complete cfl grow

Almost done, ran out of staples for the space blanket (reflective wall material) will post new pics when lights kick on in bout half hr.

I am content with how its all come together

being in the uk and growing under fluroes, I found it better to have either 2 x N to K and half P . The extra N worked better with low light/lumin square foot.
But that was back in the day that NL was the buzz bud, had me a cool lil shelf setup of flowering budz

Rudi I&I Automan said:

being in the uk and growing under fluroes, I found it better to have either 2 x N to K and half P . The extra N worked better with low light/lumin square foot.
But that was back in the day that NL was the buzz bud, had me a cool lil shelf setup of flowering budz

Click to expand...

The only light that seems to have any noticeable effect on nute uptake, is led. And to my understanding, it just needs more cal mag.

The only theory in nutes I will ever listen to is "The limiting factor (in regards to nutes) of plant growth is the least abundant nute. The plant can only grow as fast as its limiting factors."

Rudi I&I Automan said:

I found it better to have either 2 x N to K and half P .

Click to expand...

Either?

2x N to k and half p (p is usually unavailable and slow to break down, so in may say the same as k on the bottle, cough cough ff grow big) is actually a pretty regular veg formula. You should look up what the nutes do so maybe you can understand why that's a the formula you want.

Rudi I&I Automan said:

I found it better to have either 2 x N to K and half P .

Click to expand...

Usually I express such things as a ratio. So, you're saying NPK ratio 4-1-2. That's pretty high in N (not a regular ratio.). I only go to 2-1-1.8 in veg. I'm often closer to 1-1-1.8. (I vary it.) Dyna-Gro (Foliage-Pro) is 3-1-2, and those grows often look close to N toxic to me.

I can't get to N=3 with my nutrients. Mine start looking N toxic at N=2.

I'm growing a plant now under relatively low light (LED lightbulbs) using MiracleGro Tomato (which is NPK ratio 1-1-1.17). The older leaves look a little N toxic to me sometimes. It must have something to do with the form of N (90% is urea).

For the OP, there is a spreadsheet you can use to see the NPK ratios resulting from whatever you feed (if it's multi-bottle). It's nice to focus on that instead of a "schedule." You can read your plants, vary the NPK ratio. (It's really useful when you transition to so-called "bloom nutes." People who follow schedules can reduce N too quickly and have trouble. Being aware of the NPK ratio will give you some info about what you're doing if/when something goes wrong.).

Alright, thanks for the info fellas. I've been thinking I want to ph the soil before I pop the beans in to 5.5? right?, I'm using ffof, n haven't done a thing to it, (threw out the old mix with vermeculite, damn bastard sold me wrong stuff hahaha), so I starting fresh, new soil ffof, should I check it and ph it to 5.5? I'm growing autos in 2 gal smart pots. So theyre only gna be growing for bout 65 days..

Oh and I put three beans into germ last night, I popped a polar express in the glass of water method, put it in the tray, n let it sit, checked on it today it sank, so that's good. No change to the two in the plugs, but I think if they dont pop up, I'm gna take em out n try the paper towel bag method to at least crack em open before I drop them in the plugs, that seems to always work for me to at least germ, when I was a kid trying to grow, never once got a yield tho. Hahaha.

N one more thing, can I mix my nutes when I'm feeding them? I.e.-get my gal jug, pour in what I need from the ff big bloom in, then add the grow big to the same mix? N with that, what should I shoot for ph wise just starting out, (nothing to the soil in mind).

az2000 said:

Usually I express such things as a ratio. So, you're saying NPK ratio 4-1-2. That's pretty high in N (not a regular ratio.). I only go to 2-1-1.8 in veg. I'm often closer to 1-1-1.8. (I vary it.) Dyna-Gro (Foliage-Pro) is 3-1-2, and those grows often look close to N toxic to me.

I can't get to N=3 with my nutrients. Mine start looking N toxic at N=2.

