ALX.
Well-known member
dun":1c8tsqu6 said:
However in the posters area, there may be a relatively definitive choice to make money.( Assuming that is the goal ).
better breed??
- Thread starter gerardplauche
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
However in the posters area, there may be a relatively definitive choice to make money.( Assuming that is the goal ).
greenwillowhereford II
Well-known member
Frankie is right in saying that there is so much variation within breeds that you can't make a blanket statement about which will grow better.
Case in point: A friend purchased one of my former herd bulls, a polled Hereford, FGR Nevin Hudson N4. This friend, through the death of his wife's parents, had inherited a herd of about 30 purebred Charolais. In their case, their bull was several years old, but still in good shape, and threw good calves. However, they had to pull a few every year, and with replacement heifers being kept back, needed another bull. They went with this Hereford for a few reasons: Calving ease-he had a 70# actual BW, and we'd never pulled a calf sired by him. EPD was below breed average for that matter. My friend had always liked Herefords, and figured the temperament would fit in well with his cattle. They also knew through me of the bulls actual performance-740# weaning weight at 188 days on grass and milk only. Adjusted 205 was 804#.
When the next calf crop rolled around, there were two carryovers from the Charolais bull that were born a month before the group sired by the Hereford. When they sold at about 5-6 months old, the tan baldies had overtaken the straight Charolais in size and weight. The bonus was that calving trouble even in first time heifers was almost completely eliminated.
I know that heterosis has to be considered....but Mike, if the Herf was much of a dud at growth, the heterosis couldn't have made up the difference.
I've seldom seen a feed test where the herfs weren't the best convertors, as they were in the Kansas feedlot GOP (Genetic Outreach Program) the CSU studies, or most recently in the Harris Ranch study underway.
Case in point: A friend purchased one of my former herd bulls, a polled Hereford, FGR Nevin Hudson N4. This friend, through the death of his wife's parents, had inherited a herd of about 30 purebred Charolais. In their case, their bull was several years old, but still in good shape, and threw good calves. However, they had to pull a few every year, and with replacement heifers being kept back, needed another bull. They went with this Hereford for a few reasons: Calving ease-he had a 70# actual BW, and we'd never pulled a calf sired by him. EPD was below breed average for that matter. My friend had always liked Herefords, and figured the temperament would fit in well with his cattle. They also knew through me of the bulls actual performance-740# weaning weight at 188 days on grass and milk only. Adjusted 205 was 804#.
When the next calf crop rolled around, there were two carryovers from the Charolais bull that were born a month before the group sired by the Hereford. When they sold at about 5-6 months old, the tan baldies had overtaken the straight Charolais in size and weight. The bonus was that calving trouble even in first time heifers was almost completely eliminated.
I know that heterosis has to be considered....but Mike, if the Herf was much of a dud at growth, the heterosis couldn't have made up the difference.
I've seldom seen a feed test where the herfs weren't the best convertors, as they were in the Kansas feedlot GOP (Genetic Outreach Program) the CSU studies, or most recently in the Harris Ranch study underway.
backhoeboogie
Well-known member
VanC":c7n6vdps said:
Van, I question the climate and time of year for which studies are performed. Carencro, Louisiana is south of Opelousas. If I had to choose between those two breeds, climate would dictate my choice.
backhoeboogie
Well-known member
gerardplauche":1395e9dj said:
Brangus, beefmaster or something with bos indicus influence for the climate you are living in. What are you going to do with these cattle? Are you breeding commercial cattle? If you go with bos indicus influenced breeds and sell locally, you'll probably take a little a hit on steers but you'll get a bonus for heifers. Those are my "thoughts". You need to seek input from someone who raises cattle in your climate. If you are set on angus, breed to calve in the fall.
OP
OP
gerardplauche
Well-known member
I have messed with both a little, more blacks than whites. I see that the angus are bringing higher price/lb than charolais, but the charolais calves are bigger. Maybe it will come out even at the end. I was really thinking about if the charolais calves' growth rate is significantly higher than the angus, I might be able to benefit more from the charolais... :shock:
Frankie":2n8o49gg said:
What about the Angus bull that only weighed 1170 out of the same sire that weighed 1550? Calves out of the same sire can vary 400 lbs at a year of age? So what does that say about Angus?
Jovid":1zuwrs4w said:
Bulls all have a momma. She has a bit of influence, too. And they can be managed differently which will affect their weights. Or they can get sick. Or maybe they don't like the feeding environment.
novatech
Well-known member
Someone has probably already said this. I'm not going to read 3 pages to find out.gerardplauche":jmi9l6bz said:
Either has the potential of being the best. It only depends on the genetics of the particular animal. The one that will normally do the best is a cross between the two.
Caustic Burno
Well-known member
novatech":1wn31m9k said:
Correct a 2 way cross will average 10% heavier at weaning with a three way at almost 20 %http://www2.dpi.qld.gov.au/beef/2182.html
ALX.
Well-known member
Caustic Burno":neyvd4rp said:
Now Burno creation , should that not say cattlemen ( or wimmin ) at the bottom of your post? And thanks for poviding a credible link to back up what you post.
Edit - Too quick on the draw sometimes, good to see your posting again CB, you've taught me a lot, and all the best in the New year. Sorry folks. AngusLimoX
The bottom line in all phases of beef production is getting the most amout of product-efficiently. I feel that performance is where it starts. Less time to weight and finish means less time on feed. An early maturing animal will finish faster when on full feed,will also have a smaller amount of end product. Time from birth to consumer is also a question on these poorer performing cattle. A faster growing animal will provide a greater amount of product in a shorter amount of time from birth to consumer. Quality of product is another concern. High performing cattle can and do produce quality end product.
So I quess the question I have is which is the more efficient?
I personally feel the best of both worlds is what I try to produce. High performance cattle that mature optimally(not early-not late) and provide a quantity of product with quality.
I do it with Chiangus cattle-but it can be done with several breeds.
So I quess the question I have is which is the more efficient?
I personally feel the best of both worlds is what I try to produce. High performance cattle that mature optimally(not early-not late) and provide a quantity of product with quality.
I do it with Chiangus cattle-but it can be done with several breeds.
