What Did I Do Wrong? Only Yielded 7oz

Kot

1,109
163
I get 2lbs or more off of 12” colas. My last two plants had 67 and 53. Say what you want but to those of us that spend the time to get these results (120 day veg) we are laughing at you right now. I do this running 9 qb132. I have consistent results like this. Stop telling people what they can’t do, and start putting the time to achieve what you clearly don’t understand. Not sorry for the animosity, you want to call bs best have your facts straight
Everybody grows how we wants. In that 120 days you could go from seed to dried buds and hit one gram per watt. Long veg is not the way to go but as I said everyone can grow as he pleases.
 
991
243
Everybody grows how we wants. In that 120 days you could go from seed to dried buds and hit one gram per watt. Long veg is not the way to go but as I said everyone can grow as he pleases.
Perpetual grow with 6 plants - because it’s legal. If you think I could yield more flowering every 60 days please explain. It’s about optimum flower in the shortest cycle right? Can’t speed my cycle faster than the plants flower. I could run them with much less veg and training and obviously the yield would be less. The OP asked how do
I increase my yield. Lights, training and veg time that’s considerate of what you want to yield. Further if I ran less plants, in the same method I would use less footprint. My lights allow me to adjust for that. So that does NOT mean i would go to 1gpw it would mean my total
Yield for the cubic foot would be less.
 
Has anyone recommended to the OP to get some c02 or more fresh air blastin. Lighting is key, but plants can’t even use much light without some good ass airflow. Hydro is another options to get more weight if that’s your primary focus. Coco is easy, ebb and flow is fairly simple. I’m personally a bit intimidated by dwc and aeroponics but that’s the real shit right there if you want some weight. Air tho man.. air
CO2 doesn't matter until you are light saturated. He's not. RDWC is easy, once you understand the setup. Look up the setup at growweedeasy.com for a small example.
 
1,278
263
Here’s a pic before



That’s a cute popcorn forest. My are maybe 12-14 inches tall and make yours look like toothpicks. That’s how 2gs a watt is achieved
I have nothing but respect for your grow man. Beautiful.
I don’t think anyone is saying you are lying about 2 gpw, it’s just if you spend twice as long vegging (your training looks cool af by the way) the 2 gpw measurements isnt super valid measurement. Like if you are using 500 watts for 16 hours but I’m using 1000 and getting it done in 8 hours it costs the same amount in power. Again I don’t think buddy was calling bullshit on the number just the unit of measurement or whatever. Seeing your crazy ass plants, and the mad efficient lighting I don’t doubt that you flowered those plants at 2 gpw
 
1,278
263
CO2 doesn't matter until you are light saturated. He's not. RDWC is easy, once you understand the setup. Look up the setup at growweedeasy.com for a small example.
I’m going to have to disagree that c02 doesn’t matter lol. Anyone can throw a big light over a plant. C02 is essential. (You don’t need it from a bottle or burner mind you) fresh airflow is so overlooked. Also rdwc is not so easy for everyone. Obviously simple in theory. But easy no sir. Especially if your location has certain limitations
 
I’m going to have to disagree that c02 doesn’t matter lol. Anyone can throw a big light over a plant. C02 is essential. (You don’t need it from a bottle or burner mind you) fresh airflow is so overlooked. Also rdwc is not so easy for everyone. Obviously simple in theory. But easy no sir. Especially if your location has certain limitations
I agree with you on airflow. I believe you are incorrect on the addition of CO2. CO2 is used in direct proportion to the photons received by the leaf. The math is exact, so many photons are required to make so many molecules of sugar. If you want I can google up the reaction equation. Additional CO2 cannot be used unless there is a photon available to energize the reaction. It is chemically impossible to add to the growth of a plant by increasing CO2 unless there is excess light over what can be used to process the existing atmospheric concentrations of CO2. If adding light increases growth, then by definition light was the limiting factor, and there is no excess light available to process the added CO2.
 
1,278
263
I think we are on the same page. Again I’m not saying supplemental c02 is a must, all I’m saying is lighting upgrade without airflow upgrade can also be just a waist of power (I’m talking c02 in fresh air) just like how throwing c02 at a setup not requiring it is pointless. And I see this issue all the time. There is exact math, I agree. But I don’t know how many times people are like “I have this monster light, where’s my weight at?” And they are venting into same room and just using stale ass air. Just didn’t want OP forgetting about that aspect. (Not saying he would benefit from bottled c02 under 200 actual watts of led lol.) haha well said tho. I agree with you
I agree with you on airflow. I believe you are incorrect on the addition of CO2. CO2 is used in direct proportion to the photons received by the leaf. The math is exact, so many photons are required to make so many molecules of sugar. If you want I can google up the reaction equation. Additional CO2 cannot be used unless there is a photon available to energize the reaction. It is chemically impossible to add to the growth of a plant by increasing CO2 unless there is excess light over what can be used to process the existing atmospheric concentrations of CO2. If adding light increases growth, then by definition light was the limiting factor, and there is no excess light available to process the added CO2.
 
Lol, you can google, hashtag etc (social media) and argue all you want about co2. If you don’t have a sealed room and I want to stress a sealed room. You CAN NOT use co2 to its full potential.
I'd go one step further: if you haven't maximized every other factor, adding CO2 is an expensive step that can't produce. It can only add growth when every other factor is maximally present.
 
18
13
LEDs are the future. However, for lights on a budget, search "600 watt grow light kit" on Amazon. There are a lot of inexpensive options. There is a Vivosun with digital ballast that can be set for 250, 400, and 600 Watts. It comes with 600W MH and HPS bulbs. You also get a basic reflector, hangars, and a nice timer. Price today is $129.00 Prime!!! There are so many options and the 1000W version costs just a little more.
 
1,278
263
Ya dude get the 600 not 1k. Then when you get some more coin get another 600 or 315 cmh or 300 watts of cobs to pair with the 600 in a 4x8 and your livin the dream. I feel confident you could pull a pound off a 600. I run my 1k at 750 w most of the time. Get the 600 if you buy hps
 

jumpincactus

Premium Member
Supporter
11,456
438
ppfd par and temperatures are all integral to use of C02 as well. But like most have mentioned you are wasting gas n cash if your throw gas into a unsealed well ventilated room or tent.

When Co2 is truly required is when your using light systems that are pushing the ppfd envelope with light intensity and DLI levels.

Here is a great paper to understand using high par ppfd lighting and when and how C02 is needed.

https://2xuwao2gok1v2wn2em9n5ys8-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Fluence-Photobiology-Guide-2019.pdf
 

CrimsonEcho

Premium Member
Supporter
2,393
263
Just my 2 cents. The blurples should perform better than white leds if you get quality ones. They only emit at the peaks of photosynthesis and most provide fr, uv and sometimes even ir which white leds doesn’t provide. There was a good video around here, the guy in the video explains it way better.
But quality ain’t cheap and the qbs and cobs perform amazingly well for their price.
 
Top