Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Grahamsville, NY
    Posts
    440

    Post

    "I wonder if anyone know what is the net weight of the bee-o-pac also the finished product weight?"

    Standard Medium Super contains 40 lbs. of honey(net) in 10 frames;
    Bee-O-Pac Super contains 32 lbs. of honey(net) in 8 frames;
    Halfcomb Super contains 30 lbs. of honey(net) in 40 cassettes;
    Ross Round Super contains 16 lbs. of honey(net) in 32 round sections.

    Boris

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Grahamsville, NY
    Posts
    440

    Post

    " Maybe you've never seen it, so I'll describe the
    "experiment"... "

    Jim,
    Your "experiment" is great!

    Thank you.
    Boris

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fort McMurray, Canada
    Posts
    220

    Post

    We tried cutting a top bar like Ross shows

    http://www.myoldtools.com/Bees/frames/sled5.jpg

    Without removing the wedge it came out like this:

    http://zacharyfarmsllc.com/45_deg_top%20bar.htm

    Do you think it will work like this or should the slot be closed down or the wedge piece removed?
    Lat 56N

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Greenville, TX, USA
    Posts
    4,326

    Post

    But, you also need to weigh a foundationless comb and one from foundation and see how much of that provided wax was actually needed. I percieve foundationless combs to weigh less.

    [size="1"][ February 23, 2007, 04:25 AM: Message edited by: Ross ][/size]

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Greenville, TX, USA
    Posts
    4,326

    Post

    Flathead, that's what mine look like now except I rip a little deeper so there are no flats on the bottom. They work fine.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    45,324

    Post

    >Maybe you've never seen it, so I'll describe the
    "experiment".

    But you've only measured how they move and use the wax, and not how quickly they will draw a comb.

    I've seen the same results you speak of when using dark foundation. If speed is not the issue, that would seem to support making foundation two or three times as thick, since they will use the wax and you'd waste a lot less foundation from buckling and warping. If foundation is about getting the bees to reuse wax, then we should give them as much as they would make good use of.
    Michael Bush bushfarms.com/bees.htm "Everything works if you let it." ThePracticalBeekeeper.com 40y 200h 37yTF

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Grahamsville, NY
    Posts
    440

    Post

    "But you've only measured how they move and use the wax, and not how quickly they will draw a comb."

    Who has the REAL data comparing the speed of comb drawing for frames with foundation and foundationless frames?

    Boris

    [size="1"][ February 23, 2007, 10:15 AM: Message edited by: Boris ][/size]

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads