• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Orwigs Tubs

Help Support Ranchers.net:

rem_243

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
Location
The Dakotas
Does anyone use or have you used Orwig's tubs? Just wondering what you thought or think of them. http://newconceptnutrition.com/index.cfm Thanks
 

Justin

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,785
Reaction score
0
Location
NW South Dakota
i've been using them for several years with no complaints. i start putting them out around the first of Feb(i start calving the end of April) and keep them out until around the first of June. conception rates have improved since i've been using them. also, they seem to be a harder tub than some of the others which helps keep consumption in check.
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
0
Location
The Dark Side
Hardness of a tub is not necessarily a good thing. It can keep cattle from getting all the supplement they need when they require it most. Doesn't do a lot of good for their teeth, either.

Just sayin'.

Remember the NFDM program? You'd have thought they poured concrete in those tubs. :shock:
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
0
Location
The Dark Side
Justin said:
loomixguy said:
Hardness of a tub is not necessarily a good thing. It can keep cattle from getting all the supplement they need when they require it most. Doesn't do a lot of good for their teeth, either.
but at least they can't drink it :wink:

Drinking it is a good thing! :D

It's when they drink too much it can get costly. Some overconsumption can be laid on the dealer, but other overconsumption problems are a direct result of PPM, like not having water available for the cattle, or not having fed any mineral for the prior 6 months.

My customers also like not having to make a trip into town to get their supplement, and they like the fact that I move the troughs for them when they move the cows. Less trips to the chiropractor for them. :wink:

The fact that I'm $268/ton cheaper than my tub competition don't hurt, either! :D
 

littlejoe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
Montana, East Slope
loomixguy said:
Justin said:
loomixguy said:
Hardness of a tub is not necessarily a good thing. It can keep cattle from getting all the supplement they need when they require it most. Doesn't do a lot of good for their teeth, either.

Drinking it is a good thing! :D

It's when they drink too much it can get costly. Some overconsumption can be laid on the dealer, but other overconsumption problems are a direct result of PPM, like not having water available for the cattle, or not having fed any mineral for the prior 6 months.

My customers also like not having to make a trip into town to get their supplement, and they like the fact that I move the troughs for them when they move the cows. Less trips to the chiropractor for them. :wink:

The fact that I'm $268/ton cheaper than my tub competition don't hurt, either! :D


I like them both---tubs and liquid-----but it's got to be a special situation to justify using either----$$$

I refuse to feed any liquid in open troughs, I won't pay that much then let it get contaminated---and I got lots of lick tanks from yrs ago---was getting it laid in for $138 ton then.

This yr I've got a little set---24---of fine older black cows about 25 miles away----open water, good shelter and beaucoup grass--but looks like it's a little lacking.

I'm 'thrifty' (wife says 'cheap') but still like to experiment. Might try Moorman's 'roughage buster'----anybody got any input on that? tia.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
BlackCattleRancher said:
The fact that I'm $268/ton cheaper than my tub competition don't hurt, either! :D
but probably half of what you are delivering to them is water, so it better be half the cost

The water would be a filler just like filler in dry feed. As long as your protein percentage is the same as a dry feed it wouldn't make a difference.
If you had ten pounds of liquid or ten pounds of cubes and the protein was 30% on each you would be getting the same protein content. It does make you wonder what amount of freight is contributed to water. It costs the dealer to delivcer the extra water
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
0
Location
The Dark Side
BlackCattleRancher said:
The fact that I'm $268/ton cheaper than my tub competition don't hurt, either! :D
but probably half of what you are delivering to them is water, so it better be half the cost

If there was water added to LOOMIX, then why will it pump and flow at -40?

Mix 30 will damn sure freeze up in hoses, tanks, and valves.

Larrry is correct in that the contents must meet the analysis on the tag. Our product is patented, so each load must match up.

LOOMIX has a neutral pH, so no viruses, etc., can survive in it. A couple of sick cows will not contaminate the whole herd through the LOOMIX.

