Hmm, that might partially explain why so many people have good results adding blackstrap molasses? It being an excellent source of Iron, and a good source of Calcium?
bloombastic??
- Thread starter Rjstoner
- Start date
Hmm, that might partially explain why so many people have good results adding blackstrap molasses? It being an excellent source of Iron, and a good source of Calcium?
GanjaPharma
Member
nowadays i run maxi, dunno if there is a simpler line than that. my finishing amendments have always been something simple like koolbloom, plus algen. plus a carb, like molasses..
got on the atami sample list at a convention and since i had my suspicions (smell (earthy), taste(sweet) color(green like the hulk) about what was in it, i sent an email to erwin over @ atami to clear up 3 things.
1)is bloombastic a replacement for silica, seaweed, pk boost, and carb load?
2)do i apply every day during weeks 4-8 or only once a week? (like i prefer to do with my PK boost)
3) can i re-use coir that has been treated with Bloombastic after i had flushed for 10 days? (this was my trial balloon for PGR's)
he replied:
yes, it contains silica and kelp...and an engineered carbohydrate so he doesnt want me to overdo it.
and he says fine to re-use. therefore prolly no PGR's
so was sold to try it at least....that was 3 years ago. didnt really do the math but i am pretty sure i come out ahead buying the single product (i get the 5.5L for $700) vs what i used to buy for my pretty basic finishing regimen... with better results.
got on the atami sample list at a convention and since i had my suspicions (smell (earthy), taste(sweet) color(green like the hulk) about what was in it, i sent an email to erwin over @ atami to clear up 3 things.
1)is bloombastic a replacement for silica, seaweed, pk boost, and carb load?
2)do i apply every day during weeks 4-8 or only once a week? (like i prefer to do with my PK boost)
3) can i re-use coir that has been treated with Bloombastic after i had flushed for 10 days? (this was my trial balloon for PGR's)
he replied:
so if i read between the lines
yes, it contains silica and kelp...and an engineered carbohydrate so he doesnt want me to overdo it.
and he says fine to re-use. therefore prolly no PGR's
so was sold to try it at least....that was 3 years ago. didnt really do the math but i am pretty sure i come out ahead buying the single product (i get the 5.5L for $700) vs what i used to buy for my pretty basic finishing regimen... with better results.
Thinking about going to Maxi myself.
T
TREE KING
bobby if i was using a.n sensi 2 part what ratio would i use with bloombastic?
also currently im using sensi 2 part bloom, big bud/overdrive, b-52, nirvana, and bud candy. if i started using bloombastic which products would i cut out? im guessing big bud/overdrive but i dont know about the rest
also currently im using sensi 2 part bloom, big bud/overdrive, b-52, nirvana, and bud candy. if i started using bloombastic which products would i cut out? im guessing big bud/overdrive but i dont know about the rest
YosmiteSam, will be able to answer your question, better than I can.
But if it were me, and I wanted to try it, I would use during the last 4 weeks of flower, at 2ml per gallon.
But if it were me, and I wanted to try it, I would use during the last 4 weeks of flower, at 2ml per gallon.
TheBioMaster
Member
FYI- We tested Bloombastic and also there root product called Rootbastic and both tested "ok" at best. We did some side by side test as well as analysis. The side by side test were done using Koolbloom liquid and powder as well as several other bloom boosters like Big Bud from AN.
I wont bore you with all the details but in a nutshell Bloombastic rated about 4th in the boosters. Below are some key points we found during testing you may find helpful.
Koolbloom liquid and powder combo did much better than Bloombastic in all the test we did.
All test were performed in a RDWC system using grow stones for the media.
The worst thing about bloombastic is that it will seperate and leave a "powder" like substance in the tanks. The organics in Bloombastic never were broken down even at the end of the cycle.
Bloombastic needs a strong and diverse biology present to fully work as there are sources of plant nutrients that are not available to the plants directly. A grower running a sterile tank will see the least amount of gain from the product. A grower with a strong micro-herd present will notice the most gain from the product.
Bloombastic would be better suited for a soil enviroment running organics.
With that said, Bloombastic does have some mineral properties and a grower "could" see a gain from that (example would be someone running the Lucas formula in which case those plants would be starving of certain minerals, and the addition of a additive like bloombastic would initiate a grow "surge" for sure) just not enough to justify the price IMO as the amounts would be considered "trace".
Someone running a more balanced profile would notice very little gain if any at all with the addition of Bloombastic as there plants are already getting a balanced diet, and as previously stated the amounts available are trace amounts.
Please note that trace amounts of certain minerals is all that is needed/recomended or ever used by the plants and this is not always a "bad" thing.
Still pending analysis of content including culture test (bacteria/fungi) and hormones.
Summary- Bloombastic is over priced for what you actually get in the bottle and a grower would be better off using a cheaper alternative for boosters if any at all.
Rated- 5 out of 10
I wont bore you with all the details but in a nutshell Bloombastic rated about 4th in the boosters. Below are some key points we found during testing you may find helpful.
Koolbloom liquid and powder combo did much better than Bloombastic in all the test we did.
All test were performed in a RDWC system using grow stones for the media.
The worst thing about bloombastic is that it will seperate and leave a "powder" like substance in the tanks. The organics in Bloombastic never were broken down even at the end of the cycle.
Bloombastic needs a strong and diverse biology present to fully work as there are sources of plant nutrients that are not available to the plants directly. A grower running a sterile tank will see the least amount of gain from the product. A grower with a strong micro-herd present will notice the most gain from the product.
