Flaxen x Flaxen = ...not flaxen?

[Syn]

Right. So.

If you breed a flaxen chestnut to a flaxen chestnut, you should get a flaxen chestnut. 100% of the time. Flaxen and chestnut are both recessive genes, so if you breed two horses who are homozygous for this recessive genes, you will only get foals who are homozygous as well.

I bred this stallion to this mare and this mare. They are all clearly flaxen chestnuts.

Like an idiot, I rehomed both foals but they were both chestnut and neither were flaxen.

Oops!

[Totina]

Is it possible that the foals just got a more reddish shade of flaxen that on a normal chestnut doesn't look much like flaxen? I have been trying to breed liver flaxen chestnuts for some time now and I have a few horses with a more red mane and tail but is actually flaxen.

This kind of red mane and tail would be nearly invisible on a lighter chestnut horse:
Madame Red


I have also noticed that this kind of red shade of flaxen is very difficult to reproduce so it seems like it is recessive to lighter flaxen colours. I have also noticed that foals that inherit this reddish shade of flaxen have slightly more red on the lower parts of the legs when born. If you go to the gallery and look at the foal pictures on this horse you can see and compare to what your foals looked like, if you can remember:

Red Cloud

[Syn]

It's certainly possible, but the two foals were absolutely indistinguishable from the non-flaxen chestnuts I've had. There was no red on the lower legs and the mane and tail were the exact same color as the body. There was absolutely no visual indication to me that either was flaxen. :/

I regret rehoming them now. I should've at least let them grow some.

[Kintara]

I've had quite a few flaxens that weren't flaxen as foals