[Carl Russell]

Yes Mike that one is great.

Donn you are right. It is the tip of the pole that is most critical, but it is most effective if the evener hitch point is on, or next to, the pole. Primarily for holding back, but also to maintain a taught hitch. If evener and pole are offset, and the is some flex or give, then they can come out of sync…. I can’t really see how that would happen, especially with a cart, but I think that is the basis for the convention. In fact you can run into this with a two-way sulky plow where the evener is down by the plows, 12″ or so below the pole, and when shifting bottoms there is a discrepancy between line of draft and pole.

The main point with pole height is forward stepping with the front legs. The horses need free movement without hitting the neckyoke. I know for rigs like mowers and plows there is a conventional height, from which the mechanisms work best, but I think that was because the pole tip height was already a convention, and they worked back from there. I figure that around 30″ is pretty good. When you start to shorten the pole and tighten the hitch length, knee room become very important.

I think it is also important to note that as the hitch point is raised, so can the heel chains be shortened. My cart is set on one link, which on the ground would never work. As the evener is now close to 24″ off the ground, corresponding to the log hooks on the back, the hind legs can easily travel freely below.

Pulling in the neckyoke, and shortening the heel chains will create a shorter hypotenuse of that triangle with the same angle at the D. This will actually make that hypotenuse higher off the ground, which in turn raises pole tip height, as pole tip is one point in the triangle.

I just want to say that you can pick up history books, coffee table books, family albums, or travel down gravel lanes all over the country and find photos after photo, and living operators with all variety harnesses and equipment getting good work done day after day. I happened to have two mentors who were adamant about the physical nature of working horses, who were also both dedicated users of the D-ring harness. These things I am covering here may seem like minutiae to some, and they may be, but these two men never knew each other, but could have written the same book chapter and verse. They both had worked horses their whole lives, both taking on small mechanical operations during the 60-70s, but returning to the working horse because of the inherent efficiency. They both had machines, but did their work with horses because they knew how to get the most out of the animals. A very big part of that for both of them was the D-ring harness. This harness fit fundamentally into the other aspect, which was the way equipment provided mechanical advantage. They both designed log/farm carts around the harness, and they both used sleds, one a scoot, the other the bobsled. The principles of the biomechanics of horses, transferred through the D-ring harness, into simple and sturdy equipment was all based on a study how these layers overlap.

This is all to say that while I am detailing these components of the hitch, pole height, D-ring location, and biomechanical geometry, I realize that there are many who get plenty done without such attention to detail.

I in no way intend to portray that because there is so much thought behind this that it is “The Way” to do it. What I am trying to do is answer to FAQ’s of the D-ring harness that tend to escape people, which in turn makes the harness system seem to be inferior, or not as effective as some of us would have you believe.

Anyway, I’ll be hitching up Monday morning and I’ll get some specific footage of some of what I have been trying to describe.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

George, it is at my place. I never had any discussions with him about the placement of the bunk. It is a smaller sled than my bobsled. It has rings on either side of the bunk, presumably to direct the tension on a chain from the evener.

The ring at the nose is for both pole and draft chain. It has a spread chain similar to a scoot to center the pull. It has mortise and tenons holding it together, so I thought it might be pretty sturdy.

I can see the value of hitching a few logs with a choker onto the bunk of a go devil, but the way I use a scoot I would e left too much log movement. Plus if I’m using a pole I wouldn’t want a loose evener.

I get used to the way I do things and usually don’t find the time to experiment much. I usually only use a sled when hauling long distances, so I prefer larger devices to carry more. I have thought many times about a go devil, but haven’t found that job that has pushed me to make one.

I think bundling small material into a feasible hitch is a good motivator. I have found the Swedish wagon to fill that niche, which now has me looking at material I would normally just leave to rot.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Regarding questions about improving function by moving the back plate forward, here is a clip showing the Barden cart in action.

[Carl Russell]

So, I have written some of this in other threads, but it seems somewhat appropriate now again.

If the D-ring is too low, i.e., front trace is too long or misadjusted, the converging angles at the D can also be too flat for easy hitching, even with a reasonable pole height.

One of the reasons that Les designed the plug yoke was to shorten the pole and increase pole height at the same time. If you look at the forward side strap side of the triangle and shorten that, you can raise the pole a few inches just by way of geometry. If you have a long neck yoke and pole end, the pole will hang low, and when trying to raise it by tension, one will find the triangle gets too flat to functionally hitch tight enough to raise the pole where you want it.

Hitch height on a log cart obviously has advantages, but horses do not move forward laterally. They lift their front ends with the action of the hinds, and use the counterweight of their body mass to carry them forward. If hitch height gets high, the force of the horse is compromised as the draft angle pulls back on their body mass as they are naturally designed to lift regardless of where the draft aligns on them. While high wheels and high hitches will carry more log weight and reduce friction, they also prevent horses from applying their greatest effort.

The D-ring harness alleviates this draft issue, so a cart that will be used with those harnesses needs to have a pole and hitch height that coincides with the D-ring location, so that hitching and carrying pole weight can be maximized.

Since pole weight can be an issue if harnesses are not adjusted correctly, then these other design features should be taken into consideration when building the cart. Within reason the carts should be built to fit the animals being used on it.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Envision the triangle formed between the rear trace, the forward side strap, and the line between neckyoke and evener. If the pole and hitch point are as high as the D-ring, then the angle at the D is almost flat, or straight. Then when you are trying to get slack to hook heel chains you are pulling in a straight line against the other straps already taught.

