Some bull pics

[smnherf]

The Reload calf needs to be on about a 56 or 58 MCal diet. Then he would look really good. Probably good enough to take to some show and then sell him. Otherwise he is kind of the thinner bull in the pen. The rest of the bulls would be fat enough to grade choice though.

Brian

 

[KNERSIE]

The Reload calf needs to be on about a 56 or 58 MCal diet. Then he would look really good. Probably good enough to take to some show and then sell him. Otherwise he is kind of the thinner bull in the pen. The rest of the bulls would be fat enough to grade choice though.

Brian

How did he convert? Typically bulls of that type convert really well in a feedlot situation. I agree that I would rather have the deeper soggier M326 calves. At the moment I have a bull that could pass as a twin of the reload bull on test as well as one that is closer to the type of the M326 calves. Three weeks into test the Reload type has a slight edge on the other calf, but its still too early to tell.

I am usually avery finicky when it coms to shoulder structure, but I can't honestly say that the M326 calves in this thread's shoulders bother me. The Reload calf on the other hand looks like he might be a touch open shouldered if I have to try and find shoulder faults. His neck extension would make him always catch your eye in the showring.

 

[JHH]

As I scrolled down through the pics and reached the last one, I said, "dang a M326 with a frontend and shoulder I like" then scrolled down a little farther, Reload, oh well. Really like the butt on that 922 calf.

You say with a frontend and shoulder you like. Can you explain it better to someone who doesnt have a good enough eye to catch it. I like the 922 calf but if I went to look I bet I would pick a different one.
I would probably stay away from the reload calf knowing the B.W. issues a friend of mine had with one.

 

[smnherf]

The Reload calf needs to be on about a 56 or 58 MCal diet. Then he would look really good. Probably good enough to take to some show and then sell him. Otherwise he is kind of the thinner bull in the pen. The rest of the bulls would be fat enough to grade choice though.

Brian

How did he convert? Typically bulls of that type convert really well in a feedlot situation. I agree that I would rather have the deeper soggier M326 calves. At the moment I have a bull that could pass as a twin of the reload bull on test as well as one that is closer to the type of the M326 calves. Three weeks into test the Reload type has a slight edge on the other calf, but its still too early to tell.

I am usually avery finicky when it coms to shoulder structure, but I can't honestly say that the M326 calves in this thread's shoulders bother me. The Reload calf on the other hand looks like he might be a touch open shouldered if I have to try and find shoulder faults. His neck extension would make him always catch your eye in the showring.

The Reload calf was the top conversion bull of the 53 on test. He converted 4.96 while the 952 converted 5.59, the 919 converted 5.74 and the 922 converted 6.05 on a high roughage ration. They were all in the top 9 for ADG.

Some of the differences we are seeing on these bull is the difference in maturity. The Reload is a much later maturing bull that is going to continue to grow and grow. The two M326s are a little earlier maturing but are certainly going to be big enough. Part of that is the cows they are out of. Your right about the openess of the shoulder. He is borderline on that for my tastes. My M326 bulls tend to grow into the little extra leather that they have right now. It doesn't concern me at all. I will take the fleshing ability of them any day. The female mates to a bull like the Reload would concern me for fleshing ability on my place at least.

Brian

 

[WichitaLineMan]

>>on a high roughage ration.<<

What exactly was the ration? The term "a high roughage ration" to me is just a buzz word you see from every producer today. Means absolutely nothing!

 

[smnherf]

>>on a high roughage ration.<<

What exactly was the ration? The term "a high roughage ration" to me is just a buzz word you see from every producer today. Means absolutely nothing!

Well to some of us it does mean something. The final month of the 72 day test after a 30 day warmup they were fed

1 lb supplement
4.54 lbs corn
4.54 lbs hay
4.54 lbs haylage
12.87 lb silage

I beleive it was supposed to be about a 48 Mcal ration.

Brian

 

[WichitaLineMan]

>>1 lb supplement<<

what did this contain?

 

[smnherf]

>>1 lb supplement<<

what did this contain?

