What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Absolem's mistake regarding H3ad 6/9 solution profile corrected

Absolem

Active member
Hello fellow Icmag growers.

I messed up big time on H3ad's 6/9 solution profile and posted wrong information.

I would like to apologize to H3ad for misrepresenting his 6/9 and to the community here for giving bad information. I eat my words and play the fool.

When I ran H3ad's solution profile I forgot to add in the potassium contained in GH Micro which made H3ad's K number low. I will post the correct solution profile for H3ad so people can see where the numbers come from.


H3ad 6/9
........GH Micro............................GH Bloom............Total
N.........97......................................0....................97
P..........0.......................................60...................60
K........16......................................91...................107
Ca......97.......................................0....................97
Mg.......0......................................41....................41
S.........0......................................27....................27

I think his solution profile numbers are solid. Some heavy feeders may experience some slight deficiencies and could use a stronger feed. For those that have heavy feeders you could try using 7 ml GH Micro, 1/2 ml GH Grow, and 9 ml GH Bloom.

....7 ml GH Grow......1/2 ml GH Grow.......9ml GH Bloom.....Total
N.......113......................3...........................0..................113
P.........0........................1...........................60..................61
K.......19........................8...........................91................118
Ca.....113......................0............................0.................113
Mg.....0..........................1..........................41..................42
S.......0..........................0...........................27.................27

For those interested in a pk boost. Drop down to 6 ml of GH Micro day 8 of 12/12 and increase the GH Bloom to 10 ml weeks 2-4 of flower.

Sorry for the confusion.

Absolem


Edit 12-18-2017. The information contained below is wrong and should be ignored.

Hello Icmag growers. Recently a grower on here asked some questions about the H3ad 6/9 coco formula and adding Epsom salts. I looked into adding more GH Bloom to increase both Mg and S instead of adding Epsom. When I did this I found a glaring solution profile error regarding the K level in the H3ad 6/9 formula. The K level posted by H3ad is 13% higher then what is in the actual nutrient solution. I have been a supporter of the 6/9 for it's ease of use. Now knowing the K level in his formula is 13% less I can no longer back the 6/9.

Lets take a look.

The mix I have arrived at has reduced levels of K and P, and a slight reduction in total concentration, because I have been keeping the runoff to a minimum (only a few ounces of water come thru, just enough to let me know I'm completely saturated...

In the coco, I am now using 6ml/gal micro and 9ml/gal bloom which gives the nute profile:
N 97
P 60
K 105
Mg 41
S 27
Ca 97

adding 1 g/gal epsom salts to the solution changes the numbers for mg and s to:
Mg 67
S 61


6/9 As posted by H3ad.......................H3ad 6/9 with K corrected
N......................97...................................................97
P......................60....................................................60
K....................105 Incorrect.....................................91 Correct
Ca...................97.....................................................97
Mg..................41.....................................................41
S....................27.....................................................27

Looking at these numbers we can see how off the K level is as posted by H3ad. The solution profile numbers posted by H3ad will work in coco. However we can't hit those profile numbers using the 6/9. The good news is there is an easy fix. It will require buying the GH Grow to compensate for the low K number in the 6/9. GH grow is loaded with K and it will only require 1ml of grow per gallon.:dance013:

Lets look at the reworked 6/9 into the new 6/1/9 so we can hit the K number posted by H3ad.

Absolem's 6/1/9

6 ml GH Micro........1 ml GH Grow........9 ml GH Bloom.........Total
N......97...........................6.......................0.....................103
P.......0............................1......................60......................61
K......0...........................15......................91....................106
Ca...97...........................0........................0......................97
Mg...0............................1........................41.....................42
S.....0............................0........................27.....................27

Comparing the 6/1/9 to the 6/9 we added some N and hit the K number H3ad was trying use by only adding 1ml of GH per gallon.

H3ad 6/9.......................................................Absolem's 6/1/9
N....97........................................................................103
P.....60.........................................................................61
K....91 Correct. H3ad posted 105 Incorrectly................106
Ca..97.........................................................................97
Mg.41..........................................................................42
S...27..........................................................................27

The 6/1/9 can be used throughout the whole growing cycle just like you would the 6/9. For those looking to add a booster in flower we can just add more GH bloom to increase the same nutrient levels a booster would do.

Veg till day 7 of 12/12 use the 6/1/9.
Flower weeks 2-4 use the 6/1/11. Using 11 ml of GH bloom will act as a booster and will give us this solution profile.
N 103
P 74
K 142
Ca 97
Mg 51
S 33

Flower weeks 5-6 go back to the 6/1/9
Last two weeks of flower reduce the 6/1/9 to 1/8 strength and feed as normal. By adding a weak nutrient solution the final two weeks will allow the free exchange of nutrients between the coir and plant roots.