I'm growing a plant now under relatively low light (LED lightbulbs) using MiracleGro Tomato (which is NPK ratio 1-1-1.17). The older leaves look a little N toxic to me sometimes. It must have something to do with the form of N (90% is urea).

For the OP, there is a spreadsheet you can use to see the NPK ratios resulting from whatever you feed (if it's multi-bottle). It's nice to focus on that instead of a "schedule." You can read your plants, vary the NPK ratio. (It's really useful when you transition to so-called "bloom nutes." People who follow schedules can reduce N too quickly and have trouble. Being aware of the NPK ratio will give you some info about what you're doing if/when something goes wrong.).

Click to expand...

One thing to remember in your ratios is the amount of the nute that is readily availiable, combined with the amount that becomes availiable over time. I forget the timeframe but if I remember correctly, urea takes weeks to months to break down. And yes in my experience the mg urea left inevitable n tox in the lower leaves.

berten-ernie420 said:

N one more thing, can I mix my nutes when I'm feeding them? I.e.-get my gal jug, pour in what I need from the ff big bloom in, then add the grow big to the same mix? N with that, what should I shoot for ph wise just starting out, (nothing to the soil in mind).

Click to expand...

Go for a balanced ratio, the plant can only grow as fast as it can find the nute it needs, thus an all purpose with micros such as Jacks all purpose that rm3 would recommend would be perfect for a beginner. Don't over feed. The autos should want at most 2-3 light feedings the whole grow

As for ph advice, Google will give you a couple charts. It gives you a small range for soil or hydro in which fluctuations are ideal for uptake. It is usually not needed if you have well water. Also, healthy soil is self phing. PHing hurts microbe life. PH is usually only a problem in hydro/aero or in bad soil. If you have pretty good soil and your ph is only a little off, don't do anything.

I just finished a CFL grow of 4 plants.
I used 452 watts
20@18 watts, 4@23 watts
6500k, 5100k, 3400k, 2700k.

My total haul from 3 plants were 42 grams dry, the buds were fluffy, airy. It was good weed for my first grow though. Just don't expect dense buds and keep a low expectation on your haul so you won't get disappointed when your yeild is not what you expected.

I did my grow in soil (Super Soil), Walmart bags .50 cents each and absolutely no nutes, just teas and water. Did my research and chose the least problematic way of growing (soil) no PHing, mixing nutes, and if you fuck up soil is more forgiving and no flushing.

My 4th plant is finishing under a 400 watt hps. She's a verrry slow finisher.

B4L

Blunted 4 lyfe said:

I just finished a CFL grow of 4 plants.
I used 452 watts
20@18 watts, 4@23 watts
6500k, 5100k, 3400k, 2700k.

My total haul from 3 plants were 42 grams dry, the buds were fluffy, airy. It was good weed for my first grow though. Just don't expect dense buds and keep a low expectation on your haul so you won't get disappointed when your yeild is not what you expected.

I did my grow in soil (Super Soil), Walmart bags .50 cents each and absolutely no nutes, just teas and water. Did my research and chose the least problematic way of growing (soil) no PHing, mixing nutes, and if you fuck up soil is more forgiving and no flushing.

My 4th plant is finishing under a 400 watt hps. She's a verrry slow finisher.

B4L

Click to expand...

Sounds like you heatstessed them and underfed them. I bet a single well timed feeding of something like 1/2-3/4 strength grow big mixed with 1/3-1/2 strength max sea bloom and a shot of cal mag (one combo I use, varies depending on what I think plant wants,) would have literally doubled yeild. The plant in my pic is one of the 6 or 7 I grew in horrible conditions under 108w of t5ho, the 4ft tubes. Rootspace and temp were outside of accepted ranges. II still got somewhere between 2 and 3 ounces.
If you don't pull .2 gpw minimum off cfl, you did it wrong. No doubt about it.

