DabLab Reloaded-- back to vertville

[DHF]

Thanks for re-postin pics here to the site bro.......Don`t know HOW many times I`ve warned folks against goin offsite to youtube or elsewhere to check videos from a weedsite cuz the proxy server`s null and void after that if in a non-legal state , but anyways......

Thanks again for the thread and your time....

Peace....Freds..........

 

[Ttystikk]

Hey guys, I made a point of including the ratios for each Jacks recipe- so once you've decided what ratio you want, mix it up, then dilute to reach your target EC. Adjust pH after adjusting EC and you're golden.

FWIW, I've done a few runs in coco- and I ran 1.8 EC in my room, conditions as follows; 80-84F, 65-75%, CO² 1500ppm. Not a bit of tip burn, ever. YMMV...

 

[DabOnDabs]

Dabs, nice setup! I just read the thread cover to cover, great stuff going on in there.

I'm a big fan and user of Jacks, I've run three ratios and still run two of them.

From the Jacks blog comes 4g/gal Jacks, 2.4g/gal calcium nitrate and no epsom. This gives an EC right around 1.8. This is my formula for bloom, only I add .5g/gal of epsom salts anyway. That's a ratio of 1.67:1 of Jacks to calcium nitrate.



The next formula is the famous 1.5:1 ratio 3-2-1 mix, but again I'd tweak things a bit and run only .5g/gal of epsom. It's a fine general purpose formula for everything, but no single formula is ideal for every use. 3.75 g/gal Jacks, 2.5g/gal calcium nitrate gives about 1.8 EC.

Last and lowest ratio is 1.25:1 Jacks to calcium nitrate. 3.5g/gal Jacks and 2.8g/gal calcium nitrate give about 1.8 EC. A prominent dispensary in boulder runs this from cradle to grave, so I'm told, with great results. I haven't been there to see for myself but my buddy definitely knows his business, so I don't doubt it. I run this mix in veg.

The last formula isn't about the ratio of nutes, it's about nutrient strength. I run 1.8 EC and even let it run up to 2.0 in peak bloom for some hungry strains, and I get away with it because I run relative humidity levels between 65-75%. Because it's so high, the plants transpire less water and so need a higher EC to get ideal nutrition. Obviously, I ramp this down through late bloom and run a dilute solution of Jacks at .5-.7 EC for the final week 'flush'. At no point does the plant ever get a pure water flush in my RDWC. Tasty, flavorful, smooth, nice light gray ash.

Hope this helps!

All I see are Jack's ratios, not NPK ratios. Also, I have to disagree on your weights/ppm ratios. Without going and checking myself, i can assure you that 2g/gallon of each is 1.8ec. I do appreciate you posting some different recipes and ratios you use, but they all look REALLY strong to me

 

[DabOnDabs]

Heres the update, for all you people in non med states. Sorry about that, didnt know yal were so paranoid about browsing

Lesson learned, I'll link them from now on.

Heres the Leeroy Triangle Kush

 

[DabOnDabs]

Citrix - Best looking of the 4 strains IMO. One of them grew the tap root straight up, so i covered it in coco and hoped it would go back down...It didnt, and grew out to like a dead root nub...So i pulled the entire thing out of the rapid rooter, reversed it, and put it back in, fearing it was dead as shit. 4 days later, I've got some growth lol.

Group shot of the Hemlocks

 

[DabOnDabs]

Group shot of the citrix

Cerebral Haze lookin shitty as fuck

 

[DabOnDabs]

Scotts OG

Has a little bit of yellowing on the first leaf tips... early indicator of cal/mag whore??

Heres a shot of one of the NMOG clones

 

[DabOnDabs]

Clones - 9 NMOG, 7 GSC

Plant on the left is a citrix who was late to the party, and the one on the right is the one that grew upside down and i had to replant

 

[DabOnDabs]

Flower shots;

 

[DabOnDabs]

 

[DabOnDabs]

"Girl Scout Cookies"

This plant is fucking huge, but doesnt have a ton of colas. hm

You're welcome DHF, you're my boy blue.

 

[DHF]

Bust dem beans Brozini.......and......We need SWELLAGE.....Hope they blow up soon for yas Dabster....

Peace.....Freds............

 

[otis33]

my Scott's turned out to be neck and neck with wifi in my rooms.com however the wifi yielded better and didn't have the super crazy stretch that Scott's does.com so watch lift for Scott's stretch. it's staying in my hairs garden in spite if the crazy stretch

 

[Ttystikk]

my Scott's turned out to be neck and neck with wifi in my rooms.com however the wifi yielded better and didn't have the super crazy stretch that Scott's does.com so watch lift for Scott's stretch. it's staying in my hairs garden in spite if the crazy stretch

I see Swype is your friend, too...

