# Lucas formula +rep for knowledgeable answers :)



## CLOSETGROWTH (Mar 28, 2010)

Hello folks.

Went from fox farms to the lucus method recently, and already seeing outstanding results.. So easy.

Im using the micro, and the bloom @ 8-16 Superb!! 

Anyways,.. Iam reading up on the lucas method and heard that you can either use 8ml per gallon of floranova bloom, or floranova grow from veg to harvest, and be done with mixing the micro and the bloom.

Im confused, Lucas says use the floranova bloom, but others say the supernova grow..

Whats your opinion here.. 

I just bought the supernova bloom, but kinda unsure. Heard it was some thick ass shit.

Is this the right stuff?

Or should I stay with the cleaner flora series?



Thanks so much


----------



## llewop211 (Mar 28, 2010)

The point of the lucas formula is to provide your plant everything that has been biologically proven it needs to grow, without wasting money on boosters and additives that have no real effects. Lucas claims that environmental conditions(mostly light) are what limit a plants growth once it has it's basic nutrients. The GH Flora series that Lucas suggests is just the cheapest system he calculated to give your plants these nutrients. This thread breaks all of them down. HERE So the way I see it is you can use any nutrient flormula that supplies these and call it the Lucas formula, GH is just the cheapest.


----------



## llewop211 (Mar 28, 2010)

Oh and I run 8/16 Flora Series from clone through harvest, why fix what isn't broken


----------



## Silverback (Mar 28, 2010)

indeed , i am going lucas formula with the Advanced micro and bloom. NPK is the same as GH so i expect good results


----------



## llewop211 (Mar 28, 2010)

Silverback said:


> indeed , i am going lucas formula with the Advanced micro and bloom. NPK is the same as GH so i expect good results



I believe Lucas created his formula based on more than just Nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium values. These are just the three primary nutrients involved.


----------



## homebrewer (Mar 28, 2010)

llewop211 said:


> ....without wasting money on boosters and additives that have no real effects.


The GH additives and boosters DO have a real measurable effect on the final product.


----------



## CLOSETGROWTH (Mar 28, 2010)

llewop211 said:


> The point of the lucas formula is to provide your plant everything that has been biologically proven it needs to grow, without wasting money on boosters and additives that have no real effects. Lucas claims that environmental conditions(mostly light) are what limit a plants growth once it has it's basic nutrients. The GH Flora series that Lucas suggests is just the cheapest system he calculated to give your plants these nutrients. This thread breaks all of them down. HERE So the way I see it is you can use any nutrient flormula that supplies these and call it the Lucas formula, GH is just the cheapest.


Thank you for the reply.

This is exactly why im going witht he gh nutes, sweet,simple..and it WORKS! 

Im not gonna be suckered into all them additives.. not worth it.


----------



## llewop211 (Mar 28, 2010)

homebrewer said:


> The GH additives and boosters DO have a real measurable effect on the final product.


I'm sure people opinions vary greatly on this. I know a ton off people who love to spoil their plants with all kinds off additives and swear by certain brands and formulas. In the end, they claim their big healthy buds are a result of the additives. I personally think it's just cognitive dissonance because of all the extra money they spent. Can you get strong without creatine? The fattest, densest buds I've seen yet have been grown organically, outdoors, and without boosters. Plants are made of carbon, not nutrients. Extra nutrients will not speed up carbon fixation, extra light will.


----------



## CLOSETGROWTH (Mar 28, 2010)

llewop211 said:


> Oh and I run 8/16 Flora Series from clone through harvest, why fix what isn't broken


Hear ya bro. 

As mentioned earlier,.. Earlier today, I went down to the hydro store and bought some supernova bloom.

After I got home, I did even more reading..

I guess the stuff is thick as 90 weight gear oil.

I dunno,.. I dont want the sludge again(Fox Farms).

Im gonna take it back tomorrow, and get the flora Micro, and bloom again.

My roots are so damn healthy now, and white again using the classic flora.. like never before.

I wanna keep em like this til harvest. 

And thats another reason Im staying with flora.

The supernova sounds ok, but I want ease, and bright roots, and if I wanna beat something up like a paint can shaker, Ill just go to the local bar, and take out my aggressions over there.. Nutes shouldn't be this much of a problem to use...Hahaha!

I like your old saying..

Im sold.

Thanks guys, +rep for all!


