Thank you for your patience! Life has been non-stop for a while now but I finally made some time for the review.
Mega Crop vs Dyna Gro final write-up.....
As I mentioned in the first post of this thread, I was going to be looking at different aspects of Mega Crop and comparing it to the food that I use regularly, which is DynaGro. I’ve already gone over ease of use, versatility, cost, pH stability, plant performance, plant health, etc., so my plan here is to just wrap this up with some closing thoughts.
The final yield for these plants was 805 grams (roughly 28.4 ounces) which is actually a personal best by 1 gram. My previous personal best occurred during my previous run with DynaGro just a couple months before this comparison grow. My goal in regards to yield coming into this comparison was 19-20oz because that’s been my average for years now in this corner tray with a 600 HPS. The thing about these last two runs, which have been personal bests, is that they’ve been powered by a brand new ballast. My previous ballast was a 600w Quantum and while that piece of sh*t did last a couple of years, it popped during the first week of my previous run with DynaGro and it took out a bulb with it. So I went to my local hydro store and promptly replaced the bulb and bought a new 600w single-ended Sun System 1. So the problem with these yield numbers is that it seems like this new ballast is vastly superior to my old Quantum and my old baseline for average yields is now antiquated. Before I can draw any final conclusions I’ll need to do another run with DG just to get an idea of what an ‘average’ yield might be. Regardless of the outcome of those future grows, 1.34 grams/watt from a static overhead system in a 3’x4’ space is pretty damn good. Hats off to Mega Crop.
Also something to consider, these MegaCrop plants were quite a bit larger than the DG plants that were pictured in this thread and they were also getting help from a neighboring light as seen below. How much of a difference did the extra height and light make? Probably not more than 15-20% but that’s maybe impossible to determine. Regardless, MC certainly proved to be a very capable plant food.
As I mentioned a number of times, I really didn’t like working with MC. It was a little dusty, dirty, and time consuming to use. On the flipside it was the cheapest food that I’ve ever tested in hydro but it really wasn’t that much cheaper than what I already use. We’re talking at most a $5 savings per two-month cycle in a 20+ gallon reservoir (basically $12 vs DynaGro’s $16.50). Does this savings add up on a larger scale? Certainly. Does the extra time required also scale up? Of course!. Time is my most precious commodity so personally I’d gladly pay a bit more for the sake of ease and efficiency. The bottom line is this: MC could save you $5 per light per harvest and that is a savings that one might actually notice. That's also a savings over one of the most inexpensive liquid foods on the market; DynaGro. So when comparing MC to other liquid foods the cost savings may be even more noticeable.
Speaking of time and efficiency, MC’s higher nitrogen content (as compared to DG’s bloom) did grow leafier, branchier plants which required much more maintenance than I’m used to. Had I not known what to expect in terms of the growth I probably would have yielded a ton of airy, wispy flowers. These plants also required a bit more trimming because they were a little more leafy – maybe 10-20% more leaf? I’ve also noticed that the overall density of the flowers is lower than normal but by no means is the overall density low. The flowers are a tad more fox-tailed that normal - essentially I think the extra N caused the seed bracts to stack more than I'm used to. For the record, I’m a sativa guy, I don’t really care about density. However, if a strain is supposed to produce flowers on the dense side of the spectrum then I don't think the plant food should alter that. In regards to the extra leaf and slightly lower density, I do think that these two ‘issues’ could easily be rectified by the addition of a bloom booster such as MKP. It’s not necessarily the higher P and K that would increase density but the diluted nitrogen content. Because MC supplies more calcium and magnesium than needed, I actually think MC formulated this food to be used with a booster.
As far as the actual quality of the product goes, it’s essentially indistinguishable from other nutrient brands. Aroma and resin production are possibly down a bit on this MC run but I’m sure the difference could be mitigated had I been using the same supplements as I do when running DynaGro. I actually did hear an unsolicited comment about how this round of Casey was really frosty so take that for what it’s worth.
So other than my complaints about the time involved (canopy maintenance, added trim time, weighing, mixing, and dissolving) and the little dusty messes MC makes, it’s a pretty solid performer and it doesn’t break the bank! Well done, Mega Crop.
MegaCrop tray growing into a neighboring light....
View attachment 4450970
Dried flowers under natural lighting (Mega Crop)...
View attachment 4450964
More Mega Crop...
View attachment 4450967
DynaGro Flower....
View attachment 4450969