 

[papaduc]

Yo, I've always used one recipe all the way through veg and flower for the most part. When i was on the H3ad formula 6/9, i did that all the way through. I was planning on doing the same thing for this run using d9's recipe. Seems it has a little too much N for the coco, so i switched over to mister D's 2g/2g ratio diluted to 1.2 ec.

That seems to have curbed any nitrogen toxicity in the room.

Have you ever used Jacks? Can you recommend a recipe more tailored towards flowering with the jacks?

Couldnt hurt to try

With regards to brands, it doesn't matter; It's all about the ratios. I've never used jacks, but all that matters is the numbers on the bottle and what they're made up of.

You said in another thread that rather than use maxibloom, you wanted to tailor exactly the nutrients to the plant's specific needs. Whether you can do it depends on whether the ratios of the respective feeds allow you to, and make it easy to do so without having to supplement elements which are short because they're only in one of the packs, such as calcium & magnesium.

It might be easier to use the base feed which contains everything in balance, then using a potassium&phosphate fert to alter that to a better bloom ratio. You don't have to confine yourself to just the brand mix.

The bottom line is, you want the nitrogen to be lower than potassium by about half during flower, maybe even lower than that depending on appearance, and the P to be bumped up a bit as well. It's how pretty much all fruit-specific fertilizers are made up. Basic tomato feed of 4-6-8 grows lovely buds.

I'll be interested to see how you tweak it and how you get on.

 

[DabOnDabs]

With regards to brands, it doesn't matter; It's all about the ratios. I've never used jacks, but all that matters is the numbers on the bottle and what they're made up of.

You said in another thread that rather than use maxibloom, you wanted to tailor exactly the nutrients to the plant's specific needs. Whether you can do it depends on whether the ratios of the respective feeds allow you to, and make it easy to do so without having to supplement elements which are short because they're only in one of the packs, such as calcium & magnesium.

It might be easier to use the base feed which contains everything in balance, then using a potassium&phosphate fert to alter that to a better bloom ratio. You don't have to confine yourself to just the brand mix.

The bottom line is, you want the nitrogen to be lower than potassium by about half during flower, maybe even lower than that depending on appearance, and the P to be bumped up a bit as well. It's how pretty much all fruit-specific fertilizers are made up. Basic tomato feed of 4-6-8 grows lovely buds.

I'll be interested to see how you tweak it and how you get on.

Your words have been eatin me for a few hours, and i've been pouring through the internet trying to find if anything about jacks later in flower. I cant find shit.

Then there is always the general consensus (Lucas formula, H3ad formula, d9 formula) etc. that suggest 3-1-4 pretty much all the way through veg and flower.

I do have to agree with you though, i believe the difference between a good grower and a great grower is one who gets away from the averages and tailors their nute recipe to exactly what their plants need.

Running a couple different strains makes that nearly impossible and increases the benefit for a one size fits all profile.

Now, from everything I have gathered, pretty much the only way for me to start reducing N would be to head back to d9's recipe.. 3:2

This also cuts back a little on CA, and reduces the Ca:Mg ratio from 3:1 - 2.5-1

Now h3ad uses a 3:2 Ca:Mg ratio, but i've read that ideally you want to keep it at 3:1.



I was experiencing N toxicity using d9's recipe @ 1.5ec, but cutting it down to 1.2 leaves:
N - P - K
64-22-91
3 - 1 - 4


Mister D's 2g/2g is 1.8ec and has this profile
N=108ppm
P= 28ppm
K=114ppm
Mg=34ppm
Ca = 100ppm
3.75-1-4

Diluting this down to 1.2 ec creates:
N = 72ppm
P = 19ppm
K = 76ppm
Mg = 23ppm
Ca = 67ppm

3.75-1-4


IF i switched back to d9's recipe @ 1.2 ec it would lower my N and raise my K a little bit but leaves N:K @ 2:3 rather than 1:2 as you specify. Any help? Would switching back to GH nutes work??

I'm also experiencing what looks to be a Ca or Mg def in one or a couple of my plants. Just light yellowing but dont wanna test it...

ph has been @ 5.9, so they should be getting their Mg...

as i've been feeding, the ratio has been Ca:Mg 3:1.. Maybe the Og needs more Mg? Add a little epsom? or should i drop the ph to allow more Ca in.

 

[DHF]

Meant ta show respect for papaduc and his info/knowledge/experience after readin his post , but musta got influenced by Bubba and fergot about it....now....

