PDA

View Full Version : Where to find custom spurs for tall person?



Twiliath
Jul. 25, 2009, 06:57 PM
My daughter is 6 feet tall and rides a 15 h Arab. I know I've seen spurs that go up the back of the boot a couple of inches for really tall people. I've searched a little on the internet and can't find what I'm looking for. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Queen Latisha
Jul. 25, 2009, 07:10 PM
I'm tall and like my spurs higher on my boots. I buy mens spurs and straps.
They are wide enough to fit over the boot and I adjust the straps to make the spur rest higher.:D

Lusoluv
Jul. 25, 2009, 08:12 PM
Swan neck spurs like the Spanish Riding School riders wear. I have a pair by Herm Sprenger.

Twiliath
Jul. 25, 2009, 09:04 PM
Lusoluv - do you have a website?

JSwan
Jul. 25, 2009, 09:08 PM
http://www.doversaddlery.com/product.asp?pn=X1-25199&c2p=cs&bhcd2=1248570237

Twiliath
Jul. 25, 2009, 09:18 PM
Thanks, I just found that myself. Along with finding other swan-necked spurs for much cheaper!

Althought I remember seeing something extreme years ago on Ian Millar when he rode Big Ben, maybe? It wasn't a swan-necked spur, it was more like the spur neck went straight up the back of the boot 3 inches and then poked out. Hmm.

JSwan
Jul. 25, 2009, 09:28 PM
I'd have to see a photo as I can't think of what those might be called. He's a really tall guy, though.

If it helps you at all - I am only 5'9" but am all leg. I'm dumpy looking - short torso/short waisted but have to have long/custom flaps on my saddles.

When I wore those swan neck spurs I was very slender so my weight wasn't a problem - but the horse was 15h. Barely. He did not take up my leg much and I used to joke that if he tried to dump me I could just take my feet out of the stirrups and stand up.

I was able to use my leg correctly.

Twiliath
Jul. 26, 2009, 07:32 AM
We kid my daughter that she almost needs roller skates to keep her feet from dragging. She can almost hook her ankles together under his belly!

The spurs are needed to tell him to pick up his old man belly and come round. She using the nubby Prince of Wales ones right now but I thought "taller" spurs might help - she would have to reach so far.

Thanks.

CatOnLap
Jul. 26, 2009, 10:39 AM
Buy a bigger horse...
Teach your daughter to use a whip or two...

...the swan neck spurs used to be illegal in dressage competition if the neck pointed up. I don't know if that rule still exists.

Twiliath
Jul. 26, 2009, 01:19 PM
Good to know. I've also seen very long spurs, nearly 2 inches.

Twiliath
Jul. 26, 2009, 01:24 PM
As of 2/09, swan neck spurs ARE legal.

http://www.usdf.org/docs/competitions/td/SaddleryInspections.pdf

Thanks for the heads up.

samd
Jul. 27, 2009, 12:41 AM
Just as a note I've noticed that the prince of wales spurs are some of the hardest to use. Even for me and I'm 5'4". I would recommend something that goes straight out instead of curving down like some type of rowels.

CatOnLap
Jul. 27, 2009, 10:07 AM
thanks for the reference Twiliath.

bort84
Jul. 27, 2009, 10:55 AM
It says swan neck spurs are legal, but then it says the shank must point down... Wouldn't that apply to swan necks too? If not, then what's the point of having a rule that they point down? Anybody know if swan necks must be pointed down as well?

appychik
Jul. 27, 2009, 11:41 AM
It says swan neck spurs are legal, but then it says the shank must point down... Wouldn't that apply to swan necks too? If not, then what's the point of having a rule that they point down? Anybody know if swan necks must be pointed down as well?

The photos of the swan necks show them in their proper position... I'd assume :eek: that they are fine as is... but perhaps one of the dressage gurus will jump in to verify this.

I'm 5'10" and lots of leg also. I use a dressage whip when needed (ride a small Arab (14.2) mare in lessons - my own horse is 16h) but haven't had to resort to using spurs on the lesson mare. For my own "deadhead", I've got an assortment of spurs. I love my rollerball ones. :yes:

bort84
Jul. 27, 2009, 11:50 AM
It just seems odd to me that they'd allow swan neck spurs to be worn the way they are supposed to be (upright) but don't allow other spurs to have the arm pointing up... I always thought that was a kind of strange rule anyway, even stranger if they are now allowing swan necks.