Cheers and Happy Growing.
 
Last edited:

MJPassion

Observer
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Are you using the USA version or the European version?

I've heard there is a slight difference in the formulas but I've never seen both side by side.

Thanks for the post.
 

Absolem

Active member
Are you using the USA version or the European version?

I've heard there is a slight difference in the formulas but I've never seen both side by side.

Thanks for the post.


Great question.

I'm using the US version. looking at the European GHE it seems the only difference is in the GH Grow. US version is 2-1-6 and the European version of the GHE Grow is 3-1-7.
 

maimunji

Active member
HI Absolem here is cal mag differens in labels between ghe and gh. There is also difference in others micro elements like Mn and zink but can't remember exactly I can make pics on ghe micro bloom labels. I try 6/9 ghe but doesn't like results I think they are different. I also email ghe and gh to ask them. Ghe says they are same.
Gh says they are different independent company and use different formulas. Don't know who talk the truth??!!
Ghe micro calcium 7% (Cao)
Ghe bloom magnesum 3%(Mgo)
Gh flora magnesum 1.5%(mg)
Gh micro calcium 5%(Ca)
 

lopocs.mpeg

New member
good info, i had problems with 6/9 (GHE). Can you figure out a feeding schedule with straight R/O for eu growers? I can post the labels.
 

Raw710

Member
I don't mean to be rude but what is the purpose of redoing h3ads formula of 6/9 that has worked great for so many years?
 

MJPassion

Observer
ICMag Donor
Veteran
I don't mean to be rude but what is the purpose of redoing h3ads formula of 6/9 that has worked great for so many years?

If you read the entirety of the first post, it's we'll explained WHY this change was made.

YOU dont have to abide. It's NOT a requirement.
 

Raw710

Member
If you read the entirety of the first post, it's we'll explained WHY this change was made.

YOU dont have to abide. It's NOT a requirement.

I undetstand again not trying to be rude but what is the benefit? You have to buy another bottle also having to mix it. People use h3ads for the simplicity of 2 bottles. It seems you would be better off using a silica instead of the grow from gh. Really not trying to argue with you I'm sure you know more than I do.
 

Absolem

Active member
good info, i had problems with 6/9 (GHE). Can you figure out a feeding schedule with straight R/O for eu growers? I can post the labels.


Hey lopocs


I'm thinking if we post another formula on this thread for GHE might be confusing for some people with two nutrient profiles being discussed.

Thinking it would be best to start a new thread for GHE. Take some pics and lets get a GHE user thread going :tiphat:


Cheers
 

Absolem

Active member
I undetstand again not trying to be rude but what is the benefit? You have to buy another bottle also having to mix it. People use h3ads for the simplicity of 2 bottles. It seems you would be better off using a silica instead of the grow from gh. Really not trying to argue with you I'm sure you know more than I do.


Hi Raw

Thanks for the questions. H3ad based his 6/9 on certain nutrient numbers. His k number was off by 13% when he posted his solution profile. By having 13% less k in his solution profile then he figured users may run into problems that resemble a Mg deficiency.

When a user on here posted pics of their plants I just figured it was another 6/9 user loading up the formula with high calcium tap water causing k to be limited. When they told me they had their water tested and were cutting their tap with RO adding less than 5ppm of calcium it threw up red flags as to why their plants looked a certain way. So I ran H3ad's nutrient numbers and found his K to be off from his target goal.

At first I thought of adding more bloom but the P level in the 6/9 is already high enough (P=60ppm) for veg. Adding more GH Bloom and increasing P will make the plants stretch more and give them a really dark green look. Not the dark pine tree green from N but a dark green with hues of purple/black green. So I nixed adding more bloom. Most nutrients companies like Canna etc run their P level in veg between 25-40 ppm.

A user could add GH silica to increase the K level. I thought about that because I like the idea of adding silica. However many growers like to cut out the silica mid-late flower so I nixed that idea. I personally would add a product call Yara SOP 52 to increase the K and S levels. I think the S level in the 6/9 is a tad low so it would fix the S and K levels in one shot. I nixed that idea because Yara SOP 52 is a salt and I thought that would turn off a lot of users of the 6/9. GH Grow does what we need to fix the K level, it keeps the user with the same nutrient brand which brings comfort to people, and we hit the nutrient profile H3ad was trying for.
Hope this helps
 

Douglas.Curtis

Autistic Diplomat in Training
Good work! :D

Doesn't hurt to have a bottle of grow around as it's certainly useful in the vegetative department. ;)
 

Raw710

Member
Hi Raw

Thanks for the questions. H3ad based his 6/9 on certain nutrient numbers. His k number was off by 13% when he posted his solution profile. By having 13% less k in his solution profile then he figured users may run into problems that resemble a Mg deficiency.