THCmeBro said:

Sounds like you heatstessed them and underfed them. I bet a single well timed feeding of something like 1/2-3/4 strength grow big mixed with 1/3-1/2 strength max sea bloom and a shot of cal mag (one combo I use, varies depending on what I think plant wants,) would have literally doubled yeild. The plant in my pic is one of the 6 or 7 I grew in horrible conditions under 108w of t5ho, the 4ft tubes. Rootspace and temp were outside of accepted ranges. II still got somewhere between 2 and 3 ounces.
If you don't pull .2 gpw minimum off cfl, you did it wrong. No doubt about it.

Click to expand...

I guess you didn't understand that I will not use any nutes in my grow, all of the nutrients are in the soil. I feed the soil not the plant, most feed the plant and thats why so many folks have problems plus there are other advantages to grow w/o nutes, in my case it's smoothness and taste. My buddy grows hydro but I will not blaze his weed, we only blaze mine.

My focus was quality not quantity, if quantity was an issue for me I just grow an extra plant. Graphs might impress you but it does nothing for me, gpw means nothing to me.

BTW why would you think I had heat stress I never said I had that problem, besides I grew with CFLs wheres the heat. I kept my lights 3-4 inches from the top of the canopy w/3 fans and a carbon exhaust fan. Shit my canopy never went above 87•

B4L

Alright, lets say for instance I have 489 watts in there right now. Actual watts, nit equiv. If what you say is true THCmeBro, then I should hopefully get about 3 ounces? With two plants....

Seems a bit steep for me to believe. But only time will tell. Two months and counting fellas as I just checked em and they are doing just fine. Popped open so I put em in the dirt with a plastic covering on to try n keep humidity up till they pop up out the dirt. But they did split, I can see the taproot poking out ever so slightly from the shell. Will post pics tomorrow if they sprout up.

berten-ernie420 said:

Seems a bit steep for me to believe. But only time will tell. Two months and counting fellas as I just checked em and they are doing just fine. Popped open so I put em in the dirt with a plastic covering on to try n keep humidity up till they pop up out the dirt. But they did split, I can see the taproot poking out ever so slightly from the shell. Will post pics tomorrow if they sprout up.

Click to expand...

If you are going for a good cfl grow, veg a little longer (like 3 weeks longer than you would with hid) before flip. Cfls get a couple weeks behind hid in veg and so many people seem to go by age for maturity, and with cfls that just doesn't work.
Also the higher the watts used, the less gpw you will get eventually. CFLs are heat machines. When I grow cfl, I stick to roughly 10 23w bulbs or higher for four plants, and I try to maximize the surface area on the apical bud of the plant each light actively covers.
If you are new to cfl, .05-.1 gpw is pretty easy and is a more than a safe assumption.

IMO sog is the only way to go with cfl. 2.5 23w cfls of mixed spectrum per plant, inches away from the top/side. I was getting 12 gram plants with minimal effort (except during flip stretch, that's an annoying time) and no additional veg time after preflowers. That's without controlling humidity and with extreme temp fluctuations between night and day.

Who knows, maybe my experiences are atypical and I just have a knack for low light situations, or I got lucky with my genetic stock.

berten-ernie420 said:

Alright, lets say for instance I have 489 watts in there right now. Actual watts, nit equiv. If what you say is true THCmeBro, then I should hopefully get about 3 ounces? With two plants....

Click to expand...

In short, no, not 3 oz. Don't try for more than 1oz plants with cfl, it will bite you in the but.
If you veg a long long time, yes 3oz from 2 plants. But as I said before, if you aren't getting .2gpw you are doing something wrong. IMO growing secondary or Tertiary buds under cfl is a huge yield reducer as each plant is getting a minimalists amount of light for energy production, and so the best yeild would come from 1-2 main budsites, not an evenly topped 10 or so budsites, etc.


I guess what I'm tripping on is the fact that you went over 400w with cfl. For 489w, I would set up a dwc 4 plant 400w hid grow and I'd be expecting 45 gram plants as my safe margin.

Blunted 4 lyfe said:

I guess you didn't understand that I will not use any nutes in my grow, all of the nutrients are in the soil. I feed the soil not the plant, most feed the plant and thats why so many folks have problems plus there are other advantages to grow w/o nutes, in my case it's smoothness and taste. My buddy grows hydro but I will not blaze his weed, we only blaze mine.

