# what would be the maximum weight you would put on...#

S

shiresrus123

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 November 2008
Messages
275
Visit site
what would be the max weight you would put on a 16.1hh full up cob with 9.5 inch bone for every day hacking and pleasure schooling?

out of interest :)
 
16 to 17 stone? Can't really imagine what 9 inches of bone is like, but if really thick set and 16hh then probably more!
 
Last edited:
I keep asking sellers if their 14.2h D cobs will take 12 stone! Some yes ,some no I am 5'6

I think so but not sure if they agree....am on a diet

old cob was 14.1 but very thick set front and hind..lots of bone

interesting as i read a thread on here about certain New Forests being good weight carriers
 
Depends on the horse. I wouldn't want to go entirely by the height or even by the bone. It would depend on the age, fitness, ground conditions, any medical conditions, how good the rider is, how long the rider is riding for...
As an example, someone was talking about putting 12 stone on a 14.2 cob. I have a 14.1 Welsh D and I weighed, until recently, just over 10 stone. Then I lost a stone. My vet and instructor were really pleased, said to me that it will be a great thing for my horse and make a big difference to her comfort. She is 21 which is probably why.
I assume it's either your horse and you're talking about a prospective sharer or you're wondering if you could ride it. Could you talk to a local instructor you trust who knows the horse pretty well who would be able to give you an impartial opinion? Ideally if the (possibly too heavy) person is a bit thick skinned (you know what I mean, putting the horse's well being above their feelings) and could have a bit of a ride in front of a good instructor whose opinion all parties trust to see how the horse goes for them, if he appears to be struggling and hollowing away or if he is rounding his back up into them nicely and whatnot.
 
Probably completely opposite to general opinion but I was told once that these heavy type horses shouldn't carry excessive weight and aren't necessarily good weight carriers as being heavier horses they are already carrying alot around and don't find it easy to carry that and a heavy rider. Don't know for sure if it's true though. I have a Clydesdale and wouldn't want anyone heavier than say 15st on him for regular long hacks, however the odd ride he has carried someone of 17st.
 
ColandMe said:
Probably completely opposite to general opinion but I was told once that these heavy type horses shouldn't carry excessive weight and aren't necessarily good weight carriers as being heavier horses they are already carrying alot around and don't find it easy to carry that and a heavy rider. Don't know for sure if it's true though. I have a Clydesdale and wouldn't want anyone heavier than say 15st on him for regular long hacks, however the odd ride he has carried someone of 17st.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm not sure? Interesting, that is a bit like saying a big boned man would find hiking across dartmoor harder than a small boned man, as hes having to carry more bone.... think that would only work via overweight man V good weight man, not sure bone structure makes a difference, other than a big boned man would be stronger, .. so talked myself into saying I don't think so! x
 
thanks all, its about cobs tho not shire horses, cobs are weight carriers arent they?

horse is under 10,riding school fit, short backed with a scrumptious bottom
 
Devonshire dumpling said:
Hmmmm not sure? Interesting, that is a bit like saying a big boned man would find hiking across dartmoor harder than a small boned man, as hes having to carry more bone.... think that would only work via overweight man V good weight man, not sure bone structure makes a difference, other than a big boned man would be stronger, .. so talked myself into saying I don't think so! x
Click to expand...

Haha just what someone told me, like I said have no idea if it's actually true. I knew a lady who was easily 20 odd stone who rode a 17hh shire, I must admit I didn't like to see her riding and I'm no lightweight but I honestly thought she was asking a bit much from her horse. Especially as she rode without a bra!! :eek:
 
In ye olden days the rule of thumb was double the bone measurement and that was the weight in stones that the horse could carry "all day on the hunting field". So 9.5" equates to (9.5 + 9.5) 19 stones.

Plenty of people these days would shoot that down in flames...
 
thanks for all the replies, very interesting

yes the health and safety nuts do seem to think horses can carry no more than a 5 stone waif for 10 mins before a good rest
 
shiresrus123 said:
what would be the max weight you would put on a 16.1hh full up cob with 9.5 inch bone for every day hacking and pleasure schooling?

out of interest :)
Click to expand...

