# String test says my colt will surpass his parents?



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

Hi all! 

I wasn't sure where to put this, but I figured since this was the genetics section, it might be a good place. 

I just did the "string test" on my 6 month old colt. The one where you measure mid-knee to coronet band. He measured 16.2!

Now the interesting thing is, his mom is a Foxtrotter and she measures 15.1 (a friend with an actual measuring stick measured her for me, so I know that's pretty accurate). When I did the string test on her, she came out 15.2. I also measured my Mustang, whom measures 14.3, and according to the string test is just under 15 hands.

So, if I am measuring just a little on the large side, my foal should still mature to around 16.1 according to the string test. 

I've met his sire, a QH, and while I don't know exactly how tall he is, he is pretty average and not very tall. I'm guessing he's also around 15.1.

So would it be unusual for my colt to come out 16.1 when both his parents are around 15.1, (a Quarter Horse and a Foxtrotter)? I know the string test thing may not be 100% accurate, and my measurements may not be 100% accurate, but any way I look at it, the colt's cannon bone is a good inch longer than his moms. So does that sound about right?

It would be cool to have a big horse for a change. :lol:


----------



## Indyhorse (Dec 3, 2009)

Trailhorserider - I have the same thing with both my youngsters. I don't think the string test is really accurate - it might be in some cases, but I seriously doubt it will be in mine.

String test on Finn puts him at 18.2 hh at maturity. His dam, Freyja, is only 15.3 hh. His sire is 18.2 hh. He is currently 16.1 hh and 21 months old. I honestly expect him to mature around the 17.2 hh range.

String test on Fiona, Finn's full sibling, puts her at 19.1 hh at maturity :shock::shock:. I think this is out of the question. She is currently 14.3 at 9 months old. 3 inches taller than Finn was at this age, and she is certainly built more heavily than he is, but I still don't think she will get taller than her tallest parent by 3 inches. I just don't think it's at all likely, she will get much greater than 17.2 herself, either.

I know there have been cases of foals growing larger than either parent, but I don't believe it's the norm. I've always heard the tend to fall right in the middle in between the two parents, if there is a height difference.


----------



## cloudkisser (Jul 19, 2010)

Same with my colt. Then I read somewhere on google your supposed to do the string test when there 1 year old otherwise its not acurrate. Not sure but My colt is 8 months so I guess I'll try it again when he's a year. He is about 12.3H now. How big is your colt? Isn't he also 8 months?


----------



## Brookside Stables (Jan 16, 2011)

I was told to measure at 1 year of age by the stallion owner. He swears by it. I have to wait till June 6th!


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

Interesting enough my strings tests were exact (which was a big relief because my yearlings were very undersized and I was afraid they will never make the height the string was showing). However string was giving me 14'3 on my qh as a yearling when she was 13'2 at her best (and she's 14'3 straight at 7 yo) and 15'2 on my paint (she's right in between 15'1 and 15'2 at 6 yo). BTW my paint's parents and another sibling were just 14'3, so she definitely overgrew them all.


----------



## lilkitty90 (Nov 11, 2009)

my boy will be a year on march 9th so i'll measure him and see how big he will get as well.


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

I think the theory behind it is that the cannon bones stop growing in length by 6 months. That is why it doesn't matter if it is 6 months or a year. In this string test, you are only measuring from mid-knee to cornet band. 

I think there is a string test where you measure from elbow down, and then swing it up over their withers, but I can see how in that one you would need to wait until they are a year, because the upper arm bone (I don't remember what it's called) doesn't close until later. But I have heard that test isn't as accurate as the knee-down one.

So I don't know if it is right, but I thought it was kind of exciting. If he never gets past 15.1 that is cool too, it will make him easier to mount. :lol: 

But I am kind of thinking he will be taller than that, because his knee to cornet measurement is about an inch longer than his moms. So at the very least, he should be an inch taller than his mom I would think. 

All of this really isn't important, I just think it's kind of fun to speculate. And I wrote his measurements down, so maybe a couple years from now I can see how he measures up! 

I wish I knew how tall he was now. I don't have a proper measuring stick, which I think is the best method. I have a weight tape with "hands" on the off side. I will get a guesstimate with that, but I have a hard time eye-balling it that way.

I would love to get a proper measuring device, but they are kind of expensive and they want to charge you oversized shipping too.

It makes me wonder how many people really know how tall their horse is, and how many just guess.

Cloudkisser, my colt is 6 months old now. I'm going to try the off-side of the weight tape to get a guess at his current height. The weight tape says he weighs 565 right now.


----------



## farmpony84 (Apr 21, 2008)

I think your test could be correct. My mare is 14.3 and the sire I used was 15.3. String tested a bit early but it put my baby right at 15.3. He's 5 this year and just a little over 16hh.


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

*Indyhorse*, have you tried the string test on Freyja? I know you said she is 15.3, but it would be interesting to see if you measured her from mid-knee to coronet, if you also came up with 15.3? It did seem to work on my adult horses, at least within an inch or so. For instance, Isabelle is 15.1 and the string test put her at 15.2.

Part of the inaccuracy might be the difficulty of determining exactly where mid-knee is, which is why I was out there doing and it and re-doing it, to get a consensus. :lol:

It is method #2 on this website:

http://www.ultimatehorsesite.com/info/stringtesting.html


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

farmpony84 said:


> I think your test could be correct. My mare is 14.3 and the sire I used was 15.3. String tested a bit early but it put my baby right at 15.3. He's 5 this year and just a little over 16hh.


Well that's good to hear Farmpony! 

Height does not mean anything really, as long as he is "average." I am only 5'6", so I don't need a super tall horse. As long as he is built solid because I am heavy. BUT, I admit it would be cool to have a tall horse for once! If he makes 16 hands, he will be the tallest horse I have owned.


----------



## farmpony84 (Apr 21, 2008)

LOL... Riley is the tallest horse I've ever owned. He's in a barn full of shortys!


----------



## Indyhorse (Dec 3, 2009)

Trailhorserider, you know I have never thought to try the string test on any of my adult horses. That would be an interesting test. I'll do that.

I have been keeping record of Finn and Fiona's heights as they have grown. I string tested Finn at 6 months initially, and Fiona at about 3 months initially (and have several times since with both - the numbers have remained constant.) Fiona has been consistently 3 inches taller than Finn was at the same age, throughout all the measurements since her birth - but Freyja was also malnourished when I got her, and was likely malnourished throughout her pregnancy with Finn (he was also subsequently weaned at 4 months) - an obstacle she didn't face while carrying and raising Fiona (and Fiona wasn't weaned completely until nearly 8 months).

I do have a measuring stick - complete with the little level built in - I picked up pretty cheaply. If you go to tack auctions, you can usually find them for about 25 bucks.


----------



## smrobs (Jul 30, 2008)

It's not so uncommon for a foal to be taller than either of his parents. The best example I can think of is a pair of Appaloosa's that my Dad showed back in the '70s. The mare and stud were both just barely over 14 hands and of 5 foals that they had, 4 were about the same height. Then Devilweed was born and he matured to about 16 hands. So, yep, 16.2 is dang sure possible.

I can't attest to the accuracy of the string test yet. Rafe is supposed to mature to 17 flat and he is standing just short of 16 now at 18 months so......


----------



## dee (Jul 30, 2009)

You guys are seriously scaring me! Dancer is 15HH and Scooter is 16HH and a bit. Rain string tested at 16:2, and she was only four months old! Does that mean she's going to be a monster?


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

I just measured my colt today. He is 12.3 at 6 months of age.


----------



## Strange (Jan 11, 2009)

You have to remember that height is a trait that isn't one or the other, it's a spectrum of possibilities. Since height is determined by multiple genes it really is a toss up. Obviously a smaller horse will have more "short genes" (just like people) and a taller horse has more "tall genes" but that's not to say that a smaller horse has some "tall genes" in there somewhere, and if paired with a taller horse that's why you'd end up with something usually in between the parents' heights, but it's not unlikely to have a horse with two parents of the same size and still outgrow them both if it happened to get all the "tall genes" from both parents. 

I don't really know how to describe it other than that, lol.


----------



## reining girl (Jan 30, 2009)

lots of foals get taller than there parents. There are generations of horses that a foal can take after. Crickets sire was only 15.1h and her dam was 15.3h and she ended up being 16.2 hands and 1350lbs. I have no idea how acurate a string test it. I tried it on duchess once (she was 6 or 7yrs old, fully grown) and it said she should have been 16.1h.... she is only 15.3h.


----------



## dee (Jul 30, 2009)

You guys really aren't making me feel any better LOL! Holy cats! If Rain really does get that big, what am I going to do with her? o-o


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

dee said:


> You guys really aren't making me feel any better LOL! Holy cats! If Rain really does get that big, what am I going to do with her? o-o


Well, I'm kind of looking forward to a larger horse for a change. My main riding horse is only 14.2/14.3!

:lol:


----------



## mom2pride (May 5, 2009)

dee said:


> You guys really aren't making me feel any better LOL! Holy cats! If Rain really does get that big, what am I going to do with her? o-o


You can send her to me, of course!!! :lol: :wink:


----------



## dee (Jul 30, 2009)

mom2pride said:


> You can send her to me, of course!!! :lol: :wink:


I don't know why anyone would want her - fugly head just like her momma's - but the rest of her is okay, I guess. But...she's just a mutt. A loveable mutt. 

The daughter that wanted her backed out, but I think we'll keep her - even if she does get really tall. As sweet and gentle as she is, she might make a decent horse. 

Trainer friend said it was such a pity she wasn't registered - she would have been great as a jumper. I didn't know they had to be registered for that. BUT - this is cowboy country anyway - and she will probably be stout like both her parents - maybe make a reiner or a roper? Barrel racer (granddaughter would LOVE that!)


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

dee said:


> I don't know why anyone would want her - fugly head just like her momma's - but the rest of her is okay, I guess. But...she's just a mutt. A loveable mutt.
> 
> The daughter that wanted her backed out, but I think we'll keep her - even if she does get really tall. As sweet and gentle as she is, she might make a decent horse.
> 
> Trainer friend said it was such a pity she wasn't registered - she would have been great as a jumper. I didn't know they had to be registered for that. BUT - this is cowboy country anyway - and she will probably be stout like both her parents - maybe make a reiner or a roper? Barrel racer (granddaughter would LOVE that!)


You have been listening to too many people on this forum! I don't see why a "mutt" is any less of a horse than a registered horse. They may not have as much monetary value, but they can be every bit as good (or better) as a riding and pleasure horse.


----------



## dee (Jul 30, 2009)

trailhorserider said:


> You have been listening to too many people on this forum! I don't see why a "mutt" is any less of a horse than a registered horse.


Not exactly listening to them. There are some grade horses that I have seen sell for $10,000 - $15,000 - but they were special - well trained, experienced rodeo horses.

I just don't see Rain being one of those. Her being a great riding horse, though, is pretty much a given. She's even showing signs she may single-foot just like her momma!


----------



## smrobs (Jul 30, 2008)

Hey, a good horse is a good horse regardless of papers.


----------



## dee (Jul 30, 2009)

Agreed! Unless one is planning on breeding at some point, I don't really see the need for papers on a using horse. Nor does a using horse have to be perfect!


----------



## smrobs (Jul 30, 2008)

Precisely. Shoot, my best horse is a mutt and there are very few people in this world who would have enough money to even make me consider selling him.


----------

