water extract micron size?

so correct me if I'm wrong but the way I understand it water extracts are labeled by the micron size they fall on to not what they fall through (for instance if you use 120u-90u-45u when you pull the 120u what is left on the 90u would be called 90u hash). wouldn't it be better to rate by saying all particles are less than the size of the bag above (sticking with the same example, what is left on the 90u bag would be <120u). someone could even take it further and rate both bags the one above and the one below (for instance the same hash would be called 120u-90u).

sorry for the rant just something on my mind

Your reasoning is spot-on, @isaacjd. While it's important to know the size of the catch screen, that information only tells part of the story. Naturally, the same screen-range classification system also applies to dry sifts.

I've seen a lot of people talking about 25 micron hash. since that is the catch bag it could be anywhere from absolute trash (45 micron above) to pretty decent half melt (90 micron above).

yeah really the hash should be graded like this 90-45 micron, meaning the matter caught in the 45 bag is smaller than 90 but bigger than 45. I've got a 63???(maybe) which is where My full melts at with blue cheese. So 90-63 is my favourite grade

Personally, I like to screen for a 160-45 μ slice of the proverbial pot pie. Based on the micro-morphology data that's been published to date, this range leaves the least number of glandular heads on the hash table.

I'm running og kush right now and the best grade I'm getting is 120-90 I get almost as good in the 90-70 range. but for some reason i can't quite get to full melt. I'll have to try some dry sifting and see what I come up with...