Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 26 of 26
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    denver colorado
    Posts
    357

    Default Re: Considering changing to Langs

    Quote Originally Posted by gww View Post
    MslPossibly true but abby was pretty adimate about his measurements and his reasons for them.
    LOL….. more “cult of warre”
    from the man himself
    We preferred the 300 x 400 mm frame because it simplified our calculations
    then he went and cut it in at the request of his helpers…. Then one day do to a supply issue he went foundation less
    No magic here, square is a good shape and “about” that size is good( as used by many outer ) but the exact dimensions were chosen to suit man. No reason not to round them in to inches and to suit economy of materials

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsof View Post
    But if you don't use frames and don't use foundation it is a complete pain in the rear to take out the comb and look to see what is going on. You are going to see a lot of wonky comb. You are going to see a lot of cross-comb. You are going to see a ton of large cell comb (i.e. drone comb)
    that all depends on your top bars and management , its not going to be any worse than most other topbar hives. Yes if you put in big fat warre type top bars that were set up for fixed comb you going to have issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsof View Post
    He designed a system for use (let's be honest) that a peasant could put up
    He died in the 1950s…..not sure how many peasants were running around

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Rosebud Missouri
    Posts
    1,592

    Default Re: Considering changing to Langs

    msl
    I see your point but at the size he ended up with, its about an 8 frame medium or a five frame nuc. I did convert to inches and that makes for about a 8.5 inch board. The hive might be cut down to using a 6 inch board but to get any brood area in the box that is pretty small, I would still have to put two of them together or have really small light boxes and a bunch of them. "My" biggest reason for using the 8.5 inch board is that I really don't have much imagination of my own and so when i build things, I usually find a plan to build from and do my crappy building as close to it as i can. I do cut my own lumber and my logs average me an 8 inch board which really makes building medium langs handy with out having to dig through a bunch of boards to find what I want to use. I usually have to stack the boards for at least all summer and it is much easier just trying to end up with atleast an 8 incher from a wood