16 stone max occasionally. 14 stone max for regular hacking and schooling/jumping.
 
Last edited:
I think there are far too many people who are too heavy for their horses. You only have to look at some photographs on here and other websites.

My thoroughbred gelding is 16.1 and has 9 inches of bone, but I wouldn't like him to regularly carry much more than 12 stone. I am just under ten and five foot nine.
 
I'm on a diet to make my horse have an easier time. I used to be 13 stone and i have a 15.1hh Anglo Arab Stallion, I'm 5 ft 6". I now weigh 101/2 stone and this July will be the first time I have ridden him after shedding all the weight so I'll see if there is a difference. I suspect the main difference will be in my ability to keep up with him actually - my stamina has certainly improved. Sorry if it's gone of topic a bit but I did worry a lot about having too much weight for my lad.
 
millreef said:
I'm on a diet to make my horse have an easier time. I used to be 13 stone and i have a 15.1hh Anglo Arab Stallion, I'm 5 ft 6". I now weigh 101/2 stone and this July will be the first time I have ridden him after shedding all the weight so I'll see if there is a difference. I suspect the main difference will be in my ability to keep up with him actually - my stamina has certainly improved. Sorry if it's gone of topic a bit but I did worry a lot about having too much weight for my lad.
Click to expand...

What a lucky boy your horse is to have someone who cares so much for his comfort. I think your current weight should be excellent for him. Well done. It takes a lot of discipline to lose so much weight. :)
 
ColandMe said:
Haha just what someone told me, like I said have no idea if it's actually true. I knew a lady who was easily 20 odd stone who rode a 17hh shire, I must admit I didn't like to see her riding and I'm no lightweight but I honestly thought she was asking a bit much from her horse. Especially as she rode without a bra!! :eek:
Click to expand...

HAHA bounce one way, then they bounced the other way... 17hh shire more than capable of 20 stone surely??

I saw a rather "look at me with my squeaky voice" and oh I will stand in the middle of the road and block traffic because I am on point... 20+ stone woman out hunting riding a fine tb type who was barely 16hh, poor bloody horse! x
 
I was always taught the old rule of no more than 15%-20% of horse's body weight on their back (including tack).

Going by this, a 600kg horse wouldn't be comfortable carrying more than 14-18 stone (in total for both rider & saddle)...
 
Lobelia_Overhill said:
In ye olden days the rule of thumb was double the bone measurement and that was the weight in stones that the horse could carry "all day on the hunting field". So 9.5" equates to (9.5 + 9.5) 19 stones.

Plenty of people these days would shoot that down in flames...
Click to expand...

I certainly would!! Bone is only one part of the equation in working out the weight-carrying ability of any horse. You also have to consider length of back, breadth (a broader horse distributes the weight over the rib cage better) and depth. And obviously a horse with weak hindquarters won't carry weight even if he has 10" of bone!!

Example:

Rambo-October.jpg


This pic was taken last year when Rambo was 5 and still a stallion (pure Irish Draught!) He is 17.1hh and has 10.25" of bone. He's broad across the back and plenty of heart room but his back-end was still a little immature! At THAT stage I wouldn't have wanted him carrying more than 14 stone max! Yes, he could do it - but it sure wouldn't be good for him!

He's 6 now - and gelded - and I think that in another year he WOULD carry 17 stone hunting - as long as the rider is well-balanced!

This chap (Lofty) is the same height and the same age, and has 10.5" of bone.

lofty-trot.jpg


He's still immature (and slightly bum high) at 6 - but when HE is mature (another 2 years) I'd say he'd easily carry 20 stone of balanced rider all day. And the difference is NOT the .25" of bone. He's shorter in the back, broader through the rib cage, and a bit deeper too. He's by the same RID stallion, but out of a TBxPercheron mare - who was 17hh - and big - but lacked bone and foot size for her height and would NOT have carried anywhere near the same weight.

Of course hose CAN carry more weight - but it sure as hell doesn't do them a lot of good!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top