----------



## homebrewer (Mar 29, 2010)

llewop211 said:


> I'm sure people opinions vary greatly on this. I know a ton off people who love to spoil their plants with all kinds off additives and swear by certain brands and formulas. In the end, they claim their big healthy buds are a result of the additives. I personally think it's just cognitive dissonance because of all the extra money they spent. Can you get strong without creatine? The fattest, densest buds I've seen yet have been grown organically, outdoors, and without boosters. Plants are made of carbon, not nutrients. Extra nutrients will not speed up carbon fixation, extra light will.


I limped into hydro by just using the GH Flora 3-part series. Without knowing anything, I felt the additives were a scam as they all had 'tongue-in-cheek' kind of names with colorful labels. Slowly I added one additive at a time so I could tell if they _actually_ helped the plants. Sure enough, each round looked better than the last, at which point I ran to the grow store to test another additive. Long story short, I now use the entire GH expert line and the additives absolutely help produce a better product. By no means am I saying you can't get results by only using the 3 part series. But I am saying the product will only improve when additives are used. 

Before I added the additives one at a time (florablend, floralicious bloom, floralicious plus, kool bloom liquid and dry, floranectar), I calculated their cost per round. I use a 15 gallon reservoir for 6 plants under a 600 watt. I change my water and nutes each week. Assuming 9 weeks to flower, it costs $70 per round to add all the additives (but costs $271 to buy them all - most are gallon size). 

Just my .02. Try the extras, it's worth the extra effort and the minuscule amount of money it costs per round. They pay for themselves.


----------



## llewop211 (Mar 29, 2010)

homebrewer said:


> I limped into hydro by just using the GH Flora 3-part series. Without knowing anything, I felt the additives were a scam as they all had 'tongue-in-cheek' kind of names with colorful labels. Slowly I added one additive at a time so I could tell if they _actually_ helped the plants. Sure enough, each round looked better than the last, at which point I ran to the grow store to test another additive. Long story short, I now use the entire GH expert line and the additives absolutely help produce a better product. By no means am I saying you can't get results by only using the 3 part series. But I am saying the product will only improve when additives are used.
> 
> Before I added the additives one at a time (florablend, floralicious bloom, floralicious plus, kool bloom liquid and dry, floranectar), I calculated their cost per round. I use a 15 gallon reservoir for 6 plants under a 600 watt. I change my water and nutes each week. Assuming 9 weeks to flower, it costs $70 per round to add all the additives (but costs $271 to buy them all - most are gallon size).
> 
> Just my .02. Try the extras, it's worth the extra effort and the minuscule amount of money it costs per round. They pay for themselves.



Reps to ya, I've always wanted to test additives. I do think a side by side test is necessary to truly determine the worth of a product. I'm sure your plants environment, along with your experience changed from cycle to cycle.


----------



## CLOSETGROWTH (Mar 29, 2010)

homebrewer said:


> I limped into hydro by just using the GH Flora 3-part series. Without knowing anything, I felt the additives were a scam as they all had 'tongue-in-cheek' kind of names with colorful labels. Slowly I added one additive at a time so I could tell if they _actually_ helped the plants. Sure enough, each round looked better than the last, at which point I ran to the grow store to test another additive. Long story short, I now use the entire GH expert line and the additives absolutely help produce a better product. By no means am I saying you can't get results by only using the 3 part series. But I am saying the product will only improve when additives are used.
> 
> Before I added the additives one at a time (florablend, floralicious bloom, floralicious plus, kool bloom liquid and dry, floranectar), I calculated their cost per round. I use a 15 gallon reservoir for 6 plants under a 600 watt. I change my water and nutes each week. Assuming 9 weeks to flower, it costs $70 per round to add all the additives (but costs $271 to buy them all - most are gallon size).
> 
> Just my .02. Try the extras, it's worth the extra effort and the minuscule amount of money it costs per round. They pay for themselves.


Thanks for your input Homebrewer


----------



## homebrewer (Mar 29, 2010)

llewop211 said:


> Reps to ya, I've always wanted to test additives. I do think a side by side test is necessary to truly determine the worth of a product. I'm sure your plants environment, along with your experience changed from cycle to cycle.


