Jump to content

60's Hippie weed?

  • by cotir2005
  • Jul 12 2009 04:12 AM
  • 120 Replies
  • This topic is locked
  • Registered User

  • cotir2005
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 184 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 04:12 AM

I saaw a picture once from High Times. It was a chart of about 12 different strains from the 60's or 70's. It showed what weed looked like then and if it wasnt from a magazine from the 70's then the article was talking about how it changed over the years. The weed looked like mids look now. Does anyone have a link to this photo or know where to find it? Any help is appreciated.
Replies (120)

  • Weed Scientist

  • cody8892000
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 379 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 10:24 AM

you talking about this picture? lol
Attached File  page1.jpg   319.37KB   11508 downloads

looks pretty shitty right? Leads me to believe all the hippies saying "You dont even know what the weed back in the day was like" are full of shit haha

Edited by cody8892000, 12 July 2009 - 10:26 AM.

  • Registered User

  • supercoco
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 605 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 10:31 AM

yea lol the average thc content was like 5%

  • Registered User

  • DKro1856
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 441 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 10:47 AM

theres a thread about it use your search button dawg thats what its there for : ).

  • OG Boxers never die

  • Volcano South
  • Gold Member
  • 2,475 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 12:05 PM

Posted Image

If ANYONE posted those pictures today and said dank pickup check it out they'd be laughed right off GC.
  • SWIM_obviously likes this

  • Registered User

  • PipPipPip
  • smokinweed
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 46 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 12:07 PM

doesn't everyone know not to judge a book by its cover?

Edited by smokinweed, 12 July 2009 - 12:11 PM.

  • Guest_Joe Luxon_*
  • Unregistered / Not Logged In

Posted 12 July 2009 - 12:19 PM

it might only be 5%, but i bet they smoked more than 4x as much as we do to make up for it:D

Checkout #22 in the pic, is that seeds:eek:

  • Smokin' the dank in 805

  • luvskush
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 877 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 12:22 PM

doesn't everyone know not to judge a book by its cover?

yeah, unless the covers made of shit...
  • sloppyjoe likes this

  • OG Boxers never die

  • Volcano South
  • Gold Member
  • 2,475 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 12:38 PM

doesn't everyone know not to judge a book by its cover?

You sound like a disgruntled hippie from the 60s.

Allow me to clue you in: Your weed looks like shit, probably smoked like shit, no one knew how to manicure or cut off water leaves.

Granted, you old hippies didn't have access to advanced techniques that we have today for growing. There were likely less "progrow indoor" operations.

You did the best you could and we thank you for saving this wonderful herb for us, but seriously -- that weed = sucks. The only weed on those images I'd pay more than $30 a quarter for is the Maui and I'd give about $40 a quarter for it.
  • SWIM_obviously likes this

  • Theresafungusamongus

  • Typewritermonky
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 2,654 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 12:47 PM

I would pay through my ass and out my nose for some legitimate old school strains.

I have smoked Acapulco Gold. It literally looked gold.

  • Registered User

  • cotir2005
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 184 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 01:00 PM

Thanks everyone! That is exactly what I was talking about. I googled and searched here "classic marijuana strains" "60's weed" "70's weed" "hippy weed" "hippie weed" ... I could not find a darn thing. I picked up a book from Barnes and nobles that talks about the price of weed in 1965. $8 for a lid. $80 for a kilo. With inflation that comes up to be about $60 a lid today. my kinda prices even if the best would be what we call mids.

  • Ganja Connoisseur

  • Litew8stoner
  • Old School
  • 1,195 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 01:35 PM

Cmon guys. For one thing those pictures are low resolution.

And yes nobody manicured back then but that doesnt mean that shit wasnt some bomb. It was probably organic and tasted awesome.

Remember, a good sativa grown outdoors under the sun in some of the hotter and higher altitude places on earth probably had a much better high and taste then the mid we have nowadays.

Some of the most bomb ass weed we smoke nowadays had their origins in those seeds.

Edit: Though I did watch this weed documentary from the 70's called "Acapulco Gold" and those hippies actually tried picking and smoking ditchweed. They were risking getting shot to steal hemp stalks with only leaves on em. Then they dried the leaves and after putting them in bags of dry ice (they said it increased potency) they bricked the shit up. And apparently a lot of that shit was getting sold. (The hippies who filmed the movie ended up setting the brick on fire when they realized it was worthless, hence their trip to mexico for the acapulco gold)

Edited by Litew8stoner, 12 July 2009 - 01:41 PM.

  • Fear and Loathing

  • Jimi Thing
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 2,642 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 04:12 PM

Ok so the government says weed In the 60s was less potent and therefore less dangerrous than the weed of today right? Bullshit, smoking weed with a lower thc percentage means that you not only have to smoke more to get high but you are also inhaling far more burnt thc-less plant matter than you would be if you were smoking the high quality bud of today. What do you thinks goin to be harder on your lungs? A bowl of dank? Or the 4 or 5 bowls of schwag that it would take to get you high?

  • Fuck you, PAY ME

  • skeeter1620
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 111 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 04:19 PM

it all looks like shwag

  • registered toker

  • take it higgher
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 186 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 05:28 PM

the only one of those that even look smokeable are the thai and maui, and even those dont look good. rest of it looks like schwag

  • OG Boxers never die

  • Volcano South
  • Gold Member
  • 2,475 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 06:14 PM

And the Oaxacan looks seedy as fuck.

What a sad time for High Times.

  • World Strain Tester

  • Burned Haze
  • Old School
  • 3,946 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 06:21 PM

i would still smoke that shit, looks like mids thou. But i bet it was some stickey shit man. Maybe?


Edited by Burned Haze, 12 July 2009 - 06:36 PM.

  • Exercise & Healthy Diet

  • weednotcrack
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 7,800 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 06:30 PM

yeah,it looks like stress,but i had stress that looked better.:smoke: and i think i bought some of that weed before.:confused:

  • Banned

  • PipPipPip
  • 6034life
  • Banned by Moderators
  • 40 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 07:28 PM

man middies dont look that bad!!!

  • Corpseblender.

  • Bakedmagiii
  • Registered Upgraded
  • 1,330 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 10:03 PM

I always questioned the potency of weed back then.
My mom told me a story about finding a ditch full of weed, so they filled garbage bags with it and stuffed them into a van.
They they proceeded to burn them in a bonfire.
If that was some dank shit, you wouldn't burn it like that.
Nor would it just be chillen in a ditch for people to steal.

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users