However, if the hitch point is lower than the D, then the trace and forward strap come up to it at converging angles. That angle can be altered by changing the length between neckyoke and evener. So pushing against the unhooked end of the evener, while horses push back will put tension on the other three attachment, in essence lengthening the hypotenuse, flattening the angle at the D, which will cause the pole to go up, and allow for that one heel chain to be hooked.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Sorry about the film, it doesn’t show the hitching of the traces.

Also rmember that a high pole, and high evener means a flatter triangle, so there is less spring in the trace/holdback connection. One should be able to push on the evener and see the pole go up. If the pole and hitch are too high, this cannot happen, and the tension is against a straight line.

I’ll look for a picture of the jack stand, Carl

[Carl Russell]

Here is a link to our daughter Tuilelaith’s senior project, harnessing, hitching, and driving the horses. It shows her hitching and lifting the pole the way I do it.

[Carl Russell]

It may not be in these plans, but Les used to make a jack stand under the front of the cart that would park with the pole at the correct height to hitch loose. Once hitched he would lift the pole off the jack stand and let it down to hang from the jack saddles.

I have a pretty heavy pole on my cart With saw, gas, and the underseat tool box full it is probably 75 pounds. I chuck the wheels and have the horses back into it while I push the evener forward with my thigh. It seems easy to me, but many people struggle with it when I let them hitch. The secret is to have the horses lean back….

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Good points Mark. The teamster handling issue is what I meant by “a feasible horse powered impliment”…..

I have to say that pole weight is a perpetual, and critical issue for users of Western harnesses. Even with mowers, wagon tongues, scoot poles, and the like, the weight of the pole has potential significant impact on neck, shoulders, and draft to an extent. Of course that is not to mention other issues related to draft and collar pitching due to draft angle….

While your point about the value of having equipment that can be used with both may seem reasonable on the surface, that principle is already not being applied in equipment design and use, as evidenced by the fact that it remains a constant concern.

Pole weight is never an issue for me on any impliment found in use in the draft animal world.

I submit that if teamsters want to make pole weight a significant issue in implement design and use, then they have a solution that is very accessible and functionally versatile…… the D-ring harness…..

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Thinking as I’m putting on my boots…… One major drawback from moving the backplate forward would be the complimentary use of this cart for hitching other implements such as wagons, etc by way of the drawbar that can be inserted into the bottom of that backplate structure.

Truthfully, it can still be accomplished, just turning radius again will be impacted. This cart was clearly designed to be a logging cart, but it can be used for many farm uses, which is different from other dedicated logging designs.

Carl

• This reply was modified 9 years, 3 months ago by Carl Russell.

[Carl Russell]

George, here is a pic of the last sled made by Les Barden. I have not used it for anything yet, but your Go-devil reminds me of it. I thought you might to see this.

The pole fits in like that of a scoot, so it can easily be used with or without.

Carl

• This reply was modified 9 years, 3 months ago by Carl Russell.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Carl Russell]

I think using D-ring harnesses, the discussion of pole weight is moot. 1500 pound horses can easily carry 200-300 pound person on their backs over challenging terrain. Adjusted correctly so that pole weight is born on the Jack saddle, a team of horses can handle any pole weight one could attach to a feasible horse powered impliment.

The more important issue would be if back pads are cushioned, or just plain leather.

Also, the way draft affects the weight on the pole will have affect in handling, i.e. If there is too much lift the animals can have difficulty maneuvering the device.

As far as Josh’s idea of moving the back plate forward, it seems reasonable to me. I think part of that design is remnant of the original where Les had a square tube axle welded on to accept the wheel spindles. I think in principle it would work. One might want to look in my tool box first though to see what they might be giving up…. ?….. Althogh I got to say there would be a lot less to pick up after the occasional tip over.

I know that some types of carts are actually built with the hitch bar slightly ahead of the axle, and have log headroom as Josh describes. This does allow for a closer hitch, and if the hitch is ahead of the axle allows for a slightly more effective mechanical advantage.

However, after using carts of this design for over 20 years, I can say that moving the back plate forward has never occurred to me as a critical design alteration. It certainly wouldn’t cause any failure in function as far as I can see. The only drawback that I can think of, is that the wheels would be more exposed when turning tightly.. Which would not be a huge detriment, but I think it might be an issue to watch.

I know that Les would be pleased to know you thoughtful fabricators are working over these plans……

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Northeast Woodland Training Inc. Is the org that I would check in with. Their website has a listing of all upcoming classes that are scheduled through them. http://www.woodlandtraining.com/courses.php

If you cannot find a class that suits you, but have access to an amenable landowner, you can host one yourself, which basically saves the cost of tuition. I strongly recommend these guys. Not only are they savvy about chainsaw operation, but most of them are exceptional educators.

Carl

• This reply was modified 9 years, 3 months ago by Carl Russell.

[Carl Russell]

The way I see Tyler’s hitch, it will work pretty well as it is built. If you notice the bar with slots is positioned in the center of the square bar, not along one edge. In this manner, the chain will not be hanging directly down into the slot, but will be pulling almost perpendicular so that the bitter end onlf the choker can be snapped up out of the slot, not unlike a Barden hitch. If it doesn’t work smoothly a bit of prying with the peavey will accomplished the release. In the case that doesn’t work a piece of 3/8-1/2″ rebar welded along the edge of the square beam will increase the effectiveness of such a release.

Great job Tyler, Carl

[Carl Russell]

Yes Jared, I have been busy in the woods and only today had a few minutes in town to get a copy in the mail. Sorry for the delay.?

[Author]

Posts