I already had 8 years experience in dirt before I converted 1/6 of my room into hydro. Hydro has less of a learning curve as the GH nutes are super simple to use. The only thing I needed to dial in is how many times to flood and drain given the 6" cube size. That took 3 weeks to figure out. After I was dialed in, i took a look at the additives. After that first round, I converted a second area in my room to hydro to further test products. I'm stating as fact that the additives are worth their money and produce a better product. Everyone is welcome to take the advice or leave it, but I challenge everyone to try for themselves to see what I'm talking about. Or we can post pics and compare product quality.


----------



## homebrewer (Mar 29, 2010)

Oh, I should add that I tried Botanicare's sweet instead of GH's FloraNectar for a few rounds and preferred the sweet formula's results. So with the exception of that one change, I'm a huge fan of the other GH additives.


----------



## llewop211 (Mar 29, 2010)

I plan on chopping my current grow in 5 days. I'll update this thread with some pictures ASAP.


----------



## tea tree (Mar 30, 2010)

I use the three part with the hardwater micro. I love it with straight tapwater and I just fill my buckets with a hose! Easy. Best growth I ever had. I plan to add kool bloom.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Mar 30, 2010)

llewop211 said:


> The point of the lucas formula is to provide your plant everything that has been biologically proven it needs to grow, without wasting money on boosters and additives that have no real effects.


Based on the 16 essential elements, his wonder fuel is far from complete. You tell me what his NPK and micro values are, and I'll show you how this formula was developed by a newb for noobs who don't know squat about plant nutrition.

I want to see your plants just before harvest. 

UB


----------



## CLOSETGROWTH (Mar 30, 2010)

Uncle Ben said:


> Based on the 16 essential elements, his wonder fuel is far from complete. You tell me what his NPK and micro values are, and I'll show you how this formula was developed by a newb for noobs who don't know squat about plant nutrition.
> 
> I want to see your plants just before harvest.
> 
> UB


Here's a grow running the Lucas Formula>> http://www.weedbay.net/overgrow-thebook/Hydroponics/Art4.htm

http://www.lucasformula.com/

http://www.cannabis-world.org/cw/showthread.php?t=892

His plants look pretty damn good to me! 

And he's not marketing like AN 

And Lucas is an old pioneer in the grow scene.

I dont think you know what YOUR talking about, Especially since you never heard of him.

He's one of the most educated growers out there.

A newb? Yea..Ok... Whatever. 

Shows us how knowledgeable you really are.

"Your a legend in your own mind"


----------



## homebrewer (Mar 31, 2010)

I, myself, am hearing of this Lucas formula for the first time on this thread. After reading through Lucasformula.com, this feeding schedule looks like nothing more than an easy way to get by without spending a lot of money on nutes. If that's how it's being sold then I'd agree that his formula will get you by. 

I agree with his statement on the site that one shouldn't compensate for a poor environment and bad genetics with additives. But when a system is dialed in, the envoronment is good, and you're working with solid genetics, you can't tell me that you should continue with this amateur hour formula. Come on.


----------



## llewop211 (Mar 31, 2010)

http://www.cannabis-world.org/cw/showthread.php?t=892

first 10 pages are a good read, whether or not you believe his system.


Edit: Just realized this was already posted...


----------



## llewop211 (Mar 31, 2010)

Uncle Ben said:


> Based on the 16 essential elements, his wonder fuel is far from complete. You tell me what his NPK and micro values are, and I'll show you how this formula was developed by a newb for noobs who don't know squat about plant nutrition.
> 
> I want to see your plants just before harvest.
> 
> UB


https://www.rollitup.org/hydroponics-aeroponics/268790-lucas-formula-recipe-scratch-really.html

^
Based upon the most recent analysis of Floramicro and Flora Bloom this is the corrected formula for the Luca Method:

ppm concentrations at a 1:100 dilution

Nitrogen 167
Phosphorus 333
Potassium 397
Magnesium 100 
Calcium 215
Sulfur 133
Iron 3.33
Manganese 1.67
Boron 1.67
Zinc 1.00
Copper .33
Molybdenum .03

Ounces
PART A
Calcium Nitrate 14.2
Iron Chelate .45

Ounces
Part B
MonoPotassium Phosphate 21.0
Magnesium Sulfate 13.5
Manganese Sulfate .090
Boric Acid / Solubor.123
Zinc Sulfate .058
Copper Sulfate .020
Ammonium Molybdate .001

Volume of Stock Solutions 1/2 gallon each part

Dilution Rate
100

This is a high concentrate formulation based upon analysis concentrations. The EC of the Part A is 1.08, Part B EC = 1.64, combined the EC is 2.72. Obviously a higher EC then most would consider using.

The PH used with RO water should be 5.4 at 1:100

The TDS ast a 1:100 mix is 1904 



Pictures will come soon...


----------



## tea tree (Mar 31, 2010)

make sure you read thru the whole thread at cannabis cuture "ask lucas". Might still be active but I dont know. Was a few months ago. 

Lucas changes quite a few times on what his formula is. In the latest peice he is deciding that regular str flora nova veg is right up until the flip too 12 and 12 then begin adding flora nova bloom in the addbacks and topoffs until it is all flora nova bloom. I cant rember what he says about cal mag with this, I assume it is covered or what is the point at all of reading the thread! Lol. 

The thread deals mostly with cal mag probs. Also In the beginning it talks about the 8 16 and the 5/10 ( I think I also forget this exact lower number) as diferent formulas for cfls or HIDS. The plant wants the stronger nutes for higher lights. 

The opinions of the thread and lucas and his freinds change quite a bit. He pretty much finds that flora nova and flora nova bloom are the same as the three part at his dream ppms. So he pretty much decides that the three part is the best soultion, and to use the bloom as addback additive or a bloom form as that so as to N load up the plants. 


I dont see how this "lucas formula" histeria is a big deal still at all. I went anck to the two part thinking that I had found a grail when I read about this formula and then I read the whole thread. I then decided that I was better off using the three part as apparantly lucas agreed. Especially when you decipher that the the flora nova grow and bloom are the same NPK ratio as the three part at full str. 

However I get better control and more mineral and stable nutes with the three part. For me it is about ease and contril and the fact the astronauts use the three part! When it comes to hydro. 

In soil I am an organic nut and believe in the soil food web and go on all day about the bene. But in hydro give me chems!

Also as i wanted ease nothing is better than the three part with the hardwater micro and tapwater! Naysayers abound about ph but I am still fine and I am in flower. These are the healthiest looking plants I ever grew. 

I add superthrive and h202 and kool bloom, liquid and prob dry too or big bud which I have on hand an prob use as I have seen them pump up buds. 

I then flush for a week in dwc and nothing is cleaner


----------



## Uncle Ben (Mar 31, 2010)

llewop211 said:


> https://www.rollitup.org/hydroponics-aeroponics/268790-lucas-formula-recipe-scratch-really.html
> 
> ^
> Based upon the most recent analysis of Floramicro and Flora Bloom this is the corrected formula for the Luca Method:
> ...


OK, that's 12 elements versus Dyna-Gro's 16, and not enough N to support foliage. Flip the NPK values and I might be convinced that it's a start. Still, would never buy into it..... 

That as opposed to Dyna-Gro's Foliage-Pro 9-3-6 - 16 elements, cheap, one part no fuss, no muss.

UB


----------



## Uncle Ben (Mar 31, 2010)

tea tree said:


> Lucas changes quite a few times on what his formula is. In the latest peice he is deciding .....


That's because he doesn't know what he's doing. Check out the links here: http://www.staugorchidsociety.org/PDF/IPAFertilizers.pdf

There's about 5 excellent papers in that series.

What's up with the Superthrive? You guys add stuff not knowing the outcome, or because someone else claimed they got "super" buds? IMO, you will only benefit from the use of Superthrive during a transplant to induce root cell division and even then my expert network of professionals says its a waste of time and money.

UB


----------



## LEDZEP (Apr 1, 2010)

Im a noob and the Lucas Formula, after I switched to 12/12, has been great, and cheap. I didn't like the results while vegging but I was a little apprehensive. I am using the add back method and it is so easy, I think I have great results, but then again this is the first go and I have nothing to compare to. All I know is that the formula got me off to a great start and I don't have to do res changes every week. I would recommend it to anyone.
Peace


----------



## CLOSETGROWTH (Apr 1, 2010)

Uncle Ben said:


> That's because he doesn't know what he's doing. Check out the links here: http://www.staugorchidsociety.org/PDF/IPAFertilizers.pdf
> 
> There's about 5 excellent papers in that series.
> 
> ...


Superthrive works great. 

Ive grown with, and without.

In comparison,

The plants that received the Superthrive were noticeably bigger, and much more healthier. 

And it always made my plants short and Bushy. Way more shoots. And talk about roots!!! 

