Your defintion of moderate frame ?

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

I don't think anyone is getting Knersie's point:
"WHO says a frame 4.5 cow in BCS of 5 - will weigh 1150#"
Under the old extension "finish weight" type data, that may have been true.
But, under todays modern moderate frame 4.5 can easily be 1400# (or more!) if she has the depth & thickness we are looking for.

 

[KNERSIE]

I don't think anyone is getting Knersie's point:
"WHO says a frame 4.5 cow in BCS of 5 - will weigh 1150#"
Under the old extension "finish weight" type data, that may have been true.
But, under todays modern moderate frame 4.5 can easily be 1400# (or more!) if she has the depth & thickness we are looking for.

Exactly! As long as you avoid extremes on either end of the spectrum framescore need not even be mentioned when easy doers (or grass genetics) are discussed, type is far more important.

You can fatten any type with enough feed, but you can't feed an animal into a certain type!

 

[TexasBred]

I don't think anyone is getting Knersie's point:
"WHO says a frame 4.5 cow in BCS of 5 - will weigh 1150#"
Under the old extension "finish weight" type data, that may have been true.
But, under todays modern moderate frame 4.5 can easily be 1400# (or more!) if she has the depth & thickness we are looking for.

So frame is just that....frame....BCS is everything wrapped around it.

 

[KNERSIE]

I don't think anyone is getting Knersie's point:
"WHO says a frame 4.5 cow in BCS of 5 - will weigh 1150#"
Under the old extension "finish weight" type data, that may have been true.
But, under todays modern moderate frame 4.5 can easily be 1400# (or more!) if she has the depth & thickness we are looking for.

So frame is just that....frame....BCS is everything wrapped around it.

Not quite.

Framescore is just an expression of hip height

The important part of "frame" isn't measured in inches off the ground, cattle is 3 dimensional, not simply two dimensional as most grass fed genetics gurus want to make it out to be.

 

[Brandonm22]

So frame is just that....frame....BCS is everything wrapped around it.

BCS does not tell us anything about type, thickness, or muscling. All BCS is is a measure of stored body condition. You can always starve "easy fleshing" cattle into a 3, 2, or 1 BCS score and in enough time in a feedlot most "hard doers" can become fat cattle

 

[Dylan Biggs]

Let's try again.....

...and she weighs about 1150 lbs (what a frame 4.5 cow should weigh in BCS 5 condition)

Says who?

My guess is, http://www.thejudgingconnection.com/pdfs/Frame_Score_and_Weight_in_Cattle.pdf.

If ones reads the second paragraph though it says "Values in the chart represent averages of thousands of cattle, but individual animals may vary.' :tiphat:

 

[TexasBred]

So frame is just that....frame....BCS is everything wrapped around it.

BCS does not tell us anything about type, thickness, or muscling. All BCS is is a measure of stored body condition. You can always starve "easy fleshing" cattle into a 3, 2, or 1 BCS score and in enough time in a feedlot most "hard doers" can become fat cattle

Thus it is what's over the frame...or lack of it..whether it be muscle or fat.

 

[novatech]

I don't think anyone is getting Knersie's point:
"WHO says a frame 4.5 cow in BCS of 5 - will weigh 1150#"
Under the old extension "finish weight" type data, that may have been true.
But, under today's modern moderate frame 4.5 can easily be 1400# (or more!) if she has the depth & thickness we are looking for.

I have read more than once, in more than one article, that is what they are expected to be at a certain age. I am not agreeing with it by any means quite the contrary. Frame score should be hip height only but this is not what a bunch of others think.
http://animalscience.ucdavis.edu/animal ... Manual.pdf
On the site listed they state what the expected weight will be and it is calculated on a BCS of 5. Page 11. Over all a very good article by the way. (Sorry, it would not let me cut and paste)
It was written within the last 5 years.
There are different TYPES of cattle within every breed. I think it is totally imposible to make blanket assumptions the way they are. Maybe they are talking about the average cattle you see while driving down the road. I have certainly seen many cows, calves and bulls on this board to throw those assumptions out the window.

 

[JHH]

Looks like you need some cowsense to weed out the bullshi$

 

[Dylan Biggs]

Not quite.

Framescore is just an expression of hip height

The important part of "frame" isn't measured in inches off the ground, cattle is 3 dimensional, not simply two dimensional as most grass fed genetics gurus want to make it out to be.

Knersie, please elaborate.

 

[KNERSIE]

Not quite.

Framescore is just an expression of hip height

The important part of "frame" isn't measured in inches off the ground, cattle is 3 dimensional, not simply two dimensional as most grass fed genetics gurus want to make it out to be.

Knersie, please elaborate.

Most grass fed gurus claim you can only have a grass animal if it is frame 2-3.5 and everything 4 or over is simply too big. All of this sound good, but you immediately confine your animals to a niche market as most conventional markets wants a animal where they can add more value between buying and finishing, ie put more pounds on by converting relatively cheap energy (grain) in more expensive protein (meat).

The truth is you can have an efficient grass animal in a frame 4-6 if its the right type.

To have the right type (regardless of frame size) the width of frame is probably more important than the height of frame, hence my comment that cattle is 3 dimensional and not 2 dimensional. Without the width of frame you simply don't have the fleshing ability to put muscle on on low quality grass, you also don't have the capacity for proper lung function through the heartgirth making for an animal that can travel long distances to food and water, you also won't have enough capacity through the midsection to carry a calf and still have enough rumen capacity to eat enough slow digesting, low quality grass to sustain the cow and pregnancy through tough times or to still raise a decent calf in a drought where the quantity of roughage may still be there, but the quality is lacking or in an even worse scenario where the only forage left is whatever two or three year old straw you could source since there is no hay or other feed to be found like often happens in long term droughts.

As a side thought...

I have seen taller animals (frame 6+) be very efficient converters of low quality forage and be as easy fleshing as shorter animals, but more often than not those tall easy doers shortchange their calf in tougher times making the shorter cow a more efficient calf raiser. Off course there are exceptions to the rule, but its simply my observation. From experience the really short cows often also lack that capacity, especially in late term pregnancy, to do well when grass quality is poor.

In the end it all boils down to if you stick to the middle of the road you're less likely to end up in the ditch.

 

[Idaman]

In the end it all boils down to if you stick to the middle of the road you're less likely to end up in the ditch.

On a road built on a very steep hillside when it gets slick you had better hang to the higher bank from the beginning. If you don't and slide the other way you'll never make it back to the higher bank

 

[KNERSIE]

In the end it all boils down to if you stick to the middle of the road you're less likely to end up in the ditch.

On a road built on a very steep hillside when it gets slick you had better hang to the higher bank from the beginning. If you don't and slide the other way you'll never make it back to the higher bank

True, more so when linebreeding!

 

[Dylan Biggs]

Most grass fed gurus claim you can only have a grass animal if it is frame 2-3.5 and everything 4 or over is simply too big. All of this sound good, but you immediately confine your animals to a niche market as most conventional markets wants a animal where they can add more value between buying and finishing, ie put more pounds on by converting relatively cheap energy (grain) in more expensive protein (meat).

The truth is you can have an efficient grass animal in a frame 4-6 if its the right type.

Knersie, we have been grass finishing and killing cattle for our branded beef wholesale and direct to consumer sales for the last 16 years and I agree with you. When you do the math to cut yield you quickly find carcass weight matters. After all our experimenting our preference from a cowherd standpoint in our environment and with our management is frame 4-5 and from a finishing stand point 4-6 works. Like you say, type in our experience is more crucial then frame score.

The last research I did, 2 years ago, of grass finished demographics in North America indicated that the vast majority of cattle harvested off grass are killed at over 20 months of age. This in our experience reinforces the need for cattle with a growth curve that will capitalize the time economically. I believe the niche marketers who are sharp with the pencil will conclude that carcass weight is an essential component of the margin equation and that the appetite for frame 2 and 3 cattle will wane, if their ever was one.
To be fair there may be a specialized application for 2 and 3 if rapid frame score reduction is the goal.

Middle of the road, and if you are going err on the side of safety a little to the uphill side like Idaman intimated is the safer side to err on. :tiphat: