Urgr8estfear 2nd FLURO ONLY soil grow - start to finish.

[urgr8estfear]

Odin, I'm sorry buddy but you are wrong:
HID lights are not better.
You cannot talk about good(better) or bad without mentioning a purpose.
This is how religions get started!

I cannot use HID in my growbox since its in the attic,
where temps go 100F+/40C+ in the summer without any lamps turned on.
A HID would simply fry everything. Cool tube or not doesn't matter.
The room where the box is in gets waaaaay too hot.
I cannot fix this without cutting bigass holes in my roof.
I ain't going there.

HID lights are also power hungry.
I gotta pay every kWh myself and I'm no rich guy so I gotta watch out there.
Also, HID lights are more expensive and need replacements more often which means more money.
Ofcourse I can fix this by selling MJ but I'm a daddy and I'm not going there either.
If I'd have all the money in the world I probably wouldn't be growing my own pot.

Quality of the end product is debatable per definition since its subjective.
But I do know that my home grown nooby fluro grow tastse ALOT better then that commercial/hydro/HID grows they sell in the shops here and on the street.
It's like baby bottoms versus unshaved old man cheeks.
Honestly, after smoking a few kilos of commercial pot, the quality of smoke from my first grow was a real shocker.
Like totally one with the universe , no annoyed sinuses, no anxiety or other forms or physical/mental stress.
Best fucking smoke I ever had, despite the 'issues' my grow has had.

What is comparable however, regardless of things like growing style, lighting used, soil type, etc. etc. etc. is grams per Watt. Simply yield versus power.

I have read jack-the-uber-grower does something like 1 g/W with a near-perfect grow.
I appear to be well on my way to do 0.5 g/w.
And this grow is far from perfect, acidic soil, wild temperature swings, no bottom/ground insulation, manually controlled light cycle, horrible humidity, no grow-type tubes/CFLs, etc. etc. etc.
So while growing enough pot for me to smoke, I can 'upgrade' the box to produce more pot quicker.
I'm gonna find out how close to the 1g/W I can get with fluros.
And I'm gonna let you know.
Its like a game to me, getting better and better.
And I'm saving money too, since I can stop financing the darker parts of the Netherworld...uhhm...lands by buying their weed.
So, please Odin, start a grow journal and show us how many g/W you can do.

Yes, top growers on this forum like Mr. Postman & Dierwolf all use HIDs.
This works best for them.
They don't just produce pot, what they produce may be considered art.
They don't seem to have problems with excess heat or lack of funds.

Bottom line is :
You can't go around claiming HIDs are better then CFLs/fluros without telling us what it is they are better at!

Bluebong, the law of conservation of energy simply means energy cannot get lost.
It is simply transformed into another form(frequency) or energy or matter.
Two bulbs work better then one. You can see that with your bare eye.
They don't put these things in office by the pair by accident.

What 'they' are referring to in the book you read is the following:
Light does not interact with other light.
(partially true don't ask, you don't wanna know!)
(really I mean it!!)
We all know light has a frequency. We can all imagine a nice sinus wave for that.
Higher frequencies mean shorter sinusses.
Bigger power light will mean higher waves in the sinus.

But if you have two sources of lightwaves they will not make the wave twice as high.
The wave(s) stays the same height.
Funny things is they ussualy mention fluros in this respect,
but the nature of the lightwave generator does not matter.
HIDs suffer the exact same 'problem'.

What 'they' are forgetting in the book is the duality of nature.
Light is not just a wave, it's also a particle.
And since energy does not get lost, the plants get more power allright.
Some people just can't wrap their heads around two waves occupying the same time/space.
(they just keep seeing that damned ocean)

KamelRedLight, buddy, you seem to understand, as I see in your grows.
I'm content growing enough weed for me to smoke to until my next grow finishes.
I'm pretty sure you are too!
I know the 'law of inverse square' is true for all types of light.
This is why I want to stay as close to the fluros as possible, so it isn't such a problem.
If you get closer to the lighting then 1 foot you're actually getting more lumens on the plant then the specs on your bulb say they do.
O yeah, its true I got only 3 plants.

[youngandstupid]

urgr8estfear to be fair, in my skimming of your response, you selectively answered Odin's post. When he said "better" it was pretty obvious that he was concerned solely with yield / potency, whereas you brought up all the reasons why CFLs and Flouros are great but you didn't really address his point. I can't say as far as potency is concerned but, from my limited knowledge on the subject, HID/HPS lights produce more lumens per watt than flouros. So it is common sense that they would increase yield if you use the same amount of Watts.

But like you've pointed out that's not the best way to compare the two lights. One can use (probably) twice as many flouro Watts than HID watts and have lower temps and less energy wasted. In which case (provided they are positioned around the plant, your yield will be better than the HID.

BTW the grow is looking grand keep us posted .

And Odin and bluebong, the statement that flouros can't produce big buds is just wrong, see Kamel's second grow if my word isn't enough.

