4 days of drying and my buds are crispy and crumble upon touch

RookieHaze

RookieHaze

Active Member
In my moistere meter it shows about 20-25% on the stems. But 0% on the buds. Inside the buds in was squishy. So they are not dry all the way trough. Will be trimming and putting them to jars in a couple of days. I think they will be ready by then
 
Billy the Mountain

Billy the Mountain

Well-Known Member
Again, 4 days to dust seems wholly improbable at the conditions stated.
I've dried at 70f+ many times and still have never had anything dry in four days, let alone dry to such an extent it would crumble upon touching.

A recently completed dry, first photo day 1, second photo a week later at a consistent 60f/60%
They were pulled on day 11 and 12.
1711558581419.png1711559005807.png
 
RookieHaze

RookieHaze

Active Member
Billy the Mountain said:
Again, 4 days to dust seems wholly improbable at the conditions stated.
I've dried at 70f+ many times and still have never had anything dry in four days, let alone dry to such an extent it would crumble upon touching.

A recently completed dry, first photo day 1, second photo a week later at a consistent 60f/60%
They were pulled on day 11 and 12.
View attachment 5381446View attachment 5381450
Click to expand...
They only crumble on the top parts of the bud. Where the buds become thinner and thinner. On the thicker parts they are hard. Inside they are soft. Moisture in stems lay about 20 -25 %. They are now 6 days into drying. Taking a guess at 9 days of drying I will be putting em to jars
 
RookieHaze

RookieHaze

Active Member
Billy the Mountain said:
Again, 4 days to dust seems wholly improbable at the conditions stated.
I've dried at 70f+ many times and still have never had anything dry in four days, let alone dry to such an extent it would crumble upon touching.

A recently completed dry, first photo day 1, second photo a week later at a consistent 60f/60%
They were pulled on day 11 and 12.
View attachment 5381446View attachment 5381450
Click to expand...
I see you have a lot of leaves attached. Mine is a lot more naked since they are trimmed quite a bit
 
RookieHaze

RookieHaze

Active Member
Jjgrow420 said:
Extractor FAN. Are we missing something here...?
A fan is a fan is a fan is a fan.... Something that moves air around through spinning blades (unless it's one of those fancy dyson ones)..... A fan.
My avg dry time is 12-14 days
Click to expand...
Oh so a extractor fan is blowing air directly onto the buds? You were right. I did miss something
 
curious2garden

curious2garden

Well-Known Mod
Staff member
RookieHaze said:
Moisture in stems lay about 20 -25 %
Click to expand...
If you're using a moisture meter for wood you want to be around 13%, or at least that has been my experience so far. So not ready to jar and that's when the outside will equalize some. Try to keep it out of the direct air path just mild circulation in other words no wind tunnels lol. I hope that helps.
 
RookieHaze

RookieHaze

Active Member
curious2garden said:
If you're using a moisture meter for wood you want to be around 13%, or at least that has been my experience so far. So not ready to jar and that's when the outside will equalize some. Try to keep it out of the direct air path just mild circulation in other words no wind tunnels lol. I hope that helps.
Click to expand...
Thank you :)
 
PURPLEB3RRYKUSH

PURPLEB3RRYKUSH

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
Well, the whole auto flower thing is new to me. It's a different plant. It doesn't look or grow the same as classic marijuana. I can't really comment on it. It's usually associated with younger people. I'm old and I prefer the old, classic photo period marijuana that's been used for smoking for thousands of years. Like I say, this site has made a special section for questions about auto flower plants because it's a separate thing altogether.
Click to expand...
Autoflowers no different to photo other than light schedule. Breeding has advanced a long way
 
tstick

tstick

Well-Known Member
PURPLEB3RRYKUSH said:
Autoflowers no different to photo other than light schedule. Breeding has advanced a long way
Click to expand...
Auto flowering marijuana is a relatively new "thing" and I think it panders to younger crowds who grew up with it. If it's no different other than light schedule, then why does it look and grow differently? That's an indication that it's definitely not the same type of plant. In my view, why even bother with it? Is photo period marijuana so difficult to grow that there needs to be an alternative? I don't think so. Plus, most auto flower stuff doesn't really even resemble the same plant that I grow. Auto flower weed looks like "Cleopatra" from the Addams Family! Anyway, to each his own. I have been a marijuana user since 1974 so I grew up with landrace marijuana and that's where legit breeders need to put their energy, in my opinion. Everything that made landrace marijuana great has been lost to modern hybridization. Breeders should be working on bringing it back. Why breeders are wasting their time with auto flowering stuff, I have no idea. There's no real need for it. I guess it's an achievement just for the sake of doing it....? I don't know. You tell me.
 
