hesitate to say that you can simply order an "Arab tree", or something like that. The saddle would have to be fitted to the particular horse, for a single purpose use like that.

You might also give some thought to want sort of McClellan you want. For general purpose riding, most experienced people here would tell you that the M1928 is the best of the McClellans. The M1904s are the most common original McClellan, and a lot of people here have them. Some of us derive a certain amount of pleasure from using the M1904, as we're fond of the historical associations it brings up as well. The one I use is a M1904, or at least I used to use it before my son seized it and started refusing to surrender it.

On makers, there's a lot of makers who make McClellans. At least one truly excellent saddlemaker, Tom Smith, frequents this sight, and I'm sure if you perused the page, and took note on the commentators who seem particularly knowledgeable on McClellans, you might be able to lean on them for some additional insight on how to get what you want.

Also, any used saddle may need replacement parts, of course. You don't want to risk old rigging or stirrup leathers, for example.

Pat

[John Fitzgerald]

We are all guessing because we don't know what your horse's back looks like.

I'm at a loss because Arab's are non existant here. I have to assume the mac tree is too narrow for your horse. The Bowden tree may work, but the cantle and pommel irons are made wrong. The bars are flatter though. I have one and I don't like it. An M1913 saddle might be the ticket.

John Fitzgerald
Eagle County, Colorado

Ride'm like you stole'm

[CRB]

My Uncle has a 1913, I will try it out.

[selewis]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Pat Holscher</i>

For general purpose riding, most experienced people here would tell you that the M1928 is the best of the McClellans.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I didn't know that. How common is the '28? Would you re-rig a nice example and start using it, or preserve it?
Sandy

[Pat Holscher]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by selewis</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Pat Holscher</i>

For general purpose riding, most experienced people here would tell you that the M1928 is the best of the McClellans.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I didn't know that. How common is the '28? Would you re-rig a nice example and start using it, or preserve it?
Sandy
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I've never ridden a M1928 myself, so I'd defer to others. It seems that all M1928s were converted M1904s, or at least a lot of them were. The changes in the design were to allow for closer contact, basically, along the lines of English saddles. Those who have commented here on it (not I, as I have no experience with them) feel that style or rigging and the general results are better than the older fashion rigging. And the new rigging interfered with leg aids less.

Pat

[tmarsh]

I would agree with Pat regarding the 28. Tree and the seat are the same but there is less bulk under your leg with the 28 allowing a little closer contact than the 04. In my area the 04's are by far the more common saddle that you see. If you are considering riding a 28 Sandy, I would replace the girth straps. We have talked before about the technical manual describing the conversion with simple instructions. If you have an extra 04 around with good seams on the side bars you can convert it. If it is in excellent conditon save it and find another to convert. I would be glad to send tracing of the skirt. Sometimes original skirts are offered on Ebay. Tom

[selewis]

Thanks for the response guys. What I have is a 28 conversion, in fairly nice condition to look at. I had not considered refurbishing it until I read Pat's comment that many people use theirs, which got me thinking that if there are plenty of them around I might have mine put in working order. My quandary is restoration vs conservation, scarcity being the deciding factor.

Sandy

[Pat Holscher]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by selewis</i>
<br />Thanks for the response guys. What I have is a 28 conversion, in fairly nice condition to look at. I had not considered refurbishing it until I read Pat's comment that many people use theirs, which got me thinking that if there are plenty of them around I might have mine put in working order. My quandary is restoration vs conservation, scarcity being the deciding factor.

Sandy
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Sandy, I don't know the overall numbers of 28s made from 04s, so I wouldn't take my comment to suggest they are extremely common. I don't think they're rare, and I know that some folks who participate here have ridden ones they owned.

I think all 28s were converted from 04s. By World War Two all the Regular Army cavalry units were using them, but based on the information posted here, it seems that not all the National Guard units had converted to 28s, but certainly a lot of 28s were in the Guard too. We'd thought at one time here that there were no artillery 28s, but a photo Philip put up shows us that was not the case, so there were a few artillery 28s as well.

As Tom notes, there are still 28 kits around, which must have been the kits used by unit saddlers at some level to convert 04s to 28s. I wonder what level that was commonly done at? I also wonder if the National Guard units were supposed to convert their own saddles, which might explain why they didn't all get around to it, as the saddler would not have been employed full time at that task. But perhaps all the 28s were built by the RA.

I've certainly ridden my 04, and my son rides it now. As its not rare, and in decent, if not pristine, condition, I feel it's well worth riding.

Pat

[selewis]

Thanks. Considering the above, I think I'm going to go ahead with it.

Sandy

[Joseph Sullivan]

All 1928s were conversions. They were sent out as flap and billet kits to be modified at the unit level. The trees are almost invariably 2nd patter '04s. The first stirrups were simply '04s with the cover taken off and sawed in half. There was a later purpose made stirrup.

1928s are not rare at all; I have owned several. Howevr, they aree less common than the 1904 2nd pattern saddles. The purpose-made stirrups are pretty scarce.

Joe

[selewis]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Joseph Sullivan</i>
<br />

1928s are not rare at all; I have owned several. Howevr, they aree less common than the 1904 2nd pattern saddles. The purpose-made stirrups are pretty scarce.

Joe
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Thanks Joe. That settles it for me.

Sandy

[Sam Cox]

Mac for an Arab?

Good trade

Sam Cox

[Philip S]

For a while I used my 04 Mac on an Arab mare. It was an experiment to find something which would fit her. She was built like a barrel and everything else would slip off. The Mac worked fine. Sadly the mare's owner (who had asked me to ride her) thought that using an army saddle on her was somehow cruel and I stopped.

[Pat Holscher]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Philip S</i>
<br />For a while I used my 04 Mac on an Arab mare. It was an experiment to find something which would fit her. She was built like a barrel and everything else would slip off. The Mac worked fine. Sadly the mare's owner (who had asked me to ride her) thought that using an army saddle on her was somehow cruel and I stopped.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Weird how you will get comments of that type merely based on the saddles origins.

With the McClellan, I've often heard that it is uncomfortable for the rider, based solely on its appearance. It isn't, but apparently people feel it looks that way.

Pat