Frame Score

[Stickney94]

Looking at AI sires for 2024. Trying to understand Frame Score vs actual measurements. One bull has a MFS (I assume mature frame score) of 4.9 with a mature height of 56 in. Another has a score of 5.2 and a mature height at 33 months of 54 in.

Does that make sense?

 

[Ky hills]

No doesn't make sense to me.
They would be too short to suit me anyway.
I've used bulls about like that and don't like the results at all.

 

[kenny thomas]

No doesn't make sense to me.
They would be too short to suit me anyway.
I've used bulls about like that and don't like the results at all.

I dont understand either but agree i wouldnt use them myself.

 

[simme]

Makes a fellow lose confidence in the data doesn't it? Looking at the spring 2024 ABS directory, Blue Collar is 56" mature with a 4.9 MFS. Hickok, Stellar and Full Force are 56" mature with a 5.0 MFS. Fireball is 56" mature with a 4.0 MFS. 4.0 MFS is 54.1" per FS chart. Only 1.9" off there!

Refresh is 56" mature with MFS listed as not available. Sustain is listed as 56"mature and N/A MFS, but had a yearling frame score of 6.2. When they list a mature height, but N/A MFS - did they lose their chart? Seems like MFS should be available if they have mature height.

Official BIF frame score chart has a 56" mature bull at slightly over 5 FS. So pretty close except for that 56" 4.0 FS.

A bull with a 54" height at 33 months calculates out to a FS of 4.3 according to BIF chart and my Excel interpolation. Instead of 5.2 as listed. A 33 month bull with a 5.2 FS would need to be 55.6". Wonder if the rest of the performance data is as loose as these seem to be. Maybe ask the rep to explain.

While looking at the data, I noticed that the Huckleberry bull (angus) shows a mature weight of 3230# on a 5.3 frame. Anyone ever lay eyes on an angus bull that size?

 

[anewcomer]

Look up the Missouri frame score chart. See if that helps.

 

[anewcomer]

simme just did that. Still some discrepancies!

 

[Travlr]

When I googled MFS I got this: Cattle suffering from a form of Marfan syndrome (MFS) were described to have aortic dilatation and aneurysm together with ocular abnormalities and...

The numbers in the original post don't make sense to me.

 

[Ky hills]

Makes a fellow lose confidence in the data doesn't it? Looking at the spring 2024 ABS directory, Blue Collar is 56" mature with a 4.9 MFS. Hickok, Stellar and Full Force are 56" mature with a 5.0 MFS. Fireball is 56" mature with a 4.0 MFS. 4.0 MFS is 54.1" per FS chart. Only 1.9" off there!

Refresh is 56" mature with MFS listed as not available. Sustain is listed as 56"mature and N/A MFS, but had a yearling frame score of 6.2. When they list a mature height, but N/A MFS - did they lose their chart? Seems like MFS should be available if they have mature height.

Official BIF frame score chart has a 56" mature bull at slightly over 5 FS. So pretty close except for that 56" 4.0 FS.

A bull with a 54" height at 33 months calculates out to a FS of 4.3 according to BIF chart and my Excel interpolation. Instead of 5.2 as listed. A 33 month bull with a 5.2 FS would need to be 55.6". Wonder if the rest of the performance data is as loose as these seem to be. Maybe ask the rep to explain.

While looking at the data, I noticed that the Huckleberry bull (angus) shows a mature weight of 3230# on a 5.3 frame. Anyone ever lay eyes on an angus bull that size?

I've seen A Charolais bull that weighed around 3200, named The Great Houdini.
If I remember right his hip height was 71 inches. He was a huge animal that his owners could easily lead around they took him to display at a lot of Charolais sales that they consigned cattle to.
Another Charolais bull named Thomas Mr Joker he was over 3300 when he won the National Grand Champion bull. He was even taller than Houdini. I never saw him in person but from the pictures he had a lot of daylight under him and didn't appear to be as thick, no telling what his frame score was.

 

[Named'em Tamed'em]

My uncle tended Charolais bulls for the Wesson family, they were huge! But I was small then. Haha

 

[Ky hills]

My uncle tended Charolais bulls for the Wesson family, they were huge! But I was small then. Haha

Was that in Missouri? I remember a well known Charolais breeder by that name in Missouri. I would see their adds in the Charolais Journal.

 

[Named'em Tamed'em]

Was that in Missouri? I remember a well known Charolais breeder by that name in Missouri. I would see their adds in the Charolais Journal.