Twiliath
Jul. 27, 2009, 03:43 PM
Totally a guess, but maybe because the head of the swan neck is rounded, it's allowed to be pointed up. Some spurs are curved downward but have a point at the bottom. If you turn them upside down, the pointy part digs in, rather than the curved-downward shank. Did that make sense?

What's Up
Jul. 29, 2009, 01:19 PM
Swan necks are completely legal ... because they are made for the situation described ... my husband is 6'7 almost 6'8 and all three of his horses are above 17 hands and to use his leg appropriately on the Oldenburg that really looks more like a TB he needs to use swan necks.

The answer isn't always a bigger horse or learning to use a whip (that is an additional aid to the leg not instead of if you can't get your leg on! ... sometimes it is about finding a way to make it work).

M

Twiliath
Jul. 30, 2009, 06:37 AM
Thank you, What's Up. You ride the horse you have. Lendon Gray rode small horses, too. What spurs she used, I don't know. But I'm sure the owner of Seldom Seen and Last Scene wasn't about to get Lendon bigger horses!

Janet
Jul. 30, 2009, 08:41 AM
It says swan neck spurs are legal, but then it says the shank must point down... Wouldn't that apply to swan necks too? If not, then what's the point of having a rule that they point down? Anybody know if swan necks must be pointed down as well?

The NECK of a swan neck spur points UP. But the actual SHANK (the part that pokes the horse) points DOWN.

Swan neck spurs are (and have been as long as I have been reading the rule book) legal.

bort84
Jul. 30, 2009, 01:18 PM
The NECK of a swan neck spur points UP. But the actual SHANK (the part that pokes the horse) points DOWN.

Swan neck spurs are (and have been as long as I have been reading the rule book) legal.

I understand this, though I appreciate the caps for emphasis just in case = ) And really, the part that pokes the horse is only slightly pointed downward, I think it's probably the rounded end that makes the difference. Either way, I don't really think a blunt POW spur with shank pointed down is much less harsh than the same spur pointed up. The spur is not rounded, so the contact is still likely to be on an edge, shank up or down.

I've ridden with my flat ended POW spurs both ways, and I don't think it makes all that much difference. I also grew up riding saddle seat, where everyone wears the spur at the bottom of their boot (not on the spur rests), and wears the spur with the shank pointed up.

The only difference I could see is that potentially you could get more into the horse's belly (which is more sensitive) when you're spurs are worn lower and pointed up, but that's also going to be the case with a long legged rider wearing swan spurs too. So, again, I think the rule doesn't really make a lot of sense. Perhaps the rule should be that all spurs should be rounded at the end but acceptable to be worn either way? That would make far more sense to me. And really, rowelled spurs are allowed, so what gives? I must be missing some logic here that is quite noticeable to everyone else...

Janet
Jul. 31, 2009, 06:20 AM
I understand this, though I appreciate the caps for emphasis just in case = ) And really, the part that pokes the horse is only slightly pointed downward, I think it's probably the rounded end that makes the difference. Either way, I don't really think a blunt POW spur with shank pointed down is much less harsh than the same spur pointed up. The spur is not rounded, so the contact is still likely to be on an edge, shank up or down.

I've ridden with my flat ended POW spurs both ways, and I don't think it makes all that much difference. I also grew up riding saddle seat, where everyone wears the spur at the bottom of their boot (not on the spur rests), and wears the spur with the shank pointed up.

The only difference I could see is that potentially you could get more into the horse's belly (which is more sensitive) when you're spurs are worn lower and pointed up, but that's also going to be the case with a long legged rider wearing swan spurs too. So, again, I think the rule doesn't really make a lot of sense. Perhaps the rule should be that all spurs should be rounded at the end but acceptable to be worn either way? That would make far more sense to me. And really, rowelled spurs are allowed, so what gives? I must be missing some logic here that is quite noticeable to everyone else...

I tend to agree with you- that most of the currently popular spurs are not particularly "worse" when used "upside down".

Put I think the point :winkgrin: is that, if the rule permitted "upward pointing shanks" some pretty nasty spurs would become legal. And maybe (probably) there was a particularly "nasty" spur that led to the rule in the first place