[urgr8estfear]

Originally Posted by youngandstupid

urgr8estfear to be fair, in my skimming of your response, you selectively answered Odin's post. When he said "better" it was pretty obvious that he was concerned solely with yield / potency, whereas you brought up all the reasons why CFLs and Flouros are great but you didn't really address his point. I can't say as far as potency is concerned but, from my limited knowledge on the subject, HID/HPS lights produce more lumens per watt than flouros. So it is common sense that they would increase yield if you use the same amount of Watts.

But like you've pointed out that's not the best way to compare the two lights. One can use (probably) twice as many flouro Watts than HID watts and have lower temps and less energy wasted. In which case (provided they are positioned around the plant, your yield will be better than the HID.

BTW the grow is looking grand keep us posted .

And Odin and bluebong, the statement that flouros can't produce big buds is just wrong, see Kamel's second grow if my word isn't enough.

Thanks youngandstupid!
You're right. I did selectively respond to Odin's thread unjustfully.
Sorry about that everyone, especially Odin.
He's right that HIDs produce bigger buds.
I know CFLs and fluro produce smaller less dense buds.
The words 'better buds' is what bugs me most,
I'm just pretty proud of what I've accomplished and I felt he was pissin' on my grow.

Still I'd like to see his growjournal become real (and that of others) so we can compare grams/Watt while comparing types of lighting.

[KamelRedLight]

Yeah you got me right. I try to grow enough to last till the next harvest, and so far so good. This yield though was amazing. 1.5-1.75 oz dry from one plant, I was not expecting that. And compared to what I used to buy (haven't bought a bag since July and it feels GREAT) which I can assume was HID grown probly hydro, my buds win hands down. Maybe it's not the light, maybe it's the care, the nutes, whatever. Either way I do it better, without HID. That's pretty much my point I was trying to make. Sure if you're growing big scale for profit, it's more efficient I'm sure. But for personal use, ya just don't need em.

[youngandstupid]

Originally Posted by urgr8estfear

Thanks youngandstupid!
You're right. I did selectively respond to Odin's thread unjustfully.
Sorry about that everyone, especially Odin.
He's right that HIDs produce bigger buds.
I know CFLs and fluro produce smaller less dense buds.
The words 'better buds' is what bugs me most,
I'm just pretty proud of what I've accomplished and I felt he was pissin' on my grow.

Still I'd like to see his growjournal become real (and that of others) so we can compare grams/Watt while comparing types of lighting.

I didn't take from his post that he was talking about your plants in particular just about most flouros but the comment about your past growing netting 20grams was uncalled for (I can't remember who said it, tisn't important) so I can understand why you interpreted the post as such. Regardless I think a grow competetion would be pretty friggin awesome. Like two growers, or just one with two dif light setups, do everything exactly the same: nute schedule, LSTing, date of germ, date of start of 12/12, same harvest date, same fans, same humidity, same pH, ect. It'd be friggin awesome but pretty much impossible so meh I guess I stop blabbering lol.

[sibannac]

I've just read this thread through, and Oh My Fucking God!!! You are the LST king! +1 rep! LST is soo tempting, and from the results you are having I can't understand why anyone would do anything but LST! Test flowering them is a method I've not seen done before, I'm going to try it as I would dearly love to have lst'd plants just like yours, it just seems to make so much sense.

[odin]

Hash Plant transplanted after rooting on 10/13, photo taken 10/23. Grown under a small bulb 150 HPS.



Can you do that in 10 days under fluoro? (For perspective that planter is a homemade square box, 12in by 12in) (Also this is one of 4 plants under the light, she is not alone)

[odin]

That is probably all you will see me post for awhile (not in Amersterdam), but I am not shitting on your grow. I thought I made that much clear. I like what you have done, but I take issue with telling guys that are new to this to use flouros. The fact is again (and I say again because I said this last time), HID's make bigger, tighter (and in my opinion) stronger buds. (The first 2 are proven). Again - will flouros work? Yes Will HID's usually work better? YES.
Also before I have to answer it - the clone was rooted before it was planted. This is not from cut to that size in 10 days. As soon as it was rooted, it was transplanted. The pic is from transplant (roots showing), to 10 days later (just happened to be when the pic was taken. The plant is bigger now - significantly so).

[SmknVTEC]

bluebong,

Thanks for defending me with urgr8est a while back although not necessary. He is cool and he knows I have taught him some stuff and he respects me as I do him. On the fertilizing at half strength and cutting the NPK in half I refer to Logan Edwards' book Grow Great Marijuana:

As a concentration the numbers are the percentage by weight, of the nutrients available to your plants. For example, in a one-gram sample of Mega Gro 15-30-15, 15% (or 0.15 gram) would be available as nitrogen 30% (0.30 gram) as phosphorus, and 15% (0.15 gram) as potassium. The missing 40% balance contains the remaining macro-and micro-nutrients, but it is mostly inert filler that does not affect plant growth.

A fertilizer labeled 7-15-7 would be about half the strength of a nutrient solution labeled 15-30-15. You could apply half as much of the stronger fertilizer to get the same nutrient strength as the weaker 7-15-7 fertilizer but, you could more easily burn your plants without properly diluting the stronger fertilizer.

So in this case, it seems that Urgr8est is correct and VTEC is wrong. Please forgive me oh god of ganja. I bow down to you oh lord of fluoros. And I kiss your feet my king of the three month veggers.