My focus was quality not quantity, if quantity was an issue for me I just grow an extra plant. Graphs might impress you but it does nothing for me, gpw means nothing to me.

BTW why would you think I had heat stress I never said I had that problem, besides I grew with CFLs wheres the heat. I kept my lights 3-4 inches from the top of the canopy w/3 fans and a carbon exhaust fan. Shit my canopy never went above 87•

B4L

Click to expand...

CFL = 2x the heat to useable light. And if they are cool enough to touch you can maybe understand why they are closer to heat lamps than grow lights.
With how many watts you used of cfl, heat stress is obvious.
87f is very hot for a cfl grow. I wouldn't let the canopy get above roughly 82F as my resiliant unknown strain will start showing heat stressed leaves in veg after a week of 80F
Heat stress will cause airy buds.
With the watts you used, without heat stress the likelihood is you'd notice more density and weight.
Carbon scrubbing also reduces airflow increasing pressure and heat.


I don't know what "graphs impressed me" but I do know why I care about gpw. For me after years, I find gpw to be the quickest way to judge grower skill, and to see if they have done adequate research and put that into practice. As an amatuer not controlling anything, I got .75 gpw (of very decent quality, and insane flavor, especially for hermies) off 108w of t5 just because I did my research (about 4 months worth before I even popped a seed). I've only gotten better since.

Clearly you don't have much experience smoking or growing if you want to talk about quality vs quantity. As with many things in life, I feel the middle ground is the only reasonable choice. What is quantity without quality and vice versa? What good would a plant be that always produces only 1 gram of the best tasting highest medical content marijuana in the world?


I know all about feeding the soil vs using a "nute" to feed the plant. Nutes in the bud, not a thing. Go argue with chuck estaves on that. When you Google what's the difference between organic and inorganic molecules, maybe it will put something into perspective. It will say that to be organic it has to have a hydrogen and a carbon atom. Inorganic are salts, metals, etc. So if you used rock dust for micros in the soil, technically inorganic. There are many things that are "inorganic organics" that I guarantee will only improve your quality and quantity, and that would satisfy the health or environment concious. You don't have to go synthetic/salt happy.

So instead of being roped into organics, or especially no nute growing (which I doubt you pulled off without amending soil or starting with fresh soil,) do more research. True no nute, only tea growing is unsustainable. You end up with barren/depleted soil after a couple years of not ammending (adding nutes and balancing the soil) or cycling crops after a grow. The only time I see no nute growing as practical is if you are following a style like hugelkulture (I believe it was called a full scale farming or something) where you make healthy microbe rich soil, and plant a plant from each group (rhizomes, fruit trees, perennials, etc) so that they form a symbiosis and feed each other.

And please please please don't make statements like most people feed the plant and that's why they have issues... That's just a gimmick tagline for brands like boogie brew. I've had much worse problems from desperately hungry plants than slightly overfed ones. Most people have issues A. because they didn't research and don't know what they are doing, B. Because they are tricked by grow shops or misled by advertisements into buying products they don't need (like p k heavy bloom boosters), C. Because they skimp on supplies (fan, light, nutes, temp and humidity control) and think they can get by without and D. Because they care too much about their plant.

THCmeBro said:

CFL = 2x the heat to useable light. And if they are cool enough to touch you can maybe understand why they are closer to heat lamps than grow lights.
With how many watts you used of cfl, heat stress is obvious.
87f is very hot for a cfl grow. I wouldn't let the canopy get above roughly 82F as my resiliant unknown strain will start showing heat stressed leaves in veg after a week of 80F
Heat stress will cause airy buds.
With the watts you used, without heat stress the likelihood is you'd notice more density and weight.
Carbon scrubbing also reduces airflow increasing pressure and heat.


I don't know what "graphs impressed me" but I do know why I care about gpw. For me after years, I find gpw to be the quickest way to judge grower skill, and to see if they have done adequate research and put that into practice. As an amatuer not controlling anything, I got .75 gpw (of very decent quality, and insane flavor, especially for hermies) off 108w of t5 just because I did my research (about 4 months worth before I even popped a seed). I've only gotten better since.