Dabs....Lemme tell yas a lil story.....Waaay back when I started runnin Krusty buckets , I got told ta run GH3 part EXACTLY by the directions once plants were established and fully rooted , and I did per the Klown`s preachin.....and....

Once in the setup we JACKED the juice to 15-1800 ppms and HIGHER due to auto-top offs as well as depending on the x factor 3-5 days till symptoms showed up , then flushed 24-48 hrs , and nothin but rinse and repeat....and the bitches exploded literally....

You could walk in the room 30 minutes after lights on and see them bitches "twitchin" and blowin up....and.... bitches thrived and got used to the torture and fukin loved it to the tune of 2+ lb plants EVERY run in my stable , and once strain was dialed topped out at 2-1/2 lbers consistently.....but....

When I went with increased plant numbers but refused to use anything but GH 3 part since I dialed it for almost a decade , smaller plants needed less ppms across the board , and I adopted the Lucas formula......for about 2 runs till deficiencies started showin up and I started mixin juice till the bitches were happy again.....that said....

Forever and a day all those ratios have never meant a damn thing to this pore `ol country boy , cuz I just listened to Krusty from the get and used 3-2-1 in veg till end of stretch , and then 1-2-3 per the jugs instructions ...till I started growin smaller plants that couldn`t handle the juice....anyways....

I guess why I got all wordy and shit was referring to your comment about not goin by avgs , but rather mixin up proper "consistent" ppms across the board so the plant`s juice needs and feeds don`t yo-yo up and down , and to do that , I`m not sure Jack`s is able ta be.broken down like that ........but I`ve been wrong before....

Hell....I cut my teeth on J.R(Jack) Peters special 20-20-20 and grew MONSTER Sativa-zillas back in the day with never a deficiency 1 , but I was partnered with a botany major mad scientist crazy mofo hippie , so I had an onsite grow nerd ta keep me from fukin up in my young dumb ass beginnings....anyways.....

That 1.2 EC that most old ass knowledgeable growers have gravitated to over the yrs Heath Robinson foundan obscure university study on tomatoes , and once I adopted less is more , I realized that it was consistent across the board ppm`s that mattered most.....but...

Like papaduc stated , as the plant transitions from veg through stretch and on into bloomage , it`s juice needs shift due to hormonal changes through each tri-mester ......

Like a pregnancy as we used ta call it down here in Hell , cuz bout 9 months in the ground was as early as we could ever start harveyin our outdoor crops , but the only thing my partner ever added to the Peter`s special was "Triple Phosphate" 0-64-0 for swellage , and swell they did.....anyways.....

Sorry ta babble , but avgs never worked for me , and I couldn`t make 1.2 EC/600 ppms work for me in any of my setups cuz shit started goin sideways too many times , but ......

1.5/750 made my stable some happy bitches for lotta yrs , and to do that I ran lil bit N , lil more micro , and lil more bloom as needed ,and more when N was dropped all together , and lil more bloom after end of stretch with less micro ALL the while maintaining those 750 ppms/1.5 EC across the board.....aight.....

My old ass is headed to the pier ta check the crab traps and walk the dawg......Hope yas figure out which ratios work out for yas Bro....I never used anything but GH 3 part cuz I learned and dialed it to the tits.....

Lil SM-90 , lil silicablast , and when I went full on coco , lil cal/mag ftw....No additives are needed since they`re mostly diluted or concentrated versions of..NPK....and that`s all the girls need ta show their ass for yas once yas figure out what and how much juice they needta get jiggy wit it....

Peace....Freds........

 

[farmari]

With elevated Co2, if I recall right, water use efficiency generally increases significantly. I think there is a copy of a scientific study on cannabis linked on this site somewhere that shows that. I make the uneducated assumption based on that that elevated Co2 environment all else equal would mean the plants would prefer somewhat higher EC nutrient concentration than at natural Co2 levels.

Also have always assumed (no real facts to base this on) that the best EC depends on vapor pressure deficit so what works best can really vary from one to another. Since plants drink a lot more water for the same amount of growth when the VPD is high... (hot, low humidity) a lower EC in a high VPD environment or higher EC in a low VPD environment makes sense.

Do either of these views make sense to yall? Wondering if I'm off base here. I know practically nothing about botany

 

[papaduc]

i've been pouring through the internet trying to find anything about jacks later in flower. I cant find shit.

What you need to know is whether the ratio of nutrients is a good one to carry on with right through flower.

You're going to really find out at about week 5 or 6 whether the buds are developing how you'd like. You might like how it works.

All I can give you is my experience of both using that kind of a ratio, and seeing other people use it. In the UK there's a product called plant magic which is now quite popular. IMO it's too high in nitrogen and not a good stand-alone feed.

I remember after using it posing the question to Plant magic about what the thinking was behind the ratio, and that their bloom feed could/should actually be used as a veg feed also; that there was no need to buy the grow formula.

The coco bloom was, and still is, 3.9 - 2.5 - 3.8.... the veg feed is 3.9 - 1.9 - 3.4

Some companies make stupid mistakes, and this is one of them.

But what it also highlights is how little knowledge some people have of what they're actually using.

A gardener would look at those bottles, and, if he/she was going to use a bottle feed, definitely wouldn't buy the two separate formulas for grow and bloom based on the tiny bit of extra P&K in the bloom feed. If anything the bloom's a better veg formula than the veg formula.

But, like a lot of canna-specific brands, PM has it's own little dedicated following and a lot of them just won't be told.

To this day I don't understand why PM still think a nitrogen-heavy bloom feed is at all good for cannabis. I've never seen anyone using a N heavy food to grow good fruit or bud with. They defend it by saying you should use their PK product... but a PK alteration formula shouldn't be as essential as it is with their product. A bloom formula should be a bloom formula even without the PK booster. Theirs is not.

But people keep using it. Why? Because, like in the US where the obsession with calmag has overtaken what is just good simple garden practice, in the UK what some people - but not as many - have done, is become obsessed with keeping plants really green right the way through flower.

It stems from when canna was pretty much the only feed anyone growing in coco would use. A lot of people complained about the original formula not having enough N and their plants paling. Companies like PM have countered this, but IMO gone too far the other way.

At the end of the day, it's all about how you judge your own plants, then, if you want to change something, being able to do so without too much calculation and chopping and changing.

That's why I recommended the maxibloom to you. Because it takes the guesswork away.

There's nothing wrong with switching to maxibloom at the mid point in flower. A lot of people worry about switching brands at some point in the grow cycle... again, this comes from a lack of knowledge about general gardening.

Every company uses almost exactly the same elements to make their products with. The main differences you'll see are the sources of Nitrogen. In cannabis feeds even that hardly ever changes.

The only thing you need to know is the ratio and what it is you're looking to use.

If you think the plants are a bit pale on the maxibloom, you could give them a feed of jacks, or vice versa if you think there's too much N and the buds are a bit leafy. They're very small changes to make.

Like DHF said, you could use some triple super phosphate for P, or potassium phosphate to bring up your P&K. In fact you can buy any individual nutrient. You could buy some N and use that in conjunction with the maxibloom... etc etc...

It's up to you how simple you want to keep it. I mean I'm basing what I say on what you told me when I suggested maxibloom. If you want that kind of control, you can have it. Make your nutrients from scratch if you want.

Either way, what you have to remember is the base principle is a simple one, and not complicated at all. Watch your nitrogen, and grow your weed like a good gardener grow his/her toms.

I've seen people laughed at for the notion that tomato food can be used to grow cannabis as well or better than most canna-specific feeds.... again, it's just plain ignorance of basic gardening principles. A simple bottle of tomorite 4-4-8 did me fine on a number of strains not long ago. If I see it in my local pound shop at this time of year I always pick some up.

The more you apply the basics, and the further away you get from brand names/guides, the better imo.

I don't believe keeping weed healthy qualifies any of us as great growers. I definitely don't consider myself in that bracket. Good ones maybe. Everything above that is about training and maximising yield.

A plant like weed is so basic in what it needs that I think the only reason people have problems is because, as a community, we have become obsessed with the holy grail, and as a result, are at the mercy of companies who throw 6 bottle regimes our way and tell us this is the proper way to do it. It's not. It can work, yes, but that it does is no indication that it's any better at all than using a standalone bottle of properly balanced plant food.

If I was you, I wouldn't try and cut up the jacks, especially if you are wasting your time worrying about calculations of secondary elements etc. Just use the jacks as it is made up, then if you want to change the ratios, use something like maxibloom at a certain point. It's as simple as that.

Which brings me onto this:

Then there is always the general consensus (Lucas formula, H3ad formula, d9 formula) etc. that suggest 3-1-4 pretty much all the way through veg and flower.

First of all, I think Lucas is P&K-heavy. I don't think it's 3-1-4.

But the Lucas formula is another example of a different kind of wrong in the cannabis world. IMO anyway. This is what I wrote in another thread, to save having to say it again...

I don't agree with following start to finish guides such as head formula as though they're a triumph for simplicity.

The basic application of simple gardening principles - like feeding your plant with a bottle of plant food - have, as the authors of head formula guides rightly point out, been lost on indoor cannabis cultivators.

