# Help! Forage Plus balancer or Thunderbrooks base mix? Thoughts?



## equa39 (1 February 2016)

I've been researching the best & hopefully most cost effective feed / balancer for my ex-racer going barefoot. I've only had him 3 mths and he's dropped a lot of muscle coming out of racing and so definitely needs to develop topline as well as needing help for his hooves - which are good for a tb but he is nevertheless footy on his fronts.  Anyway have heard good stuff about both the FP hoof / skin balancer adn the thunderbrooks base mix but unsure which provides the best all round ingredients, especially for barefoot.  I understand thunderbrooks is a complete feed but I also get the impression you don't need a balancer with it - does anyone know? And what are people's experience of either / both products?  Any help gratefully received as I'm driving myself mad


----------



## FfionWinnie (2 February 2016)

I read recently that thunderbrook base mix is low in copper and magnesium which might lead to him being footy. 

Personally I don't like anything that has the word mix in it. Much better to feed straights so you know what you are feeding.


----------



## chahala (2 February 2016)

I feed the forage plus hoof and skin balancer to my barefoot PRE and have been very pleased with results.


----------



## Erin (2 February 2016)

Forage Plus has much better levels of minerals. Thunderbrooks spec is pretty poor compared to others on the market.


----------



## Welshboy (2 February 2016)

I replied with this, in the other area of the forum, but thought worth copying over..

If you look at the analysis you can work out how much of key minerals eg. Copper & Zinc are provided. ForagePlus (at a typical 100g daily) provides, for example, 1200mg of zinc, 400mg of copper.... The hoof and skin version has some additions such as biotin. The Winter version also provides 2000iu of vitamin E....

Thunderbrooks is fed at 50-100g a day. 100g provides copper at 20mg and zinc at 80mg, along with many other vits/minerals.

I think Thunderbrooks is based on NRC levels, whereas Forsgeplus is providing optimal levels based on average forage analysis. 

Many would suggest, that to provide the ideal levels for your horse, you should have forage analysis for both grass & hay carried out, but it's not always practical.


----------



## JillA (2 February 2016)

chahala said:



			I feed the forage plus hoof and skin balancer to my barefoot PRE and have been very pleased with results.
		
Click to expand...

How did you introduce it? I can't get either of my two to accept more than the tiniest amount, tried apple puree, sandwiches, tasty mix (even with molasses eek!) and they hate the smell of it and leave their feeds with it in. No chance of getting anywhere near the recommended amount, 3 months on


----------



## criso (2 February 2016)

Welshboy said:



			Many would suggest, that to provide the ideal levels for your horse, you should have forage analysis for both grass & hay carried out, but it's not always practical.
		
Click to expand...

In an ideal world yes.  In the absence of this play around with dosage, you may find with something like the forageplus you can feed at lower than the recommended dose and get good results.  

Just to confuse matters also worth looking at the Equivita and progressive earth products.


----------



## Welshboy (2 February 2016)

criso said:



			In an ideal world yes.  In the absence of this play around with dosage, you may find with something like the forageplus you can feed at lower than the recommended dose and get good results.  

Just to confuse matters also worth looking at the Equivita and progressive earth products.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, I've used all three; Equivita, Progressive Earth and Forage Plus.  I've never done forage analysis as moved yards a few times and sometimes the hay suppliers change etc. 

I'm currently using Forage Plus Winter Hoof & Skin.  I've never had problems with my pony eating it, although he can be funny with certain joint supplements. I mix it into a very wet feed, before adding chaff (currently Agrobs cobs and musli, but I've also mixed in speedibeet previously).

Definitely an option to play with dosage levels, as the FP provides a high level of minerals.  I'm giving at 100g per day at the moment as we have also recently transition to barefoot - 3 months so far.


----------



## laura_nash (2 February 2016)

I feed the Forage Plus Hoof & Skin balancer at half the recommended level, following analysis of our grass (grow our own hay).  Use fast fibre as the base because its all I can get hold of.  Cob is barefoot and does well on this, hasn't had thrush for years which was a problem when he first went barefoot.  The rescue pony came to us with terrible skin and coat (he had been at the rescue centre for a year and was in good condition otherwise, they kept him longer partly because at first they thought he had sweetitch).  He now has a lovely glossy coat with metallic highlights.  

I'm never really sure about the concept of developing topline through feeding, surely that's down to the work they do (or to them getting fat).


----------



## criso (2 February 2016)

laura_nash said:



			I

I'm never really sure about the concept of developing topline through feeding, surely that's down to the work they do (or to them getting fat).
		
Click to expand...

Combination of work and getting adequate protein.  If not getting enough protein from hay (and many hays are short of protein) then you might want to feed something that adds it.

That highlights why I don't want a feed that tries to do everything.  I like to keep calories and protein separate to the minerals so I can adjust them separately.


----------



## chahala (2 February 2016)

I feed it mixed in with some sloppy alfa beet which is in turn mixed with hifi unmollassed- both dengie. a few carrots and cider vinegar and that's it. He was previously on the feedmark barefoot mix but that left him footy. He has sweetitch hence the unmollossed but would happily at anything with sugar in if he was allowed


----------



## supsup (2 February 2016)

Welshboy said:



			I replied with this, in the other area of the forum, but thought worth copying over..