Clearly you don't have much experience smoking or growing if you want to talk about quality vs quantity. As with many things in life, I feel the middle ground is the only reasonable choice. What is quantity without quality and vice versa? What good would a plant be that always produces only 1 gram of the best tasting highest medical content marijuana in the world?


I know all about feeding the soil vs using a "nute" to feed the plant. Nutes in the bud, not a thing. Go argue with chuck estaves on that. When you Google what's the difference between organic and inorganic molecules, maybe it will put something into perspective. It will say that to be organic it has to have a hydrogen and a carbon atom. Inorganic are salts, metals, etc. So if you used rock dust for micros in the soil, technically inorganic. There are many things that are "inorganic organics" that I guarantee will only improve your quality and quantity, and that would satisfy the health or environment concious. You don't have to go synthetic/salt happy.

So instead of being roped into organics, or especially no nute growing (which I doubt you pulled off without amending soil or starting with fresh soil,) do more research. True no nute, only tea growing is unsustainable. You end up with barren/depleted soil after a couple years of not ammending (adding nutes and balancing the soil) or cycling crops after a grow. The only time I see no nute growing as practical is if you are following a style like hugelkulture (I believe it was called a full scale farming or something) where you make healthy microbe rich soil, and plant a plant from each group (rhizomes, fruit trees, perennials, etc) so that they form a symbiosis and feed each other.

And please please please don't make statements like most people feed the plant and that's why they have issues... That's just a gimmick tagline for brands like boogie brew. I've had much worse problems from desperately hungry plants than slightly overfed ones. Most people have issues A. because they didn't research and don't know what they are doing, B. Because they are tricked by grow shops or misled by advertisements into buying products they don't need (like p k heavy bloom boosters), C. Because they skimp on supplies (fan, light, nutes, temp and humidity control) and think they can get by without and D. Because they care too much about their plant.

Click to expand...

I think you going sidewys on me there Papi I agree, more light is a optimal.

Relax Kimo-sabe it was a typo, it was supposed to be 78•
Give me some credit do you think that after saying I did research as well, wouldn't you think I read somewhere that high temperatures kill plants? Maybe? ...Or was it your incontrollable urge to school me?

You feel so strongly I suffered heat stress. I'll just let you keep on thinking that, makes no sense convincing you that it wasn't.

You're correct that this is my first grow but I been smoking since Woodstock (August/1969) I was taken there as a "growing up ritual" by my Uncle and his girlfreind, it was the best 3 days I ever spent away from home. Free booze, marijuana, food and of course lots of sex. My first time ever smoking weed was a strain called the "Hammer " out of Canada, no need to explain the head, the name says it all. It was also the first time I smoked Thai Stick one of the most powerful canabis of it's time. My almost 5 decades of weed smoking
Allows me the right to judge good from lousy weed. I've had weed from all over the world, the 2 most memorious weed sesions I've had were in Belize and Curacao.

Venezuela and Caracao, imo, have the best weed in the Americas right now, I may be wrong. The soil there is super rich...it has been known for for a plant to grow on a car that was heavily covered by wind blown soil.

And yes I did say I mix my own soil is that not synonymous with ammend?

Over 85% of all problems on this site has to do with nutes. Over/under feeding, deficiency nightmares, pumps, water temps and on and on. So when I say most problems encountered by groweres, especially new ones, occur when they feed the plant its because its based on observation so I'll stand by my statement and I don't really care if you agree or not and feel that it is gimmicky, in every grow I've seen in nature I never seen buckets, pumps, air stones and all that other crap.

Everybody has their own preferences I like naturally grown weed others, such as yourself, like chemically grown weed, thats great.

Where I'm lost is many agree that growing weed should be K.I.S.S. (Keep it simple stupid) but yet go out there and choose the most complicated way to grow, go figure.

Chill Papi

B4L