Do working lines GSDs have more natural muscle mass than show lines?
Or is muscle mass purely a function of exercise.
will genes affect muscle mass and if so do the dogs need more feeding.
within the limits of keeping the dog at the correct weight

Not an expert but we all know that genetics play a part in everything...as does exercise. So it's both, quite obviously.

Are your dogs not ripped enough for you?

Not an expert either, and feel the same as Ross's post. RE: feeding I have found that each dog has its own feeding requirements to maintain acceptable weight, and it seems I am constantly making adjustments to the amount for each dog at least a couple times a month. My most active one, is the one that tends to put on the weight the quickest and at her waistline

I wouldn't endorse that right off the bat without seeing some #s and stats. But it doesn't sound completely ridiculous, given some of the spindly, lanky showline GSDs I have seen vs. the compact ripped-ness of my late working-line GSD.

Maybe Michael W or Connie S will be able to clarify the dietary needs of a WL vs SL....

I don't know specifically if there is a difference from WL vs SL specificaly but it is my understanding that mals have a greater muscle mass per pound then a GSD. I recall Cindy (Rhodes) saying something to that effect in a very old post (4-5 years ago maybe) with regard to anesthesia & how it related to muscle mass in mals. Even so, I don't see where there would be any difference in food as friends have mals & raw feed the same as I do. They just may require a bit more food as it can be more difficult to keep weight on them due to their extreme activity level, at least the working mal that are working hard.

As for GSDs...I think that it depends on the individual dog (& maybe to some degree the lines). Both my dogs are WL dogs yet VERY different body types. My female is 65#s compactly built & very solid hard muscled dog. She is muscled like a body builder. My male on the other hand is 78#s has a longer body & longer legs than she has & is built/muscled like a marathon runner. He is very well muscled but doesn't have the same appearance of muscle hardness that she does. She also has a tighter coat than he does which also allow you to visualize more body muscle then you can with his coat length (he is NOT a long or plush coat, just a normal GSD coat). Both dogs are run & worked multiple times daily.

ETA....my dogs are raw fed the same diet with the exception of amount of food fed to maintain optimun weight for each dog. If a healthy diet is fed, I don't see any reason that you would need to feed any differently, with the exception of some medical issue. JMO on this. But I have VERY healty dogs that rarely neded to see the vet.

 Quote: aimee pochron

Maybe Michael W or Connie S will be able to clarify the dietary needs of a WL vs SL....

I wouldn't know without counting calories in and calories out.

I just feed to maintain a desirable bodyfat percentage and then let regular exercise take care of muscle maintainence.

If performance was suffering, I would take that as an indicator of something missing.

Otherwise, the only way is to do some calorie counting.

I think it is really more about the intensity and time spent on the level of exercise that determines muscle mass.
That and the metabolism of the dog itself.

I think it seems possible to have a SL dog that is heavily exercised and well conditioned could have the same muscle mass as say a WL. If fed the same diet and conditioned exactly the same.

 Quote: Joyce Salazar

I think it seems possible to have a SL dog that is heavily exercised and well conditioned could have the same muscle mass as say a WL. If fed the same diet and conditioned exactly the same.

The only variable being genetic muscular potential. Which, for all we know, could sometimes be greater in some showlines. It would be very individual.