Power of snaffles

[Amchara]

(I'm just curious, not looking to have my horse going in the most powerful, legal snaffle ever)

I was wondering the order of snaffles in relation to "bite" or "strength". I've heard things like a narrower bit is harsher versus a thicker bit invites the horse to seek it more. The plate in a double jointed bit isn't as inviting for the horse to grab it (same with a mild twist). Also heard that boucher bits offer some leverage and loose rings shouldn't be in the hand of beginners. Does the dee, eggbutt, loose or fullcheek piece come into play? Where would a waterford fit in on the list?

As I stated at the start of this post, I'm not seeking this information for practice in my training or my horses, simply for curiosity.

[buck22]

http://sustainabledressage.com/tack/bridle.php

[angel]

I do not think it is ever quite safe to put each bit in order of severity. Of course, the hands that hold the reins ultimately determine just how viciously the bit will create an effect. But, let's say that the hands are good ones, and take it from there.

The next thing to consider is the shape of the horse's mouth. Is the tongue thick or thin? His the palette high or low? How wide is the mouth in relationship to the width of the bit being used? Perhaps, that last one should instead ask how the bit impacts the tongue and the bars in relationship to the corners of the horse's mouth.

If you have a horse with a low palette and a thick tongue, you would not want a bit with a big lump in the middle because there is just not enough room for that lump. That is when we go to a French link snaffle, so when the bit is engaged, it does not hit the horse's palette. If I were to use a regular snaffle on this same horse, it would be "severe," because then the palette would be hit.

By the same token, a fat bit on a small-mouthed horse might be uncomfortable, while a thinner bit on a wide-mouthed horse might be considered more severe. So you see, when we talk about bits, we have to take into consideration the horse on which the bit is used.

As far as the kind of mouthpiece, I'd have to think that a Mullen might be the least severe of any, while a twist of any sort would be at the severe end of the range.

The manner in which the bit is attached to the headstall can have both a factor of the shape of the head as well as the hands holding the reins. Let's say that I have a full-cheek snaffle on a horse that has a fairly short head. Generally, what will happen is that the top part of the cheek bar will dig into the side of the horse's face unless it is bent away slightly at the top from the straight up and down line. When the horse has a longer head, such as a Thoroughbred might, this becomes less of a problem. The real reason for this kind of bit is more about keeping the bit from being pulled through the horse's mouth accidentally, such as might happen if the rider were to fall while still holding the reins. Because of that, I think of the full-cheek more as a jumping bit, rather than a dressage bit...but, that is just me.

A loose ring can be pulled through the horse's mouth as well if the person using the reins is less skilled, or if the horse is new to lunging with sidereins and decides to act stupid. An experienced person can usually prevent this from happening.

I tend to think that the Boucher as well as a D ring tend to have a little leverage action, but I can assure you, your control element with these is nothing like a curb. I just think of them as a little extra...not a great big extra...such as with the curb.

For me, the more I become skilled, the fewer style bits I use. I have not used a D-ring or my Boucher for a very long time. Basically, I use a French-link (small-mouthed horse), or my Mullen, though even the Mullen has been in retirement for awhile now.

I know this does not really answer your question very well, but this is one of those questions that I must say "it depends....":lol: