Purina - NSC Values & kcal/lb values

[SuckerForHorses]

I inquired to Purina about the NSC values of their feeds, and suggested they add this information to their website. Apparently, it can’t be added because of “space constraints” but the lady did provide me with a list of the information:

Omolene 100 NSC: 34 kcal/lb: 1535

Omolene 200 NSC:39 kcal/lb: 1625

Omolene 300 NSC: 38 kcal/lb: 1535

Omolene 400 NSC: 20 kcal/lb: 1400 (complete with forage diet)

Omolene 500 NSC: 31 kcal/lb: 1650

Strategy GX NSC: 24 kcal/lb: 1500

Strategy Healthy Edge NSC: 17 kcal/lb: 1300

Equine Junior NSC: 17 kcal/lb: 1350 (complete with forage diet)

Equine Adult NSC: 15 kcal/lb: 1100 (complete with forage diet)

Equine Senior NSC: 17 kcal/lb: 1225

Ultium Competition NSC: 15 kcal/lb: 1900

Ultium Growth NSC: 22 kcal/lb: 1700

Miniature Horse & Pony NSC: 17 kcal/lb: 1275

Horse Chow 100 NSC: 15 kcal/lb: 1000 (complete with forage diet)

Horse Chow 200 NSC: 16 kcal/lb: 1200 (complete with forage diet)

WellSolve L/S NSC: 11 (maximum) kcal/lb: 1200

WellSolve W/C NSC: 13 kcal/lb: 900

Enrich 12 NSC: 15 kcal/lb: 1100

Enrich 32 NSC: 11 kcal/lb: 1500

Amplify NSC: 17.5 kcal/lb: 2000

Race Ready NSC: 32 kcal/lb: 1650

Horseman’s Edge Sweet 12% NSC:36 kcal/lb: 1400

Horseman’s Edge Pellet 14% NSC: 33 kcal/lb: 1400

Horseman’s Edge 12:6 Lysine NSC: 33 kcal/lb: 1450

Athlete NSCL: 37 kcal/lb: 1900

Packer Pellets 21-23%

My response regarding “space constraints” was this:
In reference to the website and these numbers not being posted for “space constraints” - how much space do two numbers take up when just adding this information to the product information page? Or adding a chart just like you’ve provided below, and including this information all on one page like Triple Crown does?

[JB]

“Space constraints” :lol: :lol: :lol:

That’s rich.

I’m impressed you got all this! :yes:

[Fox_Wood_Farm]

Great info - Thanks for posting.

I suspect they don’t publish NSC or DE because they can’t or don’t or won’t put any limits on these values. They are “typical” and measured across many lots of feed. If they put 17% NSC on the Eq Senior bag and somebody decided to have a sample analyzed and it came back 19%, well, I guess that could lead to questions from the user and Purina may not want to deal with that.

I am pretty sure that even the best of feed companies who maintain fixed formulas (like Triple Crown as just one example) list NSC values as typical or without any max or min or tolerance range. So Purina could find a way if they wanted to.

I haven’t fed Purina in years but I’ll admit that I was intrigued by this one:

Ultium Competition NSC: 15 kcal/lb: 1900

Is this a complete feed or more a supplement/ration balancer?

[JB]

Ultium-anything would be a fortified feed, though I don’t know whether this one is also a complete feed (meaning its fiber content is high enough and COULD be fed to the exclusion of forage if the horse required it). So no, it’s not a supp/rb

[SuckerForHorses]

When I sent my original request for NSC values, she replied and said “for which product?” and I said “All of them”

[poltroon]

I am actually pretty shocked that calories per pound is not a normal nor required element of feed labels. It seems pretty basic, and yet nearly impossible to come by from just about any company.

[JB]

[QUOTE=SuckerForHorses;6825093]
When I sent my original request for NSC values, she replied and said “for which product?” and I said “All of them”[/QUOTE]

:lol:

I bet she went:
::wide eyed::
::thunk::
::areyoufreakinkiddingme::

[SuckerForHorses]

[QUOTE=JB;6825133]
:lol:

I bet she went:
::wide eyed::
::thunk::
::areyoufreakinkiddingme::[/QUOTE]

Probably!

I think if horse owners were more informed about what is a “good” feed versus the not-so-great ones, grain companies would be questioned more about this information, and may start putting it out there for people to see and make informed decisions from. However, that would probably mean that most grain companies would end up NOT selling certain feeds in their line (like Blue Seal’s Pacer, which is 45.5% NSC) because there are MUCH better options out there.

[Chezzie]

[QUOTE=JB;6824736]
Ultium-anything would be a fortified feed, though I don’t know whether this one is also a complete feed (meaning its fiber content is high enough and COULD be fed to the exclusion of forage if the horse required it). So no, it’s not a supp/rb :)[/QUOTE]

The fiber content of Ultium is 18.5%. I don’t think it’s designed to be a complete feed like say, Triple Crown Senior, but it has a lot of fiber.

[Chezzie]

[QUOTE=JB;6824736]
Ultium-anything would be a fortified feed, though I don’t know whether this one is also a complete feed (meaning its fiber content is high enough and COULD be fed to the exclusion of forage if the horse required it). So no, it’s not a supp/rb :)[/QUOTE]

The fiber content of Ultium is 18.5%. I don’t think it’s designed to be a complete feed like say, Triple Crown Senior, but it has a lot of fiber.

[JB]

It might be a complete feed, I just don’t know It’s at least a regular fortified feed, but it’s not a ration balancer

[Chezzie]

[QUOTE=JB;6825325]
It might be a complete feed, I just don’t know It’s at least a regular fortified feed, but it’s not a ration balancer :)[/QUOTE]

Sorry…I misread your post and thought you were asking what the fiber content was. My brain must be frozen!

[JB]

I bet it’s frozen up there LOL No, I just didn’t know the fiber content, therefore didn’t know if it’s a complete feed or not, just know it’s not a RB

[beowulf]

[QUOTE=Fox Wood Farm;6824570]
Great info - Thanks for posting.

I suspect they don’t publish NSC or DE because they can’t or don’t or won’t put any limits on these values. They are “typical” and measured across many lots of feed. If they put 17% NSC on the Eq Senior bag and somebody decided to have a sample analyzed and it came back 19%, well, I guess that could lead to questions from the user and Purina may not want to deal with that.

I am pretty sure that even the best of feed companies who maintain fixed formulas (like Triple Crown as just one example) list NSC values as typical or without any max or min or tolerance range. So Purina could find a way if they wanted to.

I haven’t fed Purina in years but I’ll admit that I was intrigued by this one:

Ultium Competition NSC: 15 kcal/lb: 1900

Is this a complete feed or more a supplement/ration balancer?[/QUOTE]

Ultium isn’t either of those, surprisingly. It’s a highly fortified high-fat high-fiber extruded (they like to throw the word ‘nugget’ around) sweet feed grain for horses in extreme physical work. I would not suggest feeding it as a complete feed because A. it would be extremely expensive as upkeep (moreso than hay or alfalfa) and it is a sweet feed that isn’t designed to replace the nutrients in hay.

[Chezzie]

[QUOTE=beowulf;6825843]
Ultium isn’t either of those, surprisingly. It’s a highly fortified high-fat high-fiber extruded (they like to throw the word ‘nugget’ around) sweet feed grain for horses in extreme physical work. I would not suggest feeding it as a complete feed because A. it would be extremely expensive as upkeep (moreso than hay or alfalfa) and it is a sweet feed that isn’t designed to replace the nutrients in hay.[/QUOTE]

Why would you call it a sweet feed? It is a low carb feed/high fat feed in pelleted form. I don’t disagree that it is not designed as a complete feed, but it’s not a “sweet” feed either.

[JB]

At 15% NSC, I wouldn’t remotely call it a sweet feed

Many feeds are complete feeds but aren’t fed as one because most horses eating them still eat quite enough hay/grass. Being a complete feed doesn’t mean you have to use it as one

[sdlbredfan]

Thanks for obtaining and sharing that! I just read this (which I searched for to refresh my memory on NSC) and thought you all might want to read or re-read it also:
http://www.ker.com/library/advances/103.pdf

[beowulf]

I label it a sweet feed because despite Purina’s play as it being a “nugget/pelleted feed”, it still is a mixture of various grains with a high amount of molasses in it. Just because it is in a pellet form does not mean it isn’t a sweet-feed to me. Being a trained Purina Expert myself (as in, my store was certified and we had many Purina Experts teach us about Purina products), I’ve seen a variety of feeds marketed as something they may/may not be classified directly as: to me, if it is bound together, crushed, rolled, and has high molasses concentrate, it is a sweet feed even if it isn’t advertised as such - note: Ultium spoils quickly because of its molasses content (:

You don’t have to agree with me, and that’s fine.

[merrygoround]

Ultium is not a complete feed. It is designed for horses needing a high sustainable energy source with a lower starch value. From what they say it is designed for horses that don’t need a sudden burst of energy but a steady source of energy.

It is not designed to have a high fiber content which would be necessary for a complete feed, such as their weight control with a 26% fiber.

[dressageluv]

Triple Crown shares their NSC value freely, so do a few other select few, most love to hide it!! Stunning when you dig a little deeper what you find. I will never use Purina again, ever…lots of money for by-products, no whole grain, and lots of fillers. Buckeye used to be wonderful, but since they got bought out they are not on my A-list anylonger. Triple Crown is not any better, not are any TSS or SS feeds

Nutrena seems to do a better job, Progressive is ok too…at least they add pro biotics into their feed which helps with Ulcers.

I met this lady who works with a mill in NC, and they use roasted whole grains, non processed, pro biotics, Vitamin A and B12…she is a tiny bit more expensive but her feed is so well put together, that you end up feeding half the normal quantity and save about $60 bucks a month per horse!!