Angus In Texas
Well-known member
Does anyone know anything about the new bull Riverbend just added to their herd. His name is Sinclair Rito Legacy 3R9. He is a son of R R Rito 707 which is a bull born in 1967 and is out of the Ideal 4465 cow.
Sinclair Rito Legacy
- Thread starter Angus In Texas
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
Angus In Texas
Well-known member
What does his growth curve look like considering his EPD's are pretty weak?
Angus In Texas
Well-known member
Both
Angus In Texas
Well-known member
That does concern me some...... I am not breeding anything to him I am just curious to know if anyone else has any information on him other than just the EPD's. I'm just wondering what kind of potential Riverbend see's in him to put him to work in their herd.
Angus In Texas":1ff09v7w said:
No, I had never heard of him until your post. We'll see how he works out for Riverbend and Badlands. When they get his EPD accuracies up, we'll take another look. He's certainly an outcross bull in my area.
His SC EPd are based on his own plus only 2 sons performance.
I think it will come up, but only to around -.30 or so as a guess. He measured 44 cm in December.
It doesn't worry me.
SC isn't linked as much to fertility as people think it is.
When I saw him last Summer, he had just bred around 60 cows naturally.
I don't consider his numbers low. If you do, then don't bother to use him, you won't be happy.
;-)
Most people won't use him because of his numbers. That is too bad.
His is a 5.5 frame bull I suppose, weighs a touch under 2200 pounds.
http://www.riverbendranch.us/fotm.html
Badlands
I think it will come up, but only to around -.30 or so as a guess. He measured 44 cm in December.
It doesn't worry me.
SC isn't linked as much to fertility as people think it is.
When I saw him last Summer, he had just bred around 60 cows naturally.
I don't consider his numbers low. If you do, then don't bother to use him, you won't be happy.
;-)
Most people won't use him because of his numbers. That is too bad.
His is a 5.5 frame bull I suppose, weighs a touch under 2200 pounds.
http://www.riverbendranch.us/fotm.html
Badlands
Angus In Texas
Well-known member
Thanks for the link Badlands. I just consider his numbers low compared to some of the newer age breeding that has inflated those YW to well over 100.
Looks good badlands. How do you compare him to Sinclair Memento? Which do you consider the better bull. Really like the looks of him and Memento. I've always had mixed feelings on the udder of the mother. I would like to see her when she is milking instead of a dry cow. Udder just has a strange look to me.
As a whole, I believe that a 65 yearling epd Angus bull has more usefulness in the western US than a 100 YW Angus. He should leave more useful daughters and be a lot more practical for the commercial man.
I recommend that people look at his type to determine his worth rather than his numbers. His type tells me that Angus breeders need to use him hard.
As a whole, I believe that a 65 yearling epd Angus bull has more usefulness in the western US than a 100 YW Angus. He should leave more useful daughters and be a lot more practical for the commercial man.
I recommend that people look at his type to determine his worth rather than his numbers. His type tells me that Angus breeders need to use him hard.
She looks odd in the udder, but that picture was taken after 5 or 6 years of flushing and not raising calves. She is recorded as raising 1 calf, but she actually raised another calf a few years later.
The pictures I have seen of her daughter's udders were just fine.
The 4 daughters of hers that I saw were just fine. Those daughters would have been 5, 4, and 3 years old. Not one of them had what I would consider even a medium size teat, but not tiny teats, either. None were long. Attachment looked fine, not completely flat into the flank, but sure not cut up, either. Maybe the way to say it is that everything is toward the right side of good. I saw nothing in those daughters that made me think I need to "protect" her udder.
Badlands
The pictures I have seen of her daughter's udders were just fine.
The 4 daughters of hers that I saw were just fine. Those daughters would have been 5, 4, and 3 years old. Not one of them had what I would consider even a medium size teat, but not tiny teats, either. None were long. Attachment looked fine, not completely flat into the flank, but sure not cut up, either. Maybe the way to say it is that everything is toward the right side of good. I saw nothing in those daughters that made me think I need to "protect" her udder.