Well, I dont' have a feed tag for it. But I beleive that it contained minerals, some protein source and an ionophore.

 

[rocket2222]

You say with a frontend and shoulder you like. Can you explain it better to someone who doesnt have a good enough eye to catch it. I like the 922 calf but if I went to look I bet I would pick a different one.
I would probably stay away from the reload calf knowing the B.W. issues a friend of mine had with one.

Here's what a structurally correct shoulder should look like if you strip away the meat, also shows what a straight one looks like, usually not to hard to see the front point of the shoulder. You will also notice how the neck and head set, it's sometimes a little harder to see or judge were the natural set is, but after you look at few pictures you'll get a feel for what looks natural and what's false, even in the showy type pics. Neck belongs on the shoulder not on the chest. I did these pretty quickly last night so they may be a little off, but you'll get the drift. Be your own judge.

These are much better, more correct.

And one that's right on the money.

 

[JHH]

But isnt that also on the edge of being post legged?

 

[KNERSIE]

But isnt that also on the edge of being post legged?

Typically sickle hocks goes with too much set in the shoulders and posty legs goes with straight shoulders.

Some of the bulls are certainly a TOUCH straighter than ideal, but unless it causes the bull to carry his head low I feel its still well within the accepted parameters unless the bull is too upright in the rear as well.

Not looking to argue with Paul, but if i added the lines it probably would have look slightly different, you also have to consider the angle from the elbow to the point of shoulder.

 

[rocket2222]

Typically sickle hocks goes with too much set in the shoulders and posty legs goes with straight shoulders.

Some of the bulls are certainly a TOUCH straighter than ideal, but unless it causes the bull to carry his head low I feel its still well within the accepted parameters unless the bull is too upright in the rear as well.

Not looking to argue with Paul, but if i added the lines it probably would have look slightly different, you also have to consider the angle from the elbow to the point of shoulder.

No argument from me, I said they're a little off, if you had the program I have to alter pics, you wouldn't have bothered changing them either. ;-) I actually posted these last night, then deleted the post with the idea of changing the lines. Then the thought of changing them, then re-uploading the pics on my connection, and said heck with it. It wouldn't have changed much anyways, and who really cares. There's not a whole lot of reg. breeders who care, and even fewer commercial breeders who care, his calves work when fed in a feed lot and add carcass quality to most, in today's economy and era where carcass qualities the big deal, he along with his sons are the hot ticket. They're increasing semen sales, a good thing for Herefords in general. I probably should be using him or one of his sons.

 

[WichitaLineMan]

Typically sickle hocks goes with too much set in the shoulders and posty legs goes with straight shoulders.

Some of the bulls are certainly a TOUCH straighter than ideal, but unless it causes the bull to carry his head low I feel its still well within the accepted parameters unless the bull is too upright in the rear as well.

Not looking to argue with Paul, but if i added the lines it probably would have look slightly different, you also have to consider the angle from the elbow to the point of shoulder.

No argument from me, I said they're a little off, if you had the program I have to alter pics, you wouldn't have bothered changing them either. ;-) I actually posted these last night, then deleted the post with the idea of changing the lines. Then the thought of changing them, then re-uploading the pics on my connection, and said heck with it. It wouldn't have changed much anyways, and who really cares. There's not a whole lot of reg. breeders who care, and even fewer commercial breeders who care, his calves work when fed in a feed lot and add carcass quality to most, in today's economy and era where carcass qualities the big deal, he along with his sons are the hot ticket. They're increasing semen sales, a good thing for Herefords in general. I probably should be using him or one of his sons.

Wow, bad day at the office?

 

[Herefords.US]

Paul, I appreciate your efforts. Your line drawing might not be perfect, but the overall demonstration was educational. I know I learned from it.

George

 

[smnherf]

You also need to be carefull when analysing pictures and take into consideration the camera angle, shadows and how the bull is standing. A bull leaning one way or the other could affect the shoulder angle appearance. Best analysis can be doe when the bull is on the move.