The stems were visibly larger, and the plants were more rigid, and tough, and could overcome any form of stress. 

Just cant use this product in flowering.

So, There it is in a nutshell.

Its a fact, enough said.

But, of course, your not gonna believe me, because your stuck in your old ways.

You hear stuff from your so called network of professionals, and believe them in a heartbeat.

Just like a newbie praising a product from AN.

UB Ever used the product? 

Didn't think so.


If it aint your way UB, you have a freakin' cow. 

Everyone does things in a different manner.

Why do we gotta do everything your way??

You think your Gods gift to man. 

The one thing I will agree about, And thats the fact that some of the cheaper $5.00 boxes of ferts like(peters 20-20-20) will do wonders for a Mj grow.

Dude, You certainly dont know it all.


----------



## researchkitty (Apr 1, 2010)

tea tree said:


> make sure you read thru the whole thread at cannabis cuture "ask lucas". Might still be active but I dont know. Was a few months ago.
> 
> I dont see how this "lucas formula" histeria is a big deal still at all.


The thread is still accessible, top result on google for ask lucas still.

The "hysteria" about the "lucas formula" is that it's a very easy, inexpensive, simple, maintenance free, headache free, less error prone, less pH/ppm sensitivity, easy to clean , etc... Its just a very simple all-in-one solution to growing from a small to a very large quantity of herb with the least amount of headache.

Since the Internet is flooded with a lot of truly worthless pure shit, newbies get confused with high tech and dont understand the fundamentals. Lucas's mentors system that is named after Lucas now, is in that it teaches the fundamentals of a better grow room environment to fuel better results.

I disagree with pH (Lucas's mentor) on two issues, though.

1.) I dont feel that maintaining the same ppm over the entire grow cycle is smart. He says that if a plant uses 40oz of liquid nutrients, that you should put it in 5oz dumps for 8 weeks. That's just stupid. The plants grow faster in different areas at different stages of its lifetime. Hence why most grow charts show you with lower ppm at first and higher ppm during the max peaks of flowering then taper off to harvest. So while the 0-8-16ml/gallon solution works (but sucks for vegging!) I feel you can yield better results otherwise.

2.) Lack of his use of any additives. Lucas himself says 1.75lbs/lamp is great for him. That's why others can pull 2.25lbs/lamp instead, by using additives. Lets face it too, what does it cost us for one 1000w lamp for nutrients per cycle, $50? $100? Woopie-doodoo. Lucas simply experiences strong results for naturally easily grown marijuana because his environment is always perfect. He knows res temps, light distances, to use 60watts/sqft, how to maintain ppm/pH perfectly, and how to balance nutrients. And all of the technical aspects of the knowledge and how each aspect changes multiple dynamics of others. That's why he's excellent, he was a great student and translated that method to the world. If additive usage was shown to provide no benefits, nobody would buy or stock them. We would all know additives would be a waste of money because we would all see no differences either way. Lucas refuses to acknowledge that they can work and admits he has no experience using them. It isnt wrong of him, its just his style, which I dont agree with that part of.

Yeehaw.


----------



## CLOSETGROWTH (Apr 4, 2010)

researchkitty said:


> The thread is still accessible, top result on google for ask lucas still.
> 
> The "hysteria" about the "lucas formula" is that it's a very easy, inexpensive, simple, maintenance free, headache free, less error prone, less pH/ppm sensitivity, easy to clean , etc... Its just a very simple all-in-one solution to growing from a small to a very large quantity of herb with the least amount of headache.
> 
> ...


Lucas formula Sucks for vegging huh??

I have vegged 32"+ plants using the lucas formula.. In a very short time, with stems the size of a mop handle, and the roots are enormous.

Can hardly put the mop head worth of roots in my 3 1/2 gallon veg buckets! 


I think its more like "user error" on your part.


----------



## Dirtfree (Apr 5, 2010)

ITS A FUCKING WEED!!!!

You guys can give your plants all the shit you want! Its not going to change the fact that most people cant read their plants!

I give my plant what it needs because it tells me too!!!


CG ya know im just fuckin around......Keep em green!!!

But seriously, give Uncle ben a chance, he knows his shit about reading plants. 
Dirtfree


----------



## homebrewer (Apr 5, 2010)

Dirtfree said:


> ITS A FUCKING WEED!!!!


It's not a weed. A weed is a plant that is invasive and crowds out cultivated plants. Weeds are also considered a nuisance. 