Badlands
Just talked with a Rep about this bull,,, A frame 5.5 not a chance the rep said the bull would be a lucky 4.5 frame .... Can I repeat that a 4.5 frame!! Also he blows away the 2200 lbs estimated he is arround 2400 lbs..
Sincliar, only sold 2 bulls last year out of him because that is all they had. Also as far as they knew no data had been reported as a Sc measurement, REA measurement, to the AAA .. the numbers express are from 707 and the 4465 cow put together... dealing with EPDS from the 60's..
I feel the reason Riverbend got this bull is to put more maternal genetics back into the 1407 and New design cattle... Riverbend is known as a bull producer.. also they have a pretty good handle on the performance side of angus!
I know Riverbend has been looking for a bull that has perfect feet and structure through the legs and hips to help with the 1407 genetics they have in place..
I feel this bull has a ton of obsticles to overcome to change the breed. First the EPD's.. Second his scrotal sac does not hang it is up tight and thus known as a hard breeder, third performance mated.. This bull is going to have to be mated to a high performance animal to get a mid range angus animal.. Ideal 4465 is well over 2200 lbs as a cow.. and this calf is only a 4.5 frame.. But the same will be said of EXT.. he was a short 5 frame and outproduced his frame all the time!!
Sincliar, only sold 2 bulls last year out of him because that is all they had. Also as far as they knew no data had been reported as a Sc measurement, REA measurement, to the AAA .. the numbers express are from 707 and the 4465 cow put together... dealing with EPDS from the 60's..
I feel the reason Riverbend got this bull is to put more maternal genetics back into the 1407 and New design cattle... Riverbend is known as a bull producer.. also they have a pretty good handle on the performance side of angus!
I know Riverbend has been looking for a bull that has perfect feet and structure through the legs and hips to help with the 1407 genetics they have in place..
I feel this bull has a ton of obsticles to overcome to change the breed. First the EPD's.. Second his scrotal sac does not hang it is up tight and thus known as a hard breeder, third performance mated.. This bull is going to have to be mated to a high performance animal to get a mid range angus animal.. Ideal 4465 is well over 2200 lbs as a cow.. and this calf is only a 4.5 frame.. But the same will be said of EXT.. he was a short 5 frame and outproduced his frame all the time!!
Badlands":eygsqyr2 said:
Dusty":3175sp1n said:
His SC and REA EPDs aren't Interims (I). Someone has reported some data to get "real" EPDs in those areas. As you can see at the link, two calves have been ultrasounded for carcass qualities.
http://www.angus.org/common/epd_ped_dtl ... 424A5F4D44
What rep? A breed rep? Most of them wouldn't know a good bull if he knocked them over the fence.
I put the bull a touch under 5 by my estimate. He measured 5.5, but I do think that is a stretch. He was weighed at 2205(over, not under, my mistake, running from memory) in December, but has put on some weight since. Like I said, he is very dense.
He's is not under 4.5.
I saw no problems with his scrotum like you mentioned. I saw him on the 12th of July if my memory serves me correctly(see above ;-) ), give or take a day or two. It was around 85 degrees and foggy. I never saw a deer, buffalo or elk yet with a pendulous scrotum, and they seem to get females pregnant just fine.
Badlands
I put the bull a touch under 5 by my estimate. He measured 5.5, but I do think that is a stretch. He was weighed at 2205(over, not under, my mistake, running from memory) in December, but has put on some weight since. Like I said, he is very dense.
He's is not under 4.5.
I saw no problems with his scrotum like you mentioned. I saw him on the 12th of July if my memory serves me correctly(see above ;-) ), give or take a day or two. It was around 85 degrees and foggy. I never saw a deer, buffalo or elk yet with a pendulous scrotum, and they seem to get females pregnant just fine.
Badlands
