-
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"!
- Status
IWanaGetHiSoHi
Active member
Why not start your own thread to dog GH?
My partner was givin a bottle to try. he didn't do nearly as well as we have with the formula I gave him. I'm pretty pissed that newbs are locked on to it based on a name. I had him on hydroplex w a douche of 0-50-30 to finish with and adding such high PK early on didn't allow for as much bulking up/swelling at the end. this sounds like a product that should be used after week 5-6 or you just shoot your prematurely. He lacks knowledge and listened to the retailer who never used it. I hope Elvme can prove there's any validity to KK when using as directed.
Flying Goat
Member
Way over my head, dudes... I grow in soil using goat berries, but I'm here to learn...
D
dongle69
There is no N in Liquid KoolBloom.
Here are the ingredients:
Magnesium Phosphate, Potassium
Phosphate, Potassium Sulphate.
Even the dry has very little nitrogen (see below).
The ratios are quite different in the 2 products.
You cannot compare dry and liquid nutrient labels like that.
A simple entry in the nutrient calculator could have saved you from typing misinformation.
Roughly, a 200 ppm mix of each product gives the following breakdown:
Liquid KoolBloom:
P 68
K 130
Dry KoolBloom:
N 8
P 83
K 98
Mg 4
S 6
As you can see, liquid has a .52 P to K ratio while the dry has a .85 P to K ratio.
Take the high road next time...
Johnny Rotten
Member
Nice....would like to see a control done with just base nutrients so we can see what they both do compared to a regular nutrient program. Nice job anyway...sort through all the BS marketing that's out there.
G
Guest 18340
They may all be similar but they are not all the same. If one contains seaweed then it is not the same as one without.
We could go on forever with this subject but we'd be going in circles and covering ground long worn. The point of this thread is to put Kushie Kush to the test by using it exactly like it says on the bottle vs what GH says on their bottles and see if it lives up to it's promises.
Anyways, an update.
They're coming along nicely. Both have been receiving Maxibloom at 3/4 tsp/gal and their respective pk booster as per directions on the bottle.As of today, theirs no difference between the two plants. In fact, if not for them being labeled I would lose track of them.
The following pics were taken minutes ago. They are perfectly healthy, the yellowing you see is from the onset of flower and going from warm day temps to cool night temps. We're experiencing a cold snap here in Fl.
Kushie Kush on the left, GH on the right.
Enjoy...
Kushie Kush
GH
wow!, your beyond clueless...i suggest you read alot more on nutrients...
when i ran my kushie kush on top of my normal h@g nutrients, i yielded 7 1/2 lb's off of 3k with the pure kush, yes, thats kush. i have never, ever even came close to that yield, along with the many people in my circle. the average yield is 1 lb per 1k with the pure in my circle. whatever is in there worked, and its worked perfectly.
2 bottles of kushie kush = extra $13500+ for me in one harvest, i dont know another product that comes close to that....
G
Guest 18340
I was waiting for you to drop in
pullin up a chair
stay safe
1
Actually, I do have one going with just base nutes, I was gonna surprise everyone with it at the end of the grow.
I'll start taking pics of the three of them together. but for now, she lokks exactly the same as the other two.
Ioni Botani
Member
Nice man, Id love to see the one with base nutes....interesting analysis evl.
Chuned In.
I
Chuned In.
I
didn't mean to hijack the thread...sorry for that. No disrespect meant. The two are very very very similiar, they aren't the same. They are also both very very similar to kk and all other pk boosts out there.
Again, well wishes. Hope the grow turns out great for you
I have no doubt it will your plants look great and supplementing any pk boost properly will give great results. It will be great to show how similar they are in production as well, which is really the point I was trying to make. I'm not good at making points as you can see.
Another good one would be to run your test with just one of gh's pk's vs using both, again to show how similar the end result would be, thus showing how growers really only need one or the other to accomplish the goals of supplementing p and k in flowering.
Again, well wishes. Hope the grow turns out great for you
I have no doubt it will your plants look great and supplementing any pk boost properly will give great results. It will be great to show how similar they are in production as well, which is really the point I was trying to make. I'm not good at making points as you can see.Another good one would be to run your test with just one of gh's pk's vs using both, again to show how similar the end result would be, thus showing how growers really only need one or the other to accomplish the goals of supplementing p and k in flowering.
G
Guest 18340
No need to apologize high road, this is an open forum and all opinions/thoughts/interpretations/experiences are welcomed
Y
YosemiteSam
Great test with all 3 elvme2. In fact, I am more interested in the comparison between no PK boost and PK boosted than I am in the KK vs KB comparison.
My experience has been that it is pretty easy to get N flushed out of the final product but P has been another story. Using PK boosters leads to my finished product popping and cracking when I set it on fire even though it burns white. Seems to me if one uses too much P anytime during the cycle one ends up smoking it in the finished product. Then again, maybe I just ain't the best flusher out there.
Anyways...will be really interested not only in the yield results but also in the smoke report. I'll be watching.
My experience has been that it is pretty easy to get N flushed out of the final product but P has been another story. Using PK boosters leads to my finished product popping and cracking when I set it on fire even though it burns white. Seems to me if one uses too much P anytime during the cycle one ends up smoking it in the finished product. Then again, maybe I just ain't the best flusher out there.
Anyways...will be really interested not only in the yield results but also in the smoke report. I'll be watching.
Nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium are all extremely mobile within the plant and are easier to flush than say magnesium or iron. Once mg or fe are in your plants tissue it doesn't leave.
Calcium is also fairly mobile within the plant, it can move where it needs to.
A proper flush, given that the plant wasn't over fertilized to start with, should remove excess NPK and Ca to the point that it shouldn't negatively affect end product. Keep in mind, with any element that is overused, it can be very difficult even with proper flushing technique to get a clean product.
You can properly use pk boosts in flowering and still maintain clean smoke. But most people overdo pk's... and underdo the flush.
Calcium is also fairly mobile within the plant, it can move where it needs to.
A proper flush, given that the plant wasn't over fertilized to start with, should remove excess NPK and Ca to the point that it shouldn't negatively affect end product. Keep in mind, with any element that is overused, it can be very difficult even with proper flushing technique to get a clean product.
You can properly use pk boosts in flowering and still maintain clean smoke. But most people overdo pk's... and underdo the flush.
K
krushonkush
Another great thread, thanks bro. I'll take my seat in the back
- Status