Bloombastic would be better suited for a soil enviroment running organics.
With that said, Bloombastic does have some mineral properties and a grower "could" see a gain from that (example would be someone running the Lucas formula in which case those plants would be starving of certain minerals, and the addition of a additive like bloombastic would initiate a grow "surge" for sure) just not enough to justify the price IMO as the amounts would be considered "trace".
Someone running a more balanced profile would notice very little gain if any at all with the addition of Bloombastic as there plants are already getting a balanced diet, and as previously stated the amounts available are trace amounts.
Please note that trace amounts of certain minerals is all that is needed/recomended or ever used by the plants and this is not always a "bad" thing.
Still pending analysis of content including culture test (bacteria/fungi) and hormones.
Summary- Bloombastic is over priced for what you actually get in the bottle and a grower would be better off using a cheaper alternative for boosters if any at all.
Rated- 5 out of 10
Hell of a write up.
Much better than just saying "it's garbage".
The fact that I use a modified lucas formula is probably why I see good results. As for the expense issue, if I were using it on tomatoes then it might be expensive. However, when each plant makes 750-1000 dollars, then price becomes relative.
Much better than just saying "it's garbage".
The fact that I use a modified lucas formula is probably why I see good results. As for the expense issue, if I were using it on tomatoes then it might be expensive. However, when each plant makes 750-1000 dollars, then price becomes relative.
TheBioMaster
Member
True, being able to regain some of the cost of the nutrients and/or additives would change the rules drastically, at least for me it would anyhow. Excellent point.
Also, please note that we test nutrients and especialy additives under an intense scope and array or should I say battery of testing. For a additive to score as high as bloombastic did under "testing" conditions means alot for that product. To be in the top five out of ALL the additves available out there says something as well about this product.
Cheers!
Also, please note that we test nutrients and especialy additives under an intense scope and array or should I say battery of testing. For a additive to score as high as bloombastic did under "testing" conditions means alot for that product. To be in the top five out of ALL the additves available out there says something as well about this product.
Cheers!
TheBioMaster
Member
I would consider working on a nutrient profile so that you get a "balanced" array of minerals in your feed schedule.
Start with a good base and build from there until you reach maximum levels.
Normally you would cut back on your base nutrients when applying Bloombastic.
Bloombastic is more of a "complete" booster formula so adding it with koolbloom would more than likely give you an excess concentration of both P and K. I would choose either GH products or Bloombastic but not both at the same time.
If you did add both, cut back the KB to 25% and run BB at around 50% dosage. Watch your EC levels closely, the plants may or may not be able to handle excessive amounts.
Start with a good base and build from there until you reach maximum levels.
Normally you would cut back on your base nutrients when applying Bloombastic.
Bloombastic is more of a "complete" booster formula so adding it with koolbloom would more than likely give you an excess concentration of both P and K. I would choose either GH products or Bloombastic but not both at the same time.
If you did add both, cut back the KB to 25% and run BB at around 50% dosage. Watch your EC levels closely, the plants may or may not be able to handle excessive amounts.
T
TREE KING
thanks bobby
Y
YosemiteSam
yep...big bud and overdrive are both PK boosters.
I almost hate myself for saying this but my guess would be you are gonna be better off sticking with big bud and overdrive. It sucks that AN does not just put everything you need in an A/B formula (they easily could). But they leave out shit just to sell additives. So if you got to use that line their additives probably are best balanced for their base nutes...just don't buy into how much you need.
Y
YosemiteSam
Just for fun this was grown with 60 ppm P and 75 ppm K...never boosted above that. Both of those elements are highly over rated. Get the rest of your minerals, including micros, right and don't buy into the nute company bullshit hype.
and oh yea, genetics plays a bigger part than nutes ever will
and oh yea, genetics plays a bigger part than nutes ever will
Last edited:
Rjstoner
Member
beautiful bud, what strain?
Illumination
Member
links to prove that statement..as per my research they source for some of the BEST ore manufacturers out there...Now AN there are some horrible elemental sources
look into it...it is true as that is what I went by to choose my nutes...where the fertilizer company sources their elements...jus like in genetics if you start with crap it is all you will get
tried the Bloombastic for free on two grows...saw nothing to make me purchase it...did as well with out it
Last edited:
TheBioMaster
Member
Yep, totally agree Illumination!
Dyna-Gro was one of the FIRST people to even produce a hydroponic nutrient over 30 years ago. You can tell by SmokeyThe Grower's comments that he is clueless for the most part....LOL!!
If he did have the slightest clue about what he was talking about he would know that Advanced Nutrients are the WORST offenders of using cheap ass crap for ingredients as they are one of only people that still uses UREA (mammal Piss) for a nitrogen source.
Dyna-Gro uses some of the best source ingredients possible. Solid products for sure.
Dyna-Gro was one of the FIRST people to even produce a hydroponic nutrient over 30 years ago. You can tell by SmokeyThe Grower's comments that he is clueless for the most part....LOL!!
If he did have the slightest clue about what he was talking about he would know that Advanced Nutrients are the WORST offenders of using cheap ass crap for ingredients as they are one of only people that still uses UREA (mammal Piss) for a nitrogen source.
Dyna-Gro uses some of the best source ingredients possible. Solid products for sure.
T
TREE KING
i agree with SmokeyTheGrower. ive been using the AN 2 part for years with great results and i just tested out dyna gro and it doesnt come anywhere close. very slow veg growth for the first 3 weeks of flower with not nearly enough stretch. i literally have plants that are a third bigger minimum when i use the 2 part