In regards to the Lucas formula, is someone going to post pictures of their Lucas product? I'm still of the attitude that lucas is a cheap bastard whose close-mindedness is holding his plants back.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Apr 6, 2010)

homebrewer said:


> It's not a weed. A weed is a plant that is invasive and crowds out cultivated plants. Weeds are also considered a nuisance.
> 
> In regards to the Lucas formula, is someone going to post pictures of their Lucas product? I'm still of the attitude that lucas is a cheap bastard whose close-mindedness is holding his plants back.


Now that you mentioned it, since me and Lucas aka "newbie" started posting at ADPC about 10 years ago, I have never seen any of his plants. That may be just me, circumstances, or......


----------



## tea tree (Apr 6, 2010)

i just mixed a res with the gh nute calculator and it was right on with the ppms they say. I love that thing,lol.


----------



## homebrewer (Apr 6, 2010)

Well if someone would like to step-up and post pictures of their lucas formula product, I'd be interesting to see the results. This is a picture of the product when the entire expert line is being used. 



*picture is for entertainment purposes only and was found though google.


----------



## llewop211 (Apr 7, 2010)

Again, I am not saying that the lucas formula is the best way to grow plants, but it does work. Heres some pictures of my current grow, Its a 30 site aeroflo, 12 plants, strain is blueberry hoggsbreath, I'm assuming it's a cross between blue dream and hoggsbreath. These plants where vegged for 5 days and are currently on day 58 of 12/12, I plan on chopping them sometime next week, been flushing since sunday. The two lights are a 600w hps on left, and a 400w on right. Both are cooled by one 4" inline. No C02, Water temps between 65-72, Room temps between 70-80, RH between 45-60. Some leaves have a bit of ozone damage, I grow in my apartment... These plants have been fed the full strength (0-8-16) Lucas Formula from day one, No additives, no h202. The reason the canopy looks like the buds are all falling is because I bent the big colas to expose the lower bud sites these last 2 weeks. There is a lot of bleaching on the top buds, I don't think this has anything to do with the nutes used, more with me being to lazy to raise the lights or move the buds around. I actually think it looks kinda cool.


----------



## homebrewer (Apr 7, 2010)

Nice pics llewop. I'd be happy with that quality. It looks like you know your shiz and I'd love to see a grower like you add an additive or two to see the difference for yourself. KoolBloom will fatten that product up real nice and products like florablend, floralicious bloom and sweet seem to really pack on the ice and improve overall health. Either way, you've got some nice ladies there. Cheers.


----------



## CLOSETGROWTH (Apr 29, 2010)

Here's a few more images running the Lucas Formula.. GH Micro and bloom, thats it! 

Got over 39 oz's from 9 plants under 1 1000 watt hps light.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it!


----------



## patlpp (Apr 29, 2010)

CLOSETGROWTH said:


> Here's a few more images running the Lucas Formula.. GH Micro and bloom, thats it!
> 
> Got over 39 oz's from 9 plants under 1 1000 watt hps light.
> 
> Put that in your pipe and smoke it!


Well , you could have gotten a little more on those Colas if you just added some Big Bud, Bloom Booster, Bud Blood, Bud Candy, Bud Factory, carbo Load, Final Phase, Hammerhead, Overdrive, Voodoo juice, Vitaboost & Super Bud Blaster.


----------



## CLOSETGROWTH (Apr 29, 2010)

patlpp said:


> Well , you could have gotten a little more on those Colas if you just added some Big Bud, Bloom Booster, Bud Blood, Bud Candy, Bud Factory, carbo Load, Final Phase, Hammerhead, Overdrive, Voodoo juice, Vitaboost & Super Bud Blaster.


LOL!! 

Good one dude!!!!! 

They blew up even more than what you seen.

I believe them cola's were right around the 5th week.

I wouldn't put that garbage in my buckets if someone gave it to me.

Peace, CG


----------



## researchkitty (Apr 30, 2010)

Is that the wet weight, or dry and cured weight?


----------



## parishollow (Apr 30, 2010)

OK, feeling really stupid but what is 8/16. I am using GH. Is that 8ml Micro and 16ml Bloom per gallon?


----------



## patlpp (Apr 30, 2010)

parishollow said:


> OK, feeling really stupid but what is 8/16. I am using GH. Is that 8ml Micro and 16ml Bloom per gallon?


You are correct.


----------