[bluebong]

I agree with the breakdown, sure. Smkn, like I said, you know your stuff.

But ok...let's say for flowering, ideal bloom products are 10-50-10 or so. Flowering needs a lot of P, not N, despite what urgr8est said. so, starting with 7-15-7, to get to proper concentration you need about x4. 28-60-28?? More N and K than veging nutes at 20-20-20? Is that a problem? Then think about the accumulation of micros- that's not good either.

But hey, try it and see. I'm sure they'll live.

[odin]

Well what I think about the fertilization matter is that while the plants do need p.. instead of n.. for big nugs, the scrutiny of the numbers is really not important. I don't think (at least in soil - this does not apply for hydro), that having a bit extra 1st or 3rd number makes a big difference. For me it is that I spike the middle number. And I don't jump straight to the bloom boosters. I make it gradual. Something like 10-10-10 during veg. Move to 10-30-10 at the begining of flowering. And finish with 10-60-10. That is what works best for me.

[urgr8estfear]

Odin, dude, you comparing apples with pears.
I illuminate a 8 square foot surface with 216W.
You illuminate a 1 square foot surface with 150W.
Your plant gets 5.5x more power then mine.
Ofcourse it's gonna grow like mad.
Cut down to 27W per sq. foot like me and then we talk apples and apples.
Then we can compare grams dry yield versus Watts.
If we compare grams per watt in this situation your HPS may be a bit less good then you think.

SmknVTEC & sibannac you guys make me blush!
And laugh hard.
Before I went to bad yesterday, I looked in the mirror raised my fist and said : I'm a LST-king!!

Now seriously,
LST-god?
God of ganja?
Lord of fluros?
King of three month veggers?
What are you? My minions and diciples?
(really I'm just another guy)

Bluebong, thanks for the warning on the micronute overload and N-P-K during flowering info.
You're probably right.
I understand 7-3-7 is not suitable for flowering, too low on the P.
I'll get some 10-alot-10 or so.
But I'm assuming 4x the micronutes shouldn't be a problem.
Those concentrations or soooo low, 4x0 = still 0.
I mean did you ever hear of someone with Molybdenum toxicity problems?
I could be wrong ofcourse........

O yeah, I never said that plants during flowering need a lot of N.
I noticed that my first grow suffered from lack of N during flowering.
So this time around I'll need more that's all.

[bluebong]

Also, I forgot about the acidic quality of nutes. At triple or quadruple concentration, they will likely overcome the buffering ability of your water, and turn you soil acidic. I would think.

Ps: Yeah, I think too much moly, for example, could be bad. It is a metal, after all, and usualy those are toxic unless in small quantities.

PPS: I think Odin has more that one of those 12x12 planters under the light. It says he's got 4. So that's 4 square feet under 150w, so about 35w/square foot. Only 8w more than yours. So you guys should compare Gs/w.

[SmknVTEC]

Very good points bluebong,
Glad to make you smile Urgr8est.
Odin, It is possible to give a flowering plant to much P and Stitch (sick plants expert) says not to use something that high in P. She also says, if the plants are vegged in 20-20-20 the flower ratio should be something similar like 15-20-15. Otherwise they could get stressed or get phosphorus toxicity which locks out potassium, zinc and iron (I believe I have seen this on the BB before). But if the 10-60-10 works for you more power too you.

[urgr8estfear]

Originally Posted by bluebong

Also, I forgot about the acidic quality of nutes. At triple or quadruple concentration, they will likely overcome the buffering ability of your water, and turn you soil acidic. I would think.

Ps: Yeah, I think too much moly, for example, could be bad. It is a metal, after all, and usualy those are toxic unless in small quantities.

PPS: I think Odin has more that one of those 12x12 planters under the light. It says he's got 4. So that's 4 square feet under 150w, so about 35w/square foot. Only 8w more than yours. So you guys should compare Gs/w.

They may. But they may not in this funny fluro grow.
Let me explain this may be difficult to understand.
Let's assume the pH of the liquid nute is pH 4 which is pretty acidic.
In reality its not that bad, but still we assume pH 4.
The water I use is about pH 7. And I mix 3x 5 ml of nute with 2l of water.
The mix ratio of 1:133.
This dillutes the acidic nute and raise the pH from 4 to 6.3 or so.
(log scale, ratio of 1:1000 would allmost produce pH 6.8)
The pH of THIS GROWs soil is approaching 5.5 already.
I have very acidic soil already, so adding nute/water combo of pH 6.3 would raise the pH.
LOL. Funny grow it is!

PS:Maybe so. But then again, this is a weed damn near unstoppable.
Maybe someone cares for a hydrogrow inside a nuclear fission reactor?
(now you know the real story about Chernobyl, the roots of the grow clogged up the cooling pipes)

PPS: Oops stoner mistake.
Look at my screen from his post :

The part about the 4 plants exactly falls off my screen.
Still I wanna see this HPS lover's grams/watt score.
After all if I can do 0.5g/w then he can never beat me by much more then factor 2.
Bring it on HID guys!