Roughage Buster is an excellent product. Don't forget to sign up for the 0% feeder finance offered through ADM if you go the RB route. Or if you go the LOOMIX route, for that matter.
 

Justin

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,785
Reaction score
0
Location
NW South Dakota
Loomix, IMO, is a good product. i've used it and was a dealer for several years. and the dealer you work with will make the difference.
 

littlejoe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
Montana, East Slope
loomixguy said:
BlackCattleRancher said:
The fact that I'm $268/ton cheaper than my tub competition don't hurt, either! :D
but probably half of what you are delivering to them is water, so it better be half the cost

If there was water added to LOOMIX, then why will it pump and flow at -40?

Mix 30 will damn sure freeze up in hoses, tanks, and valves.

Larrry is correct in that the contents must meet the analysis on the tag. Our product is patented, so each load must match up.

LOOMIX has a neutral pH, so no viruses, etc., can survive in it. A couple of sick cows will not contaminate the whole herd through the LOOMIX.

Roughage Buster is an excellent product. Don't forget to sign up for the 0% feeder finance offered through ADM if you go the RB route. Or if you go the LOOMIX route, for that matter.

One problem with tubs is that the colder it gets, when they could use more, the harder they get, and they get less.

I also consider manure, urine, rain, snow, and dirt contamination. And i got the lick tanks anyhow---if you want to see one really cratered, put it out where a grizzly bear can find it! I'll bet that was one dude that stuck to the sheets, once he went into hibernation~~

Paying to haul 'water' is an old tub sales pitch. If the 'goodies' are the same %, looks to me like the amount of 'filler' is the same. Do you think it's cheaper to haul a pound of solid tub 'filler' than a pound of liquid 'filler'?

If you want to see a tub salesman squirm--esp if he's whipped the 'water' deal on you---ask him what tubs use for 'filler'---ash and other junk will be hi on the list--if he even knows.

What--or who-- is ADM?
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
29,282
Reaction score
490
Location
NE WY at the foot of the Big Horn mountains
I've been curious about Roughage Buster for a long time now, so
I have some questions.

The way I understand it, it is made from all urea (NPN); is over 100% protein,
am I right? If so, how can it be more than 100% of anything? And from
the little I know, a little urea can be okay, but to depend totally on urea
for protein isn't good. In fact, nutritionists are now taking the urea out
of a product, discounting it totally when figuring crude protein.
For example, if a product is 30% protein, and 12% is from urea (NPN)
they figure the protein at 18% which is natural protein and give the urea
no value. Urea only lasts 3-4 hours after consumption and
then it's gone. So set me straight on this if you would, anyone...
 

littlejoe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
Montana, East Slope
Faster horses said:
I've been curious about Roughage Buster for a long time now, so
I have some questions.

The way I understand it, it is made from all urea (NPN); is over 100% protein,
am I right? If so, how can it be more than 100% of anything? And from
the little I know, a little urea can be okay, but to depend totally on urea
for protein isn't good. In fact, nutritionists are now taking the urea out
of a product, discounting it totally when figuring crude protein.
For example, if a product is 30% protein, and 12% is from urea (NPN)
they figure the protein at 18% which is natural protein and give the urea
no value. Urea only lasts 3-4 hours after consumption and
then it's gone. So set me straight on this if you would, anyone...

A neighbor used to sell roughage buster and always told me how good it works. Go figure. But---I also talked to a guy who used to sell it, and his veracity is about 100%. As opposed to my neighbor, who I'd put closer to 50%. 8) And the fact that second guy now sells competitors also says a lot---and he says RB works very well---IF you've got the proper consumption and IF they havn't changed formula. He likes it loose---if you've got 'wind vane' type mineral feeders or sheltered spot---says it's fine and will blow away.

Moormans wonder product is biuret----http://www.admani.com/canada/Beef/Biuret.htm

heres moormans promotion---which also shows me who adm is
https://service.admani.com/portal/page/portal/ADM_Alliance_Nutrition/Departments/Sales%20%20Marketing/Beef/ProductInfo/S9344E%20RoughageBuster.pdf
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2008
Messages
4,365
Reaction score
0
Location
Heart of Texas
Faster horses said:
I've been curious about Roughage Buster for a long time now, so
I have some questions.

The way I understand it, it is made from all urea (NPN); is over 100% protein,
am I right? If so, how can it be more than 100% of anything? And from
the little I know, a little urea can be okay, but to depend totally on urea
for protein isn't good. In fact, nutritionists are now taking the urea out
of a product, discounting it totally when figuring crude protein.
For example, if a product is 30% protein, and 12% is from urea (NPN)
they figure the protein at 18% which is natural protein and give the urea
no value. Urea only lasts 3-4 hours after consumption and
then it's gone. So set me straight on this if you would, anyone...

Urea is "nitrogen". What does a cow do with natural protein sources first?? Converts it to nitrogen so if your nutritionist is not considering the urea in his calculations I see no reason to even include it a feed formula at all. Oh and urea is utilized very very quickly.

Feed-grade urea most commonly available today contains 45 percent nitrogen. Therefore, 100 pounds of 45-percent urea contains 45 pounds of nitrogen. Because natural protein is about 16 percent nitrogen, there is 1 pound of nitrogen in each 6.25 pounds of protein (100 lb ÷ 16% = 6.25 lb). Thus, the “equivalent” protein in 100 pounds of 45-percent nitrogen urea is 281 pounds of protein equivalent. Some is 287%. If you'll notice the tag on any feed containing urea it will usually be disclosed as "This product contains no more than X% of "equivalent protein" from non protein nitrogen sources.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,205
Reaction score
441
Location
Big Muddy valley
TexasBred said:
Faster horses said:
I've been curious about Roughage Buster for a long time now, so
I have some questions.

The way I understand it, it is made from all urea (NPN); is over 100% protein,
am I right? If so, how can it be more than 100% of anything? And from
the little I know, a little urea can be okay, but to depend totally on urea
for protein isn't good. In fact, nutritionists are now taking the urea out
of a product, discounting it totally when figuring crude protein.
For example, if a product is 30% protein, and 12% is from urea (NPN)
they figure the protein at 18% which is natural protein and give the urea
no value. Urea only lasts 3-4 hours after consumption and
then it's gone. So set me straight on this if you would, anyone...

Urea is "nitrogen". What does a cow do with natural protein sources first?? Converts it to nitrogen so if your nutritionist is not considering the urea in his calculations I see no reason to even include it a feed formula at all. Oh and urea is utilized very very quickly.

Feed-grade urea most commonly available today contains 45 percent nitrogen. Therefore, 100 pounds of 45-percent urea contains 45 pounds of nitrogen. Because natural protein is about 16 percent nitrogen, there is 1 pound of nitrogen in each 6.25 pounds of protein (100 lb ÷ 16% = 6.25 lb). Thus, the “equivalent” protein in 100 pounds of 45-percent nitrogen urea is 281 pounds of protein equivalent. Some is 287%. If you'll notice the tag on any feed containing urea it will usually be disclosed as "This product contains no more than X% of "equivalent protein" from non protein nitrogen sources.

Roughage Buster also contains Biuret and triuret (sp) as I understand it both slow release forms of urea. :???:
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
0
Location
The Dark Side
Big Muddy rancher said:
TexasBred said:
Faster horses said:
I've been curious about Roughage Buster for a long time now, so
I have some questions.

The way I understand it, it is made from all urea (NPN); is over 100% protein,
am I right? If so, how can it be more than 100% of anything? And from
the little I know, a little urea can be okay, but to depend totally on urea
for protein isn't good. In fact, nutritionists are now taking the urea out
of a product, discounting it totally when figuring crude protein.
For example, if a product is 30% protein, and 12% is from urea (NPN)
they figure the protein at 18% which is natural protein and give the urea
no value. Urea only lasts 3-4 hours after consumption and
then it's gone. So set me straight on this if you would, anyone...

Urea is "nitrogen". What does a cow do with natural protein sources first?? Converts it to nitrogen so if your nutritionist is not considering the urea in his calculations I see no reason to even include it a feed formula at all. Oh and urea is utilized very very quickly.

Feed-grade urea most commonly available today contains 45 percent nitrogen. Therefore, 100 pounds of 45-percent urea contains 45 pounds of nitrogen. Because natural protein is about 16 percent nitrogen, there is 1 pound of nitrogen in each 6.25 pounds of protein (100 lb ÷ 16% = 6.25 lb). Thus, the “equivalent” protein in 100 pounds of 45-percent nitrogen urea is 281 pounds of protein equivalent. Some is 287%. If you'll notice the tag on any feed containing urea it will usually be disclosed as "This product contains no more than X% of "equivalent protein" from non protein nitrogen sources.

Roughage Buster also contains Biuret and triuret (sp) as I understand it both slow release forms of urea. :???:

Biuret's release rate is comparable to the release rate of soybean meal.

ADM-------Archer Daniels Midland.

Calcium is also used not only to "harden" tubs (like non fat dry milk did) but as filler as well.

little joe is correct about the tubs hardening in cold weather. As I stated earlier, the cattle will get less of what they need when they need it the most.
 

Roundup

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
Location
Montana
The theory with NPN sources is that they are converted by ruminal flora to microbial protein, which in turn is digested by the cow for use as protein. Also, the increased microbes due to the NPN utilization aid in the digestion of feed which makes more nutrients available to the animal.

Many winter herds do not lack protein in their diet, but rather energy. This of course depends on diet, weather etc. The tendency in cold temps is to feed additional protein, when in reality the cow needs a food high in energy. Excess protein is lost in the urine and is costly to the producer.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
29,282
Reaction score
490
Location
NE WY at the foot of the Big Horn mountains
Roundup said:
Many winter herds do not lack protein in their diet, but rather energy. This of course depends on diet, weather etc. The tendency in cold temps is to feed additional protein, when in reality the cow needs a food high in energy. Excess protein is lost in the urine and is costly to the producer.

This is exactly what we have found. Protein needs are easily met, it's
energy that is short. It is expensive using protein to meet the energy needs.

Also, it isn't MY nutritionist that takes the urea out of the product when
figuring CP, it's most all of them. I've read lots of articles and they all do
it.

This is an interesting thread, thanks for the info.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Justin said:
Loomix, IMO, is a good product. i've used it and was a dealer for several years. and the dealer you work with will make the difference.

AMEN- if the dealer has employees that know how to mix it- and put it out for you--but the main problem I've seen here is the inconsistency in product- mainly because of change over in dealers/employees-- and in one or two days the cows either drank all the tanks dry ( while crapping in them with half the product dripping on the ground around the tanks off their faces) or won't touch the stuff (while crapping in them even more while waiting for the good stuff back )....

Had a great deliverer for years in the area (that left for the bigger money of the WY oil fields) - had minimum wage deliverers after that that never got anything right until that outfit quit the dealership (which long before I had quit) - then a neighbor/good friend deliverer/ dealer talked me into trying it again- that I put up with a lot of waste until he learned how to do it right-- and then right after that he was injured in a Loomix truck wreck- had to hire replacement persons (who were on every side of the aisle :roll: ) until he decided he couldn't handle the dealership anymore-and got out of it- and someone 100 miles away got it and from then on it wasn't worth the gamble anymore... :( Better off rolling dice in Vegas for your expected return :(
 

littlejoe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
Montana, East Slope
"This is exactly what we have found. Protein needs are easily met, it's
energy that is short"

Say what?! In my area, about the only place I could believe this is where somebody's feeding alfalfa hay exclusively. What common feed has excess of protein and lacks energy? It is my understanding that energy is measured by burning it, that calorie/btu is the measurement, then you factor in digestibility/availability/effeciency/whatever. That the lower the protein, the harder it is to digest, the slower the 'thruput', and that one of proteins main jobs is to help digest energy. But--i alwus got lots to larn...
 

Latest posts

Top