I've only been doing drain to waste for a few years, always was straight hydro for security reasons. Anyway, to make the wife happy and give me more time I've been tasked with automating my system. I love my pro-mix, but I can't imagine that it would be a better choice than coco for auto system. Any thoughts?
Promix for automated system?
- Thread starter DaFreak
- Start date
BoatyMcBoatface
Member
It's not a good idea imo. With promix you really need to let it dry out some between waterings. Problem is that as they grow they start drinking at different rates causing the optimal time between watering to be constantly moving. Constantly gotta keep sure it's neither under or over watered.
With coco you can just saturate it daily to hourly. You can over water coco but it's nothing like overwatering a peat based mix, it's basically not a worry after the seedling stage asking as the pot isn't ridiculously oversized.
Tl;dr: you can keep coco wet 24/7, you can't keep promix wet 24/7. This makes coco far superior in an automated DTW setup.
With coco you can just saturate it daily to hourly. You can over water coco but it's nothing like overwatering a peat based mix, it's basically not a worry after the seedling stage asking as the pot isn't ridiculously oversized.
Tl;dr: you can keep coco wet 24/7, you can't keep promix wet 24/7. This makes coco far superior in an automated DTW setup.
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
Why do you want to keep the Pro-Mix and not switch to Coco/Perlite? Coco is really convenient.
I can second what @BoatyMcBoatface said: not possible to overwater coco. I have an AutoPot but I did water from the top a few times, and you can just drench the pot and let excess run off, it will be perfectly watered. Never had any signs of overwatering.
The AutoPot keeps the plant optimally watered anyway, so I don't even think about that. No idea if it would work equally well with soil (probably not).
I can second what @BoatyMcBoatface said: not possible to overwater coco. I have an AutoPot but I did water from the top a few times, and you can just drench the pot and let excess run off, it will be perfectly watered. Never had any signs of overwatering.
The AutoPot keeps the plant optimally watered anyway, so I don't even think about that. No idea if it would work equally well with soil (probably not).
I don't know. I think a lot of my aversion comes from years of watching threads of disasters when it first caught on. It wasn't even an option in my country but I've always read threads on all topics. I understand things are different now. Better quality coco, and if I understand it, "pre-charged" coco? But the wife is busting my balls about my time in the garden. Wants me to "work less," which really means she wants me to work more for her. I think I might have to go coco.
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
It's probably that folks who have only ever grown in soil, then switched to coco and tried the exact same thing as before, then failed. That's not surprising.
When using coco, you're growing hydroponically, so you need to fertilize accordingly. The coco coir is an inert medium, it's not like living, organic soil that comes with all sorts of micro-organisms.
However, that also makes it really simple and controllable. What you put in the water is what your plant gets, and nothing else. So you need to be meticulous about that aspect of growing. Get a good hydroponic fertilizer, balance the pH properly, and you should be golden. There is even special hydro fertilizer for coco.
Coco is used at large scale by commercial growers, I'm pretty sure that if you just buy coco bricks from an established gardening brand it should be fine. It never hurts to buy from a reputable, recommended brand, but don't overthink it, and don't overspend.
When using coco, you're growing hydroponically, so you need to fertilize accordingly. The coco coir is an inert medium, it's not like living, organic soil that comes with all sorts of micro-organisms.
However, that also makes it really simple and controllable. What you put in the water is what your plant gets, and nothing else. So you need to be meticulous about that aspect of growing. Get a good hydroponic fertilizer, balance the pH properly, and you should be golden. There is even special hydro fertilizer for coco.
Coco is used at large scale by commercial growers, I'm pretty sure that if you just buy coco bricks from an established gardening brand it should be fine. It never hurts to buy from a reputable, recommended brand, but don't overthink it, and don't overspend.
So my understanding, which is limited, is that the electrical charge, I forget the word, cation? is such that you have to put extra cal-mag in first so it won't get robbed from your mix and basically you can never ever let it dry out? But other than that if I am a Lucas guy I can just use Lucas? I think I remember reading some guy's coco adjusted Lucas formula. Probably same one that's been hanging around for 15 years, should be easy to find.
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
I haven't used extra CalMag so far, but I might just have been lucky because my tap water already contains a lot of calcium and magnesium.