My uncle lived in NE Arkansas. Not sure if it was Wesson oil or Smith and Wesson, but they were real concerned about the bulls. He drove to Chicago from Arkansas with a load of straw to keep bulls cozy during a cold snap at a big show once.

 

[simme]

I've seen A Charolais bull that weighed around 3200, named The Great Houdini.
If I remember right his hip height was 71 inches. He was a huge animal that his owners could easily lead around they took him to display at a lot of Charolais sales that they consigned cattle to.
Another Charolais bull named Thomas Mr Joker he was over 3300 when he won the National Grand Champion bull. He was even taller than Houdini. I never saw him in person but from the pictures he had a lot of daylight under him and didn't appear to be as thick, no telling what his frame score was.

There are a few rare ones that pass the 3000# mark, but 3230# on a 5.3 frame angus does not seem likely. I suspect that data in the sire directory suffers from a lack of attention to detail - no checking/proofreading. Wonder if a 3230# 5.3 frame angus would be calving ease? Maybe he has tremendous length!

 

[Ky hills]

There are a few rare ones that pass the 3000# mark, but 3230# on a 5.3 frame angus does not seem likely. I suspect that data in the sire directory suffers from a lack of attention to detail - no checking/proofreading. Wonder if a 3230# 5.3 frame angus would be calving ease? Maybe he has tremendous length!

I agree, that weight doesn't seem likely for Angus bull of that frame.
I would think 2500 would be an exaggeration even for an extremely well fed Angus bull at 5.3 frame. To me 2300 would be about tops for that frame.
If recall correctly the Angus bull CC&7 had a massive mature weight (but not as much as the 3200 lb bull in question)in comparison to most other mainstream bulls but he was said to have been 61 inches at the hip and listed as a frame 7.

 

[Ebenezer]

There are a few rare ones that pass the 3000# mark, but 3230# on a 5.3 frame angus does not seem likely. I suspect that data in the sire directory suffers from a lack of attention to detail - no checking/proofreading. Wonder if a 3230# 5.3 frame angus would be calving ease? Maybe he has tremendous length!

Like commercial tom turkeys, his weight would only allow him to be used AI, most likely. I don't need that. Some of the Pinebank bulls had that type data - similar but not exact.

 

[Travlr]

I agree, that weight doesn't seem likely for Angus bull of that frame.
I would think 2500 would be an exaggeration even for an extremely well fed Angus bull at 5.3 frame. To me 2300 would be about tops for that frame.
If recall correctly the Angus bull CC&7 had a massive mature weight (but not as much as the 3200 lb bull in question)in comparison to most other mainstream bulls but he was said to have been 61 inches at the hip and listed as a frame 7.

I saw a beautiful Angus bull pass through the sale ring in the St. Onge, SD auction barn, that weighed over 2500. He'd been used for AI and probably the best conformation Angus I'd ever seen up close and personal.

The only bigger bulls I've seen were Santa Gertrudis at Peterson Farms in Arkansas. Those bulls were massive.

 

[Stickney94]

I appreciate all the replies. Angus sires have gotten "moderate" (or short, haha). It's interesting looking at the measurements and the epds and where those contradict.

 

[Chuckie]

Looking at AI sires for 2024. Trying to understand Frame Score vs actual measurements. One bull has a MFS (I assume mature frame score) of 4.9 with a mature height of 56 in. Another has a score of 5.2 and a mature height at 33 months of 54 in.

Does that make sense?

No it does not. I think so many people want small cattle that they don't list the large framed cattle as what they are. I personally like the larger frame calves as they sell better here for me.

 

[gizmom]

I quit doing frame scores just had too much variance in actual frame score on paper when cattle would be like peas in a pod. I could never figure it out we tried to measure each one the same way but never seemed to get consistent. I don't do foot score either just cull for bad feet. If we measured everything the association wants us to measure we would never get the cow work finished.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

I quit doing frame scores just had too much variance in actual frame score on paper when cattle would be like peas in a pod. I could never figure it out we tried to measure each one the same way but never seemed to get consistent. I don't do foot score either just cull for bad feet. If we measured everything the association wants us to measure we would never get the cow work finished.

I marked inches on one of the pipes of my work chute. Definitely not the most accurate, but gives ballpark height for our ASA requests.
Back 20 years ago, nothing went without getting tape measured - frame score was everything!!! I don't foot score either - cut their throat and it doesn't make any difference what their foot looks like.

 

[greybeard]

To the Gulag with you!
Vere are your papers? You must show us your papers! Ve have vays of making you show us your papers..