# do i need cal-mag using lucas formula



## jayww (Apr 12, 2010)

im using ro water (my bluelab meter is showing 0 PPM), 0-8-16 lucas formula

PH 5.6-5.8

PPM 450ish starting low, then working my way up.

anyhow, regardless, is cal-mag reccomended to use with the lucas formula, if so, at full strength, half strength??


----------



## slomoking13 (Apr 12, 2010)

it's actually a pretty frequently debated topic... In my experience, i would say that yes... you do need it, but at the same time, you can get by without it. I do a full strength dose only when i start to see a slight mg def, but that's it. I don't think lucas formula was ever intended to be used with cal mag, but i see people using it more often than not.


----------



## vh13 (Apr 12, 2010)

I did a full grow using Lucas Formula. I didn't use cal-mag. Lucas is meant to be a cheap and easy complete food source, even though it technically isn't.

I'd start off without, if you see deficiency then add, the general rule with most food sources is to start with 1/4-1/2 strength and work your way up to full only if necessary.


----------



## Michael Phelps (Apr 13, 2010)

Im using the Lucas formula and i only used epsom salt twice during my grow at 1/2 strength... From what i know epsom salt is a cheaper alternative to cal mag and worked great for me.


----------



## fatman7574 (Apr 13, 2010)

vh13 said:


> I did a full grow using Lucas Formula. I didn't use cal-mag. Lucas is meant to be a cheap and easy complete food source, even though it technically isn't.
> 
> I'd start off without, if you see deficiency then add, the general rule with most food sources is to start with 1/4-1/2 strength and work your way up to full only if necessary.


 
The Lucas method (not the Lucas Formula ast here is no such thing as a Lucas formula just a GH formula used in a foolishly suggested manner by the dim wit Lucas). The mixture is a complete nutrient solution it is just not a properly balanced nutrient solution. It is ones of those "it works well enough" methods commonly accepted by unknowing growers as good. You are much better off using all three parts as directed by GH just use lower strengths then recommended. You also must remember an EC measurement converted to ppm is not a true ppm measurement but just an estimate based on the solutions ability to carry an electrical charge. Believing it is a true ppm reading can quite often mean over fertilization.


----------



## bigsourD (Apr 13, 2010)

are you plants showing signs of calcium, magnesium or nitrogen deficiencies?


----------



## trichlone fiend (Apr 13, 2010)

I use the Lucas formula with tap water....my plants are beautiful....no cal./mag here. ...getting over a pound per 600 hps.


----------



## CLOSETGROWTH (Apr 13, 2010)

If your using GH nutes, you do not have to add anything.

0-8-16 and change rez every 2 weeks. top off with plain ph'd water, or addback w/nutes.

My plants are running the GH lucas formula, and they look superb.

Dont listen to fat people, who cut everyone/everything down.

They are mainly worried about how many twinkies are left in the box, and when their social security check arrives.

They bitch and moan about everything, due to rising and falling sugar levels in their blood. 

Lucas is a very smart man, and well respected throughout the grow community 

Good luck


----------



## vh13 (Apr 13, 2010)

fatman7574 said:


> The mixture is a complete nutrient solution it is just not a properly balanced nutrient solution. It is ones of those "it works well enough" methods commonly accepted by unknowing growers as good.


My mistake, I never bother to look these things up directly, I just ask people I consider experts.

Btw, nearly three weeks into flower with my newest grow, using Dyna-Gro two part veg/flower, planning on picking up pro-tekt shortly, I expect much better results then with GH Lucas. I may try Botanicare's new cs-shit next round. Any suggestions fatman?


----------



## trichlone fiend (Apr 13, 2010)

...anyone with any Lucas Formula question, see it from his own fingers here >>> http://www.cannabis-world.org/cw/showthread.php?t=892&highlight=lucas+formula


----------



## auto22 (Apr 13, 2010)

ive found the lucas formula to work well on some strain and on some not so well. i always used cal mag in some amount depending on how things look.

trichlone fiend

thats a good yield off a 600.


----------



## surphin (Apr 13, 2010)

In my own expierence I needed the cal/mag when using the lucas formula, at least the plant I'm running needed it. Now I'm back to using all 3 parts of GH, mixing according to the directions on the bottles. No problems and no defiencies. 

It's going to come down to what the plants are telling you they need.


----------



## hellraizer30 (Sep 6, 2011)

This thread pretty old but il put my 2cents in, ive done lucas and still do for veging plants, but for bloom not a chance
0/8/16 isnt complete enough for me or my girls, they show early signs of def. So a altercation was made 5/8/16 and
All was good from then on. As for geting the most out of your girls lucas aint the answer, works for new growers or
Conservitive growers! But for those that want to take it to another level its not the best choice.


----------



## asaph (Jan 1, 2012)

fatman7574 said:


> The Lucas method (not the Lucas Formula ast here is no such thing as a Lucas formula just a GH formula used in a foolishly suggested manner by the dim wit Lucas). The mixture is a complete nutrient solution it is just not a properly balanced nutrient solution. It is ones of those "it works well enough" methods commonly accepted by unknowing growers as good. You are much better off using all three parts as directed by GH just use lower strengths then recommended. You also must remember an EC measurement converted to ppm is not a true ppm measurement but just an estimate based on the solutions ability to carry an electrical charge. Believing it is a true ppm reading can quite often mean over fertilization.



you got it all backwards man. it's the ppm reading that's not a true ppm measurement! ppm can't be magically detected by other means than EC monitoring, all your tds meters do is convert EC to ppm/tds, and they don't even do it in a uniform standard - some use 0.7 and some use 0.5 factor - that's really stupid - it would be so much better if everyone stopped using tds.


----------

