This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.EquineWikipedia:WikiProject EquineTemplate:WikiProject Equineequine articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
I came across this word in a story - being a non horseman I had to look it up.
Missing in this page are some information on what distinguishes this saddle from others.
Why was/is it considered superior?
What are the features by which an expert can tell: this is a 'McClellan saddle'
Albrecht Mucha, Germany, Bad Salzdetfurth 84.130.48.13622:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The McClellan is reconized by the simple rawhide or leather covered tree with the opening in the middle. Not mentioned in the article are the five chanlengers to the McClellan, the Jenifer´s, Hope, Grimsley, Campbell and the Jones. The Campbell which was a flex tree typ and Grinsley were early Dragoon Saddles, the Jenifer´s and Jones were new desighn´s while the Hope was of the Spanish/Mexican style used in Texas and had seen wide use by officers during the Mexican war. The Hope was a serious contender due to it´s streingth, having been used for roping on the big cattle ranches, but ordenance testers frownd on the horn fearing it would get in the way of packs and saddle rolls. Cost and Durability were the determining factors in the selection of new military saddle and the McClellan won out.
Ryttar Mark T. Warnberg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryttar (talk • contribs) 17:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"rivals critics and flaws"?
The article mentions on several occasions "critics" and "flaws" of the McClellan, but never says what these were.