Why thank you sir.

Eric Russell wrote:The problem I have with these wide toe shoes is the claim that they facilitate easy turnover while at the same time a wider toe increases ground support surface area or potential "float" resistance to initial footprint loading.

This is not something that can be easily quantified because of the dynamic interaction between the footing and the shoe. But if you really want to facilitate easy turnover I suggest that you nail on one of these shoes backwards. :cool:

chris bunting wrote:Maybe you shouldn't cut corners when you express your thoughts.

if you yanks understood proper English and werent so insenitive to constructive advice there would be no mis-understandings .
chris

chris bunting wrote:Is this an example or your assertion?

tbloomer wrote:
Wild Tom I literally just came on her to ask about the effect of the toe float on dft. I suspect any excess strain would be negated by the break over point causing an easing to the dft. +2-2=0

Alicia Thompson wrote:I suppose if Kim is going to call Bill Adams "Big Bill Adams" then you can call me "Wild Tom."

A lot of these types of shoes are likely to be introduced into the market now that the patents held by Dave Duckett and EDSS/Ovnicek have expired.

My personal choice for this purpose is a half round cross-section which is readily available in bar stock and in creased machine made shoes like Kerkhaert Classic Roller and Kerkhaert TDR. These half-round profiles are different than the St. Croix Eventer (and many of its copies), which have a crease in the toe that might have the potential to increase turnover frictional resistance in some kinds of footing.

IMO, easing turnover and easing DFT strain are two different mechanical considerations. Note, I use the term "turnover" because "breakover," as a phase of the stride, is historically and traditionally considered to begin at heel lift.

Dave Duckett and some other bio-"mechanics" define "breakover" as a phase that begins when the load on the limb changes from increasing to decreasing weight bearing. As such, the A/P relationship of the footprint to the mechanical centers of the foot becomes more relevant in consideration of DFT strain vs. "effective" hoof angle. (I'm also probably paraphrasing Tom Stovall . . .)

So for the record I got a pair of steel comforts shipped to me in a few sizes. They arrived the other day and I am not in love with them. Nail holes are to close together, the roll is totally different, heels have less meat, quarters are not functionally sweetened ... I just myself prefer the Equilibrium.

Why would you want sweetened quarters?

IronBanger wrote:
More force placed at toe and heel where the wall is strongest. I only use these shoes on horses with low angled hooves who tend to need their hooves brought back. Many of these hooves come with weak walls especially at the quarters.

Just something I like about the eqilibriums.