PURPLEB3RRYKUSH

PURPLEB3RRYKUSH

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
Auto flowering marijuana is a relatively new "thing" and I think it panders to younger crowds who grew up with it. If it's no different other than light schedule, then why does it look and grow differently? That's an indication that it's definitely not the same type of plant. In my view, why even bother with it? Is photo period marijuana so difficult to grow that there needs to be an alternative? I don't think so. Plus, most auto flower stuff doesn't really even resemble the same plant that I grow. Auto flower weed looks like "Cleopatra" from the Addams Family! Anyway, to each his own. I have been a marijuana user since 1974 so I grew up with landrace marijuana and that's where legit breeders need to put their energy, in my opinion. Everything that made landrace marijuana great has been lost to modern hybridization. Breeders should be working on bringing it back. Why breeders are wasting their time with auto flowering stuff, I have no idea. There's no real need for it. I guess it's an achievement just for the sake of doing it....? I don't know. You tell me.
Click to expand...
It's not a new thing autos been around since 2010
 
PURPLEB3RRYKUSH

PURPLEB3RRYKUSH

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
Auto flowering marijuana is a relatively new "thing" and I think it panders to younger crowds who grew up with it. If it's no different other than light schedule, then why does it look and grow differently? That's an indication that it's definitely not the same type of plant. In my view, why even bother with it? Is photo period marijuana so difficult to grow that there needs to be an alternative? I don't think so. Plus, most auto flower stuff doesn't really even resemble the same plant that I grow. Auto flower weed looks like "Cleopatra" from the Addams Family! Anyway, to each his own. I have been a marijuana user since 1974 so I grew up with landrace marijuana and that's where legit breeders need to put their energy, in my opinion. Everything that made landrace marijuana great has been lost to modern hybridization. Breeders should be working on bringing it back. Why breeders are wasting their time with auto flowering stuff, I have no idea. There's no real need for it. I guess it's an achievement just for the sake of doing it....? I don't know. You tell me.
Click to expand...
20240330_130045.jpgAutoflower I think it looks like marijuana
 
PURPLEB3RRYKUSH

PURPLEB3RRYKUSH

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
Auto flowering marijuana is a relatively new "thing" and I think it panders to younger crowds who grew up with it. If it's no different other than light schedule, then why does it look and grow differently? That's an indication that it's definitely not the same type of plant. In my view, why even bother with it? Is photo period marijuana so difficult to grow that there needs to be an alternative? I don't think so. Plus, most auto flower stuff doesn't really even resemble the same plant that I grow. Auto flower weed looks like "Cleopatra" from the Addams Family! Anyway, to each his own. I have been a marijuana user since 1974 so I grew up with landrace marijuana and that's where legit breeders need to put their energy, in my opinion. Everything that made landrace marijuana great has been lost to modern hybridization. Breeders should be working on bringing it back. Why breeders are wasting their time with auto flowering stuff, I have no idea. There's no real need for it. I guess it's an achievement just for the sake of doing it....? I don't know. You tell me.
Click to expand...
when u know how to grow autoflowers don't lack anything that the photo period has
 
PURPLEB3RRYKUSH

PURPLEB3RRYKUSH

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
Auto flowering marijuana is a relatively new "thing" and I think it panders to younger crowds who grew up with it. If it's no different other than light schedule, then why does it look and grow differently? That's an indication that it's definitely not the same type of plant. In my view, why even bother with it? Is photo period marijuana so difficult to grow that there needs to be an alternative? I don't think so. Plus, most auto flower stuff doesn't really even resemble the same plant that I grow. Auto flower weed looks like "Cleopatra" from the Addams Family! Anyway, to each his own. I have been a marijuana user since 1974 so I grew up with landrace marijuana and that's where legit breeders need to put their energy, in my opinion. Everything that made landrace marijuana great has been lost to modern hybridization. Breeders should be working on bringing it back. Why breeders are wasting their time with auto flowering stuff, I have no idea. There's no real need for it. I guess it's an achievement just for the sake of doing it....? I don't know. You tell me.
Click to expand...
20240330_125955.jpg4th week of flower
 
Beeswings

Beeswings

Well-Known Member
Dudes, autos aren't new, ruderalis has been around for probably thousands of years, and ruderalis would be considered a "land race", it's just not going to get you high.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top