Horse Height question
Tom came out to the barn today and we wanted to measure the horses.
We got one of those sewing tape measures (the soft kind) and measured them.
All of them came out perfectly, but Montana. (figures cause he is the one that I really wanted to know the height.)
I'll give you all the details and maybe someone can help me :)
Gem measured 63". I divided that by 4 and got 15.75. That would equal 15.3hh, correct?
Vega measured 62". I divided that by 4 and got 15.5. That would equal 15.2hh, correct?
Montana measured 61.5". I divided that by 4 and got 15.375. What the heck does that come out to?
I used this site OnlineConversion.com - Horse Height Conversion when I got home and it rounded 61.5" up to 62" so he came out at 15.2hh. Would he really be 15.1 1/2hh?
When I was looking at all of them, Montana definitely looked like he was the smallest, though they weren't all standing together, so I was just eye balling it, but when I'm mounting it just seems so much easier to get on him. Maybe he has shorter legs but a bigger barrel and Vega has longer legs and a shorter barrel?? I have no idea.
Since you measure to the top of the wither it's tough to eyeball a horse and decide height. Some horses have higher withers than others so its very deceiving.
I always thought they should change the way they are measured. Maybe to the lowest point in the center of the back or something easier to see.
Tony always looks at whose butt is higher :lol:
I was thinking of measuring them at different points along their back (withers, center of back, butt) and then take an average, but I think it would be way off.
Tom took pictures of me riding Montana today (YAY) and my legs did not go past his belly, yet on Vega they would, so I was happy about that. I always thought my feet went past his belly. :)
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:10 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0