Nice!! Serious nugs on those ladiesNot a whole lot of effort being put into this thread, lately.
Chem D x I-95
Wave Genetics
Pure Chem fire!
View attachment 4829509View attachment 4829511View attachment 4829512View attachment 4829514View attachment 4829515
Thank YouNice!! Serious nugs on those ladies
Do the chem lines you grow mostly start off with a sweet smell which most people call gas. I know smelling the flower is quite different than squeezing it then smelling your fingers. I know most of what I’ve grown lately has that lots of sweaty sock funk too.Thank You
I wish there was a smell emoji, then you could all smell the level of dank on them.
This is the sort of fire that gets JJ's briefs in a bunch.
I'd say most of the broad leaf cannabis plants have a sweet fruity candy like odor early on in flower, up to say week 5 and as the plant matures different strains start doing their thing.Do the chem lines you grow mostly start off with a sweet smell which most people call gas. I know smelling the flower is quite different than squeezing it then smelling your fingers. I know most of what I’ve grown lately has that lots of sweaty sock funk too.
Why would JJ get upset?
I understand what you mean on the smells now, thanks.I'd say most of the broad leaf cannabis plants have a sweet fruity candy like odor early on in flower, up to say week 5 and as the plant matures different strains start doing their thing.
I don't perceive gas in a strain as a sweet smell, but I'm sure it's very subjective
Gas and fuel to me are an almost turpentine paint thinner odor that gets all up in your nose like mentholatum.
The dirty sock component sounds like Chem Funk.
To me Chemdog is more funk and less gas than say OG Kush which is more gas and less funk, but the gas and the funk are found in both Chemdawg and OGK.
Both have varying degrees of Pine and lemon as well, but as far as I know none finish with fruity.
To answer on the JJ question.
JJ gets unhinged over people making crosses like Chem D x I-95, ECSD x Stardawg, because those were his exclusive crosses using his work.
JJ and crew has bred so many amazing crosses, I can't deny his contribution.
holy ChunkyNot a whole lot of effort being put into this thread, lately.
Chem D x I-95
Wave Genetics
Pure Chem fire!
View attachment 4829509View attachment 4829511View attachment 4829512View attachment 4829514View attachment 4829515
Nice to see some familiar faces and your kickin buds.holy Chunky
well done brother
your right bout this thread
let's turn it up a bit
cobs candy (brisco's bargain beans)
#1
View attachment 4829842View attachment 4829843View attachment 4829844
#2
View attachment 4829846
View attachment 4829847
beautiful! you can really see that chem d in there. Great job!! Thumb’s lookin mighty green!Not a whole lot of effort being put into this thread, lately.
Chem D x I-95
Wave Genetics
Pure Chem fire!
View attachment 4829509View attachment 4829511View attachment 4829512View attachment 4829514View attachment 4829515
Thank youbeautiful! you can really see that chem d in there. Great job!! Thumb’s lookin mighty green!
Not a whole lot of effort being put into this thread, lately.
Chem D x I-95
Wave Genetics
Pure Chem fire!
View attachment 4829509View attachment 4829511View attachment 4829512View attachment 4829514View attachment 4829515
Thank you.I remember someone trying to tell you were too heavy with N. I’d say you you’re doing ok
Ebb n flow, especially with recirculating water, can be ran at a lower nutrient rate for sure. I never used ec so can't remember the ec level it is comparable to but I rarely found the need to go 1000 ppm, usually in 700-800 range. Even lower if I was using rock woolThank you.
This was my first ebb and flow grow, I've been growing in coco for a few years and got bored.
I knew there would be a bit of a learning curve.
I actually use very small amounts of nitrogen, but high Phosphorus and I believe the margins were burned by allowing my EC to drift up to about 2.1 from 1.8, due to evaporation.
Perhaps 1.6 would be the sweet spot.
I'm trying another brand now and am already needing to scale back their recommended EC
Depending on what brand of reader you use, it's either a .5 or .7 scale to figure EC.Ebb n flow, especially with recirculating water, can be ran at a lower nutrient rate for sure. I never used ec so can't remember the ec level it is comparable to but I rarely found the need to go 1000 ppm, usually in 700-800 range. Even lower if I was using rock wool
I gotcha. Yeah I don't go very high on nutrients anymore. Most times in coco I only go up to about 600 range and still sometimes get leaf tip burn.Depending on what brand of reader you use, it's either a .5 or .7 scale to figure EC.
1000ppm = 2.0 EC for most American brands, which is too hot for my ladies.
I do flood every hour, so I think they need less than someone flooding 3 times a cycle.