It is recommended to give a CalMag supplement when using coco; or you can use hydroponic fertilizer that is made for coco growing, it already contains the supplement.
The Lucas formula has nothing to do with this. I honestly don't get the point of doing Lucas, you have to handle one fewer bottle of fertilizer, saving you maybe 2 minutes of your time, and that's it. Does not save you money. You're taking a three-part fertilizer and turn it into a two-part fertilizer. Why not buy a two-part fertilizer in the first place? There is a reason for it to be composed of three parts, there's rather complex chemistry involved, I wouldn't mess with the manufacturers formula unless I understand in detail what that entails.
If you use General Hydroponics fertilizer, either use their TriPart at half-strength and add CalMag, or use the two-part Coco fertilizer that they make (probably use that one at half-strength as well, haven't tried). The recommended full strength schedule is much too high for Cannabis, you will burn your plants; happened to me...
Pre-buffering the coco certainly isn't a bad idea; use a CalMag solution or a Coco fertilizer to pre-buffer it (by soaking it in nutrient solution, then drain before use).
It is recommended to give a CalMag supplement when using coco; or you can use hydroponic fertilizer that is made for coco growing, it already contains the supplement.
The Lucas formula has nothing to do with this. I honestly don't get the point of doing Lucas, you have to handle one fewer bottle of fertilizer, saving you maybe 2 minutes of your time, and that's it. Does not save you money. You're taking a three-part fertilizer and turn it into a two-part fertilizer. Why not buy a two-part fertilizer in the first place? There is a reason for it to be composed of three parts, there's rather complex chemistry involved, I wouldn't mess with the manufacturers formula unless I understand in detail what that entails.
If you use General Hydroponics fertilizer, either use their TriPart at half-strength and add CalMag, or use the two-part Coco fertilizer that they make (probably use that one at half-strength as well, haven't tried). The recommended full strength schedule is much too high for Cannabis, you will burn your plants; happened to me...
Pre-buffering the coco certainly isn't a bad idea; use a CalMag solution or a Coco fertilizer to pre-buffer it (by soaking it in nutrient solution, then drain before use).
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
Also, if your goal is to save time, you should give the AutoPot a try. My experience with it is excellent. It's not expensive and very flexible. A simple, quite fool-proof design.
One of the big advantages is that you can leave it unattended for days, even weeks. Also, the pot is removable and can be watered or flushed from the top if you so choose, then reinstalled into the tray for normal operation.
One of the big advantages is that you can leave it unattended for days, even weeks. Also, the pot is removable and can be watered or flushed from the top if you so choose, then reinstalled into the tray for normal operation.
TintEastwood
Well-Known Member
Lucas & H3ad elemental breakdowns
Last edited:
It sounds like you don’t really have a grasp on the Lucas formula. Things are doubled up anyway. GH ended up releasing flies nova to mimic the Lucas formula. But I’m sure there are cheaper things out there, just been using it for 20 years with no problem so I like it.
That’s the one
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
That's exactly my point. The manufacturers offer two-part formulas. Then why turn a three-part formula into a two-part formula yourself? And, sure, Lucas obviously took a step in the right direction by demonstrating that 3-part is not necessary, and the manufacturer picked up on the idea and followed suit.
I haven't said that Lucas does not work. Apparently it works just fine for a lot of people. It's not rocket science anyway, in my opinion a lot of growers vastly overthink the fertilizing issue. We're not growing Orchids or Vanilla.
I just don't see why I should start juggling Excel sheets to translate one tried-and-true feed chart into another, for pretty much the same results.
Well, it wasn't to get the same end results, it was to have a better ratio of MG in there and to simplify it. Their Nova is more expensive than doing Lucas. Not sure why you get hung up on a 3 part, 2 part, 5 part or whatever, if you get to the mix you need and it's cheap it's all good. But I can answer you that at least for me the why was because 20 years ago GH was the only game in town basically. Other brands have come on since, I've never been convinced that any are any better and a lot are more expensive, some are cheaper. If I ever get to the point of ditching my Lucas it won't be for another liquid Fert that's for sure, it will be for solids to bring costs down more. And again, only reason to look at the excel sheet is for curiosity, all the work has been done for people.
