RM3
Well-Known Member
cause it is a schedule and I'm a grower that advocates gettin on the plants schedule rather than forcin our schedule on the plant, I also disagree with how they mix things into the schedule. But I'm also the grower that mixes up different batches of nutes for different strains, most feed all the plants the same
Alec420
Well-Known Member
one of my buddies who has been growing for years swears by the lucas formula, showing me pictures of his harvest. being super frosty and all that good stuff. He makes a living being a vendor so i thought it might be a good option.
But if the riddler isn't cool with it, then im having second thoughts on the lucas formula
But if the riddler isn't cool with it, then im having second thoughts on the lucas formula
Mr Hyde
Well-Known Member
I've used the lucas formula, the only thing is I am different and I use straight tap water in between feedings and I don't actually feed often. I watch the plant and then put some more in of the lucas formula when necessary. Also toss some epsom salt in there once a month or so lolol. I have come out with some dank plants.
Lots of people I know pump their plants, I don't.
Lots of people I know pump their plants, I don't.
Morbid Angel
Well-Known Member
lucas formula like everything else is just a guide. @RM3 yes all guides are generic the LF can be tailored to plants. I also change scheduals according to strain needs. @Alec420 a ppm meter/ec meter checking run off or res for and aft feedings during the grow as well as XP identifying plants physical tell tale signs etc is the key. LF is fine. Its up to you and your XP to find the LF spot on the 1-10 scale.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
exactly! Just how Lucas was modified by H3AD for Coco: 6mL micro/ 9mL bloom and 1g/gal of Epsom and Boom! it works in Coco too.
mytwhyt
Well-Known Member
Used Lucas formula until i switched to FNB http://gh.growgh.com/docs/LABELS/floranova_bloom.pdf.. It has everything the LF has and more.... The label says it all... buy a qt. and give it a try...
potroastV2
Well-Known Member
I was in the group that came up with that formula, and our thinking was that the Nitrogen in the Grow was mostly derived from Ammonia, and the rest derived from Nitrates. We noticed that the Nitrogen in the Micro was mostly Nitrate Nitrogen, with a little Ammonia Nitrogen. So a bunch of us tried it on several crops, and came up with that formula where you didn't need to buy the Grow at all.
Then Lucas posted it on some web-based forums, and named it after himself.
Then Lucas posted it on some web-based forums, and named it after himself.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
@rollitupI was in the group that came up with that formula, and our thinking was that the Nitrogen in the Grow was mostly derived from Ammonia, and the rest derived from Nitrates. We noticed that the Nitrogen in the Micro was mostly Nitrate Nitrogen, with a little Ammonia Nitrogen. So a bunch of us tried it on several crops, and came up with that formula where you didn't need to buy the Grow at all.
Then Lucas posted it on some web-based forums, and named it after himself.
i'm intrigued!
here's the link that i provide to people interested in it. you were part of this?
http://www.angelfire.com/cantina/fourtwenty/articles/profiles.htm
i never have figured out where the Lucas part came into play.
RM3
Well-Known Member
I did say it works, just nothin I would do, that is not a reason not to try it
If you want something cheap, straight forward, and easy it's not a bad choice.
If you like to tinker with products and ratio's you might not like it as much.
potroastV2
Well-Known Member
Yeah Man! That was written by the grower whose handle is pH. He was actually the one who noticed the make-up of the Nitrogen in the Grow and Micro, so he posed the question, and several of us tried it to see what happened. After we all did a couple of crops using that method of leaving out the Grow component entirely, pH wrote up that formula. That was in the late 1990's.
Lucas was a grower in that forum (adpc) although I don't remember if he participated in our testing. He then posted it on OverGrow and it became known as the Lucas Formula.
PURPLEB3RRYKUSH
Well-Known Member
Garbage formula, gives you n deficient plants, aswell as too much PK
GrowUrOwnDank
Well-Known Member
Damn. Trying to read that link hurt my brain. Total buzzkill. I'm just gonna throw a small scoop of Maxibloom powder in a gallon of water and be done with.
Peace and love.
GrowUrOwnDank
Well-Known Member
Yep I give it a ten for those reasons. Cheap, straightforward, easy, fast, simple. It is the laziest way I know of to get some serious dank smoke. Perhaps not the absolute best, but it simply works awesome. 10. I ain't never going back to mixing a whole buncha stuff. I might try another good 1 part someday tho. I might also add some cal mag sometimes too.
Alec420
Well-Known Member
Thanks guys for all your input! I want to give the plant what it needs like everyone else and get back nice yields in the end.
Soo from what I understand, LF will work for almost all strains more or less. Its for the common grower to get above average buds.
If I want to get specific with what a strain's nute needs at different parts of its life, will I just have to guesstimate what a strain needs?
Talking with people on forums to see what they do?
Soo from what I understand, LF will work for almost all strains more or less. Its for the common grower to get above average buds.
If I want to get specific with what a strain's nute needs at different parts of its life, will I just have to guesstimate what a strain needs?
Talking with people on forums to see what they do?