When a user on here posted pics of their plants I just figured it was another 6/9 user loading up the formula with high calcium tap water causing k to be limited. When they told me they had their water tested and were cutting their tap with RO adding less than 5ppm of calcium it threw up red flags as to why their plants looked a certain way. So I ran H3ad's nutrient numbers and found his K to be off from his target goal.

At first I thought of adding more bloom but the P level in the 6/9 is already high enough (P=60ppm) for veg. Adding more GH Bloom and increasing P will make the plants stretch more and give them a really dark green look. Not the dark pine tree green from N but a dark green with hues of purple/black green. So I nixed adding more bloom. Most nutrients companies like Canna etc run their P level in veg between 25-40 ppm.

A user could add GH silica to increase the K level. I thought about that because I like the idea of adding silica. However many growers like to cut out the silica mid-late flower so I nixed that idea. I personally would add a product call Yara SOP 52 to increase the K and S levels. I think the S level in the 6/9 is a tad low so it would fix the S and K levels in one shot. I nixed that idea because Yara SOP 52 is a salt and I thought that would turn off a lot of users of the 6/9. GH Grow does what we need to fix the K level, it keeps the user with the same nutrient brand which brings comfort to people, and we hit the nutrient profile H3ad was trying for.
Hope this helps

Thank you for explaining it more in depth. What is the K number you shoot for in his forum it was 100-100-200-60 mg. Question 2 is I am using RO water should I use some cal mag and how much of so? How come growers usually cut out the silica mid flower?
 

Dropped Cat

Six Gummi Bears and Some Scotch
Veteran
I do the 6/9, with added Pro TeKt, seems okay.

Is recommended better to use the GH grow, 1mL,
I wonder.
 

Applesauce

Member
Hi Raw

Thanks for the questions. H3ad based his 6/9 on certain nutrient numbers. His k number was off by 13% when he posted his solution profile. By having 13% less k in his solution profile then he figured users may run into problems that resemble a Mg deficiency.

When a user on here posted pics of their plants I just figured it was another 6/9 user loading up the formula with high calcium tap water causing k to be limited. When they told me they had their water tested and were cutting their tap with RO adding less than 5ppm of calcium it threw up red flags as to why their plants looked a certain way. So I ran H3ad's nutrient numbers and found his K to be off from his target goal.

At first I thought of adding more bloom but the P level in the 6/9 is already high enough (P=60ppm) for veg. Adding more GH Bloom and increasing P will make the plants stretch more and give them a really dark green look. Not the dark pine tree green from N but a dark green with hues of purple/black green. So I nixed adding more bloom. Most nutrients companies like Canna etc run their P level in veg between 25-40 ppm.

A user could add GH silica to increase the K level. I thought about that because I like the idea of adding silica. However many growers like to cut out the silica mid-late flower so I nixed that idea. I personally would add a product call Yara SOP 52 to increase the K and S levels. I think the S level in the 6/9 is a tad low so it would fix the S and K levels in one shot. I nixed that idea because Yara SOP 52 is a salt and I thought that would turn off a lot of users of the 6/9. GH Grow does what we need to fix the K level, it keeps the user with the same nutrient brand which brings comfort to people, and we hit the nutrient profile H3ad was trying for.
Hope this helps

I use 6/9 and have a bottle of GH grow. I am about to put a round into flower. I will try the 1 mL/gal addition. I too have noticed what I think to be K def when using 6/9 under heavy lighting.
 

Absolem

Active member
Thank you for explaining it more in depth. What is the K number you shoot for in his forum it was 100-100-200-60 mg. Question 2 is I am using RO water should I use some cal mag and how much of so? How come growers usually cut out the silica mid flower?

The k number is dependent on how much the plants are feeding. Under florescent lighting the 6/9 might be a heavy feed for the plants. Under DE lighting the 6/9 might be a bit light. What's important is keeping the nutrient ratios consistent. Whether you feed more or less. Check out this thread and I think it will answer a lot of your questions on this topic. It lists the nutrient profiles of several brands.
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=177807

No need to use cal/mag with the 6/9.