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I don't want to be misunderstood here. There are many ways to come to great results, and I really like the effort taken by people like Lucas who really take the ball and run with it, and figure things out.
Maybe you know the Einstein quote: “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.”
Lucas did that, it's a great mind-set to have. You see these postings here, where people list 8 bottles that they are using in their first grow.
That's the opposite of "simple", too many hammers looking for a nail, causes way more problems than it solves.
I work in software development, and the business is complex enough as it is. Since software has no moving parts, it's very easy to go overboard and make stuff more complex than it has to be. It can be very hard to counteract that and just keep things simple. It's actually more difficult to build a simple system than a complex one.
As for costs of fertilizers: unless you buy some overpriced "made-for-cannabis" products, the money spent should not be an issue. A TriPart set of 1 quart each costs $30, and it will last you for a long time. Sure, you can cut that down to $20, so you've saved $10 over many months. How many Happy Meals does that buy you?
It's always good to cut down on costs, especially when we're talking about straight up wasted money, but for me the simplicity and manageability is what really counts.
Maybe you know the Einstein quote: “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.”
Lucas did that, it's a great mind-set to have. You see these postings here, where people list 8 bottles that they are using in their first grow.
That's the opposite of "simple", too many hammers looking for a nail, causes way more problems than it solves.
I work in software development, and the business is complex enough as it is. Since software has no moving parts, it's very easy to go overboard and make stuff more complex than it has to be. It can be very hard to counteract that and just keep things simple. It's actually more difficult to build a simple system than a complex one.
As for costs of fertilizers: unless you buy some overpriced "made-for-cannabis" products, the money spent should not be an issue. A TriPart set of 1 quart each costs $30, and it will last you for a long time. Sure, you can cut that down to $20, so you've saved $10 over many months. How many Happy Meals does that buy you?
It's always good to cut down on costs, especially when we're talking about straight up wasted money, but for me the simplicity and manageability is what really counts.
I grow the max the law allows me, just because I can, which is 24 plants. As you say, it's peanuts at the end of the day, which is why I've always stuck with it. I still use 5 products at the end of the day though. I like silicon and flouricious or whatever it's called for sure. No "boosters" though.
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
Not a lot of people go to the lengths necessary to find out which products they actually need.
It would take more than one controlled experiment with clones and identical conditions to find out if adding a certain product increases yield or quality noticeably. Then there's countless other variables like CO2, temp, humidity, light, growing method that need to be kept fixed. Just a ton of meticulous work to find out the truth, who does that? So I guess most people just throw in products and supplements for good measure at the end of the day.
But we all love products, especially if they are marketed well, just makes you feel good to have them and to use them. Consumerism.
It would take more than one controlled experiment with clones and identical conditions to find out if adding a certain product increases yield or quality noticeably. Then there's countless other variables like CO2, temp, humidity, light, growing method that need to be kept fixed. Just a ton of meticulous work to find out the truth, who does that? So I guess most people just throw in products and supplements for good measure at the end of the day.
But we all love products, especially if they are marketed well, just makes you feel good to have them and to use them. Consumerism.
Coco dtw... with auto drain system.... amazing system. Drippers in the top of the pots 10 mins per day.... the iws autodrain system is amazing
I have to say, I've been looking at those autopots and they look amazing. At first I thought they were flood and drain. I like the idea of no pumps. I've never done bottom feeding although I have done hempy which is basically a poor man's version of the same thing so I don't imagine it would be too much of a stretch for me.
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
The AutoPots are amazing. About as simple as you can make it for what you get. What's great about the system is that (a) you can remove the pots anytime and they just become regular pots and (b) it's completely modular, so you can combine 2 gal, 4 gal and 5 gal pots, all fed from the same tank.
It's not flood-and-drain, it's just a wick system, bottom-fed. More similar to Octopot than Hempy. Simpler than both of them. The "Hooch Bucket" comes close (made by YouTuber Hoocho).
It's not flood-and-drain, it's just a wick system, bottom-fed. More similar to Octopot than Hempy. Simpler than both of them. The "Hooch Bucket" comes close (made by YouTuber Hoocho).