Thoughts on these Aubrac bulls?

[WalnutCrest]

Just curious what other eyes see when they see these four different bulls.

Bull 1 (approx. 2yrs):

Bull 2 (approx. 2yrs):

Bull 3 (approx. 4yrs):

Bull 4 (approx. 11yrs):

Thoughts?

 

[Backbone Ranch]

Bull 4 looks a bit too heavy in his front end compared to his back half. That could just be due to his age.
I would like to see a broadside of bull 2, but he has a very nice back end.
Bull 3 looks quite nice.
Bull 1 has a lot of length and prime cuts.
In my opinion, that is a very good selection of bulls.

 

[Aaron]

3, 1, 2, 4

 

[WalnutCrest]

Just edited to add approx. ages of these bulls.

 

[glacierridge]

Two looks like a pied.
I also would like to see a side shot

 

[lithuanian farmer]

I like second bull the most, but all others are really nice bulls.
It's typical for Aubracs to have better developed front part.

 

[WalnutCrest]

Two looks like a pied.

Nope. Not a pied. I think you're seeing the affects of lighting and some darker pigment on his rump.

I also would like to see a side shot

See below...

<snip> It's typical for Aubracs to have better developed front part.

Aubracs do have huge REAs (a friend just got 12+ inch ribeyes out of two 8mo old steers he processed) ... but ... they also have lovely width, too.

********************************

Bull #2 -- second picture

 

[glacierridge]

I know its not a pied...
Just saying he looks like one.
His structure besides his color.

I like the second bull the most too.

 

[3waycross]

3,4,1,2

 

[KNERSIE]

3,4,1,2

Exactly as I would have placed them, 2 is a cull.

 

[OakCreekRanch]

Agree with 3waycross and KNERSIE.

 

[Rahe Family Belties]

Considering the history and purpose of the breed as a terminal, muscular breed, I would select them 2-1-4-3

The # 2 bull excels in muscling, frame and growth. (Appears)
# 1 follows the pattern of #2. He is growthy and level in construction.
#4 is not as correct as #1. I love his longevity, length and masculinity
#3 appears to be the smallest framed, least masculine and shortest bodied bull of the group.

As I understand the breed, what we call 'correct', 'heavy boned' and 'soggy' is not what is ideal within the breed.

I look forward to an Aubrac breeder's opinion.

 

[glacierridge]

Considering the history and purpose of the breed as a terminal, muscular breed, I would select them 2-1-4-3

The # 2 bull excels in muscling, frame and growth. (Appears)
# 1 follows the pattern.
#4 is not as correct as #1. I love his longevity
#3 appears to be the least masculine and shortest bodied bull of the group.

This placing and reasoning fits my logic too

 

[3waycross]

Considering the history and purpose of the breed as a terminal, muscular breed, I would select them 2-1-4-3

Just a little counterpoint for you from my perspective
The # 2 bull excels in muscling, frame and growth. (Appears)
he is also pencil gutted and lacks capacity and could be double muscled, a weak back and very coarse shoulders and a topline like a pile of rocks. Like Knersie said he is a cull. At least in the United States
# 1 follows the pattern..
He is not terrible but i see him as slab sided lacking in capacity and depth and weak in his pasterns He for sure show little if any more "masculinity that 3 or 4. and my guess is he would be pretty late maturing. He like #2 is also cut much higher in the flank than I like to see in a bull in fact he(#2) is the posterboy for that.
#4 is not as correct as #1. I love his longevity.
I also "love" his tremendous depth and capacity, great masculinity and length of hip and outstanding feet and pasterns, and for his age a real nice topline.

#3 appears to be the least masculine and shortest bodied bull of the group.

I have to assume that you are refering to the fact that because his head is down and his forehead is facing away that you don't see a crest or curly hair on his forehead. On the plus side another example of length of muscle, great length of hip, tremendous capacity, and a topline like a pool table, As far as his length goes he is a good example of great depth making a bull look much shorter than he is..

 

[Taurus]

Gosh why so much hate on DM, 3waycross? Whats wrong with DM as terminal sire?

 

[3waycross]

Gosh why so much hate on DM, 3waycross?

Contribute something concrete to the discussion or crawl back in your hole! :tiphat: :bday:

 

[glacierridge]

I think it's a legitimate question.

 

[3waycross]

I think it's a legitimate question.

I'm sure you do.

FWIW it was not a contribution to the thread it was just a juevenile attempt to hijack it with an argument about nothing.

If I am wrong I will apologize but unless i miss my bet the Aubrac should not be doublemuscled.

 

[Taurus]

Gosh why so much hate on DM, 3waycross?

Contribute something concrete to the discussion or crawl back in your hole! :tiphat: :bday:

You go first :).....but then again doesn't you think that DM cattle makes a great terminal sire even if its a different market? You said he is a cull in United States please elaborate on that statement?

 

[glacierridge]

I think it's a legitimate question.

I'm sure you do.

This is the rudest I have ever been to anyone on here in my whole stay, but you are a jerk.
You are passively rude and mean to people that aren't in your inner circle and don't think the way you do.
I've noticed that you like to ride some folks on absolutely anything they say.

People can be successful in doing things differently.
Would be boring if we had to all raise the same thing and in the same way.

I think everyone on here has things to offer and things to learn.
And I mean everyone.
On both.