The idea that you've got to focus on 6 or 7 different areas of plant metabolism and buy 6 or 7 specific products to do so, has engulfed the indoor cannabis culture. It's swallowed it up whole.

It's a victory for marketing and advertising over gardening and nature.

This complication of a very simple thing - feeding a plant with basic balanced plant food - leads to problems for a lot of growers who've never had hands on gardening experience of any kind before planting a cannabis seed in a pot and switching a light on.

But I think that while things like the head formula are very much a step in the right direction in regards to simplicity, I think they also take a wrong turn and highlight another ignorance in the cannabis culture - the investment in `systems` or `formulas` which will lead you away from danger.

If a ten bottle regime is your like your kids hanging round with ten people telling them to do ten different things, the head formula is you telling them they can only have one friend and you will choose that person for them.

It's true that rigidly sticking to a certain formula might keep people away from trouble, but is it not keeping them away from learning?

I'm almost as much against that as I am beginners having problems as a result making up feeds with ten bottles.

A lot of people who use the head formula or some other set ratio start to finish, would be stuck if you gave them another bottle of plant food, a shrub, and told them to grow it using that. That's not good, and like I say, it highlights how following a set guide of any kind should be secondary to learning basic growing.

I think both methods detract from someone acquiring a proper feel of how to grow and feed a plant.

Most 1-part base nutrients have everything in it our plants need through veg; In flower we just apply another basic gardening fact - that fruiting plants need less nitrogen and more potassium.

You're right in saying that plants flourish on proper strength nutes from the start, but you don't need the head formula to do it.

.......

Someone said that the author of the original thread had observed a better stonger veg period by using the maxi-grow in the veg period instead of the bloom... like it was some kind of revelation

Amazing.... A Nitrogen-based veg feed in veg, and THEN a PK based feed for bloom... actually works better than one bottle throughout... the wonders of gardening eh.

Running a couple different strains makes that nearly impossible and increases the benefit for a one size fits all profile.

Like I say, nothing wrong with a good simple feed. And nothing wrong with using it for multiple strains and phenotypes. As long as you know what balance you want.

Now, from everything I have gathered, pretty much the only way for me to start reducing N would be to head back to d9's recipe.. 3:2

Or forget recipes altogether and just use a different blend of nutes.

Would switching back to GH nutes work??

If you're going to mix nutes to a ratio to achieve a similar blend to something like maxibloom, why not just use maxibloom or something similar and not worry about your calcium levels etc?

I'm also experiencing what looks to be a Ca or Mg def in one or a couple of my plants. Just light yellowing but dont wanna test it...

Let's have a look.

 

[DHF]

With elevated Co2, if I recall right, water use efficiency generally increases significantly. I think there is a copy of a scientific study on cannabis linked on this site somewhere that shows that. I make the uneducated assumption based on that that elevated Co2 environment all else equal would mean the plants would prefer somewhat higher EC nutrient concentration than at natural Co2 levels.

Also have always assumed (no real facts to base this on) that the best EC depends on vapor pressure deficit so what works best can really vary from one to another. Since plants drink a lot more water for the same amount of growth when the VPD is high... (hot, low humidity) a lower EC in a high VPD environment or higher EC in a low VPD environment makes sense.

Do either of these views make sense to yall? Wondering if I'm off base here. I know practically nothing about botany

Well farm.....You`re exactly right in that if it`s too hot and dry , the plants stomata`s will close off to prevent excess transpiration and help hold moisture within the plant as a survival mechanism , but I`m not sure about it actually drinkin more to help compensate , but I`m like you and no botanist , nor have I read any studies on elevated CO2 levels , but....

I will tell yas this in the way it was explained to me yrs and yrs ago by a krazy ass klown.....IF yas increase ambient temps on up into the high 80`s-low 90`s with CO2 at max 1500 ppms , AND jack the juice up as I spoke of in my post above like Krusty usedta grow fuckin monsters with 3 liter sized top colas , but he just called it increased metabolism but WITH low VPD/high RH levels , plants will explode exponentially with dialed environment....but.....without proper REGULAR flushes , the plants will build up residual salts and get toxic...watched it happen many times with newbs tryin ta make krusty buckets work for big plants....

Low VPD with low EC across the board worked damn well for me with just ambient CO2 levels exchanging air twice per minute for almost 20 yrs...that said....

Maybe papaduc can give us a more scientific type explanation as to what you ask , and BTW....

Respect once again for explainin things a WHOLE lot more in laymen`s terms papaduc , rather than my long winded old ass just personal experience from yrs gone by ....

Peace....DHF.........