If you look at the analysis you can work out how much of key minerals eg. Copper & Zinc are provided. ForagePlus (at a typical 100g daily) provides, for example, 1200mg of zinc, 400mg of copper.... The hoof and skin version has some additions such as biotin. The Winter version also provides 2000iu of vitamin E....

Thunderbrooks is fed at 50-100g a day. 100g provides copper at 20mg and zinc at 80mg, along with many other vits/minerals.

I think Thunderbrooks is based on NRC levels, whereas Forsgeplus is providing optimal levels based on average forage analysis. 

Many would suggest, that to provide the ideal levels for your horse, you should have forage analysis for both grass & hay carried out, but it's not always practical.
		
Click to expand...

A small correction on this. The recommended dose of the Thunderbrooks base mix is 50-100g *per 100kg bodyweight* per day. I.e. a 500kg horse should get 250g-500g. So, that would provide exactly the NRC minimum recommended daily amounts for zinc and copper (namely 400mg and 100mg) if you feed the higher end of the dose. On top of this, you might get some zinc/copper from the forage, probably why they say you might be able to drop the daily dose to half if your forage is otherwise "good". It also contains 2% lysine and 1.5% magnesium, which works out to 10g lysine and 7.5g magnesium per 500g daily dose. That's all actually not bad at all. 
Minor drawbacks (with my own forage at the back of my mind) is that there's also 10g of calcium in there per 500g dose (which I wouldn't need, and would only require me to add even more magnesium to balance), and that the selenium dose comes out at the lower end at 0.75mg/day. And some people prefer higher Vitamin E doses.

All in all, I'd say it's getting pretty close in spec to Equivita and ProHoof if fed at the full 500g/day dose (for a 500kg horse). ForagePlus has some of the highest Cu/Zn amounts out there, which may be necessary where the forage is very high in iron, but may not be needed by everyone. Beyond that, differences are in the details - Thunderbrooks use all chelated mineral forms. IMO, the jury is still out on whether there's really a benefit in going the extra mile for chelated minerals.


----------



## Welshboy (2 February 2016)

Oh yes, you're right - thanks for that &#55357;&#56397; Needed to multiply my figures by 5 !


----------



## Valar Morghulis (2 February 2016)

supsup said:



			The recommended dose of the Thunderbrooks base mix is 50-100g *per 100kg bodyweight* per day. I.e. a 500kg horse should get 250g-500g. So, that would provide exactly the NRC minimum recommended daily amounts for zinc and copper (namely 400mg and 100mg) if you feed the higher end of the dose...and 7.5g magnesium per 500g daily dose
		
Click to expand...

Problem is that if you are feeding 250g per day then you are only getting half the RDA. In any case, most people seem  to be saying they are feeding a handful or a mugful - either way the amounts are very low. I'd love to know if anyone really is feeding 500g per day. Also my horses need a lot more than 7.5g magnesium per day as I know from trial and error!


----------



## supsup (2 February 2016)

Fair enough! I'm not trying to convince anyone to feed Thunderbrooks (in fact, I don't). I just wanted to make sure the information is accurate. 

I'd consider the Thunderbrooks base mix more in the family of commercial balancers. They are also often fed at about 100g per 100kg bodyweight, and vit&min levels are generally at or below the NRC guidelines. Can't help people who won't read labels and feed a fortified feed at levels significantly lower than recommended!


----------



## criso (2 February 2016)

supsup said:



			Thunderbrooks use all chelated mineral forms. IMO, the jury is still out on whether there's really a benefit in going the extra mile for chelated minerals.
		
Click to expand...

Forageplus use the chelated forms, Progressive Earth do for most of their products but have one blend (pro mineral I think) that uses the sulphate forms and Equivita uses sulphate.  

Agree there is no 'proof' that chelated are really worth the extra and one advantage of the sulphates is they are less bulky so can help if you are having trouble getting your horse to eat it.  It is also cheaper so if you are on a budget an option.


----------



## Jnhuk (2 February 2016)

Forage plus - some horses don't like the taste. It tells you to feed small amounts in something like fast fibre  in a low wide bucket and build up the quantities slowly


----------



## catkin (2 February 2016)

JillA said:



			How did you introduce it? I can't get either of my two to accept more than the tiniest amount, tried apple puree, sandwiches, tasty mix (even with molasses eek!) and they hate the smell of it and leave their feeds with it in. No chance of getting anywhere near the recommended amount, 3 months on
		
Click to expand...

I feed Forage plus as it really suits my ponies

I feed in a small amount of soaked grassnuts (a little handful per feed) and split the ration into 3 feeds a day. The nuts are the consistency of wet breadcrumbs if that makes sense. I mix the minerals into the nuts immediately before feeding and feed in a wide shallow bowl. grub vanishes quickly and plates are licked clean (they don't get to eat anything very exciting though.....)
ETA - mix VERY well - like making a cake


----------