Growers cut out the silica mid-late flower because like any other nutrient it can build up. Some think it's best to cut when the stretch is done and the majority of the plant structure in intact. Cannabis tends to accumulate what is put in the medium/nutrient solution and will stay stored in the leaves unless the plant needs it. Important not to overfeed.


I do the 6/9, with added Pro TeKt, seems okay.

Is recommended better to use the GH grow, 1mL,
I wonder.

I think Pro Tekt is a good product and super concentrated. Adding Pro Tekt at 2 ml/gal will yield K=19 ppm and Si=23ppm. Adding this to the 6/9 gives you this profile
N=97
P=60
K=110
Ca=97
Mg=41
S=27
Si=23

Stick with the Pro Tekt over the GH Grow. Silica will benefit the plants a lot. Maybe try a run using the Pro tekt then mid flower drop the Pro Tekt then add the 1ml of grow and see if you notice a difference in flavor.


I use 6/9 and have a bottle of GH grow. I am about to put a round into flower. I will try the 1 mL/gal addition. I too have noticed what I think to be K def when using 6/9 under heavy lighting.

I think you will see a benefit if you do use it. Give us an update.



IMO the 6/9 could use a bit of a boost weeks 2-4 in flower.
The 6/1/9 can be used throughout the whole growing cycle just like you would the 6/9. For those looking to add a booster in flower we can just add more GH bloom to increase the same nutrient levels a booster would do.

Veg till day 7 of 12/12 use the 6/1/9.
Flower weeks 2-4 use the 6/1/11. Using 11 ml of GH bloom will act as a booster and will give us this solution profile.
N 103
P 74
K 142
Ca 97
Mg 51
S 33

Flower weeks 5-6 go back to the 6/1/9
Last two weeks of flower reduce the 6/1/9 to 1/8 strength and feed as normal. By adding a weak nutrient solution the final two weeks will allow the free exchange of nutrients between the coir and plant roots.

Cheers and Happy Growing.
 

stoned40yrs

Ripped since 1965
Veteran
Never had any problems when I ran 6/9. That said it makes buds bland and they don't express themselves like they should. Maybe because of the lack of K? anywho I switched to canna and it wasn't much better. Then I tried V+B two years ago and it's the cats meow.
 

Dropped Cat

Six Gummi Bears and Some Scotch
Veteran
I think Pro Tekt is a good product and super concentrated. Adding Pro Tekt at 2 ml/gal will yield K=19 ppm and Si=23ppm. Adding this to the 6/9 gives you this profile
N=97
P=60
K=110
Ca=97
Mg=41
S=27
Si=23

Stick with the Pro Tekt over the GH Grow. Silica will benefit the plants a lot. Maybe try a run using the Pro tekt then mid flower drop the Pro Tekt then add the 1ml of grow and see if you notice a difference in flavor.



Your post about h3ad's numbers made me check mine,
so I posted my use of Pro teKt to confirm my work around.
I didn't know about the K difference with his 6/9, but
noticed an improvement with the buds using Pro teKt .

I also add epsom to the mix as my water is filtered.

Good thread!
 

Absolem

Active member
Hello fellow Icmag growers.

I messed up big time on H3ad's 6/9 solution profile and posted wrong information.

I would like to apologize to H3ad for misrepresenting his 6/9 and to the community here for giving bad information. I eat my words and play the fool.

When I ran H3ad's solution profile I forgot to add in the potassium contained in GH Micro which made H3ad's K number low. I will post the correct solution profile for H3ad so people can see where the numbers come from.


H3ad 6/9
........GH Micro............................GH Bloom............Total
N.........97......................................0....................97
P..........0.......................................60...................60
K........16......................................91...................107
Ca......97.......................................0....................97
Mg.......0......................................41....................41
S.........0......................................27....................27

I think his solution profile numbers are solid. Some heavy feeders may experience some slight deficiencies and could use a stronger feed. For those that have heavy feeders you could try using 7 ml GH Micro, 1/2 ml GH Grow, and 9 ml GH Bloom.

....7 ml GH Grow......1/2 ml GH Grow.......9ml GH Bloom.....Total
N.......113......................3...........................0..................113
P.........0........................1...........................60..................61
K.......19........................8...........................91................118
Ca.....113......................0............................0.................113
Mg.....0..........................1..........................41..................42
S.......0..........................0...........................27.................27

For those interested in a pk boost. Drop down to 6 ml of GH Micro day 8 of 12/12 and increase the GH Bloom to 10 ml weeks 2-4 of flower.

Sorry for the confusion.

Absolem
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top