ebb & flow buckets vs. large tub DWC - growing trees

[CLOSETGROWTH]

Soil since 1981, and NOPE I NEVER EVER have seen anything produce like this guy is saying. I also SOG because it is the best way for me to provide for myself. Not even grows outside make that much weight in this little of a space, generally speaking!
Im sure a person or two have done it, maybe...

On a side note, there should be a forum for us old timers in the 25-30 yr club!!

Im no guru, but Im coming upon the 30 year mark as well. If you count my outdoor grows its been almost 35 yrs. I had a 5 year run with hydro, but I switched back in '00 for taste/personal preferences to organic.

I LOL'd hard when I read this stuff. Some people just really have no idea!






hahahhahaha, and maybe the dirt/potter too!

Even if wet = 25lbs, there is no one on the planet pulling 8lbs(estimated dry) on this setup. NOPE NO WAY!!!

I totally agree...

Some people LOVE to talk with nothing to show.. Bullshitter's...

"REALITY WHAT A CONCEPT"

 

[plutomoney]

Im not trying to put out bullshit Im not some knid of major cultivator I did like 2 grows in my life they were both soil im doing the first hydro. I'm going off what I seen. This was the biggest plants I ever seen. I didnt take the weights thats what he had written down when I went to his place. When i helped with the chop up it was some serious weight.

 

[tea tree]

omg, no one has mentioned the dude albfuct! it has been a while. when i first joined the site on my origanal character, lol, it was every newbs dream to be another al. quite a few did it. he pulls 1 pound every two weeks under 2 1000 watters. sog of course. 4 3x3 or 4x4 trays and 30 one gallon rockwool pots or phytocell or whatever and he rotates harvest coming from for 4 donator plants. As he is vegges these takes 30 cuts max pops them right into the tray and every two weeks rotates them until he has a system where every for weeks he harvests a pound of colas. nice shit. Very effucient if you dont mind plant counts. also you got to be able to clone ok. lol. look into his thread. Very simple diy all the way thru with some adjust a wings for lights and cooltubes. he does not even use co2 which now even i have in this day and age.

 

[fatman7574]

Not that impressive. He is basically getting pounds per week from square meter of budding space. That is less than the yields advertised by seed suppliers. Seed suppliers advertise a typical average yield in SOG of 500 grams per square meter for even indicas and that means he should be getting a yield of (1 sq meters*500 grams/sq meter *ounce/28 grams*pound/16 ounces)=1.11 pounds. I get a yield of 1.57 pounds in that same space. I run 6 weeks budding in a SOG operation. The plants go from cutting to budding in three weeks. That means half the budding plants are harvested every three weeks and replaced with 3 week old clones immediattely budded. The plants are aero finish to end. IE i get more for my money with a lot less labor and many less mainteance and operation problems. No comparison. 448 grams per square meter or 700 grams per square meter. Simple as that.

 

[OregonMeds]

Fatman I'm with you on everything but the way you talk you never do seem to take into account that some of these grows you can't just figure by the square meter when they are vertically lit. Not talking about this 25lb stuff, but others when you have 10 vertical lights in say a 20' square space it's actually equal to a sog much greater than the flat space of the room yield wise if you actually are rocking it right. You'd have to unfold all that directly lit space in your head to get a picture of how large the area actually is that's putting out bud equal to the flat space of the sog.

The outdoor yields may have higher lumens, but they don't have 10 points of light being used at their most efficient means possible with perfect weather every single day. 4k per plant and up vertically puts the sun to shame aside from cost.



Flipping trees with the best practices and the right strain it's still not really as bad as you say if you take that into account. I'm suprised you don't use your multiple 250w lights vertically because I would almost guarantee you it would work far better man. You have way more experience and knowledge than me, but I get the sense you just haven't seen the vertical benefits yet and it seems a shame because your setup sounds ideal to compare it if you tried half without the reflectors in a standard krusty bucket light arrangement I'm sure you'd change your mind a little bit, on some things.

Not that I expect you to veg trees, but even vertically lit bushes and other arrangements do often work out better from my experience anyway.

 

[mrdrywall]

No way man he's still full of shit. Almost nobody gets over 2.5lbs per 1kw light. It doesn't matter how many plants or how big or how much co2 or anything, there's always room for improvement, some systems with multiple vertical lights can get more, but your friend isn't a miracle worker who can yield 4x the rest of the world.

i agree the best growers with best equipment and perfect conditions are maxing out at 2lbs or so per 1000w some exceptions to every rule but not in that time frame maybe if u veg for 6 mos. i dont know

 

[fatman7574]

Fatman I'm with you on everything but the way you talk you never do seem to take into account that some of these grows you can't just figure by the square meter when they are vertically lit. Lit growing space is lit growing space regardless of the bulb orientation. If you you use 5000 watts vertically or horizontally to provide lighting for the same square feet of growing space then the calculations of gram per square meter is still calculated the same way as you are using the same amount of light for the same amount of lit growing space. The fact that a lot of light from vertical hung bulbs is wasted due to it not being directed at the plants is just an issue that raises cost through inefficient use of the the lights. It is still a operating cost. Not talking about this 25lb stuff, but others when you have 10 vertical lights in say a 20' square space it's actually equal to a sog much greater than the flat space of the room yield wise if you actually are rocking it right. Not true. Unless those vertical bulbs are all within the same distance from the palnts as with a SOG. This is nearly never the case. The cost would be prohibitive. A 20' square space is 400 square foot. That means 16000 watts of lighting for a SOG with the lights air or water cooled so as to place them just a few inches above the plants. That means at laest 40 400 watt bulbs. even using 1000 watt bulbs vertically you would need to supply about 50 to 60 wttas of light persquare foot with the vertical bi ulbs. That would mean using at least 20 to 24 thousand light bulbs or 33 to 40 400 watt lights. You have to unfold all that directly lit space in your head to get a picture of how large the area actually is that's putting out bud equal to the flat space of the sog. You are not however calculating for the descrased PAR at a distance, nor the decrease in efficiency around the grow at area, nor are you calculating for all the many areas that are not producing much or any pot in those vertical bulb systems grows. Unless you are completely surrounding the vertical bulbs with plants such as setting up a honey combed arrangement for your plants with the plants within inches of the bulbs you just can't deliver equal quality lighting so you end up with the equivalent to a heath vertical grow or worse where your growing times are longer and your over all quality is lower and your kilo watt hours cost per gram is not only larger but the cycle times mean less yield over time. Even with a honey combed system you have n many areas where one plant is blocking thelight from aother planst so you end up with good lighting on part of the plant and poor lighting on part of the plant. You obviously are not figuring many things into your fold out theory.

The outdoor yields may have higher lumens, but they don't have 10 points of light being used at their most efficient means possible with perfect weather every single day. 4k per plant and up vertically puts the sun to shame aside from cost. 4K, what is that supposed to mean? COSTS IS A MAJOR ISSUE ALWAYS in mj production. If I can produce mj buds at 40 cents per garm total cost with 1 yera equipment depreciation, why would I want to use a system that increases that cost/ I guarntee you if I lived in a part of the world where I could grow MJ ouside in a hydropic green house all yaer with just supplemental lightin as needed I would definitelynot grow indoors. Indoors offers stealth but at a much greater cost thangrowing out doors. If hydroponic green house vegetable growers can profitably grow a product that they get maybe 25 to 50 cents per pound for growing how much cheaper do you think growing indoor is. Trying to compare lighting from the sun to indoor k lighting is a joke. The PAR avilable from sunlight even on a cloudy day or during the fall and winter is almost always greater than what we supply with indoor lighting.



Flipping trees with the best practices and the right strain it's still not really as bad as you say if you take that into account. I'm suprised you don't use your multiple 250w lights vertically because I would almost guarantee you it would work far better man. I have tried it and it is not as efficient. I have been growing indoors for over 35 years I am a research scientist. There is very little I have never tried except forsome of the totally absurd things some pr eople try or suggest. The college where I teach is also an agricultural colege. I have no lack of research studies I can visit and read data and reports from. Plus I can access at no costs all the many studies on line that cost money for the general public to read or down load. Plus I have test grow systems inn my home that are fully instrumented. My scientific opinons are not merely based upon visual/emperical data or forum and manfacturers site hype. You have way more experience and knowledge than me, but I get the sense you just haven't seen the vertical benefits yet and it seems a shame because your setup sounds ideal to compare it if you tried half without the reflectors in a standard krusty bucket light arrangement I'm sure you'd change your mind a little bit, on some things. Like I said, I have alrady donecomparitivetesting and reveiewed scientific reports about studies done on vertical lighting grow sytems.

Not that I expect you to veg trees, but even vertically lit bushes and other arrangements do often work out better from my experience anyway.

I disagree with your opinion and assumption as it is pretty hard to just ignore scientific data and research results that are contrary to your opinions. Simpy because you think your emperical data is accuratte rather than just skewed observations based upon wishful thinking does not convince me to beat a dead horse. You just can't make a silk purse out of a rats ear. If you notice the vertical grow budding times and even the vegging times are always longer than horizontally lit SOG's producing the same yields per square meter. I would much prefer 9 crops per year than 5 or 6. If vertical grows were more efficient they would use less kwh's per gram to produce equal or better quality buds in a year as the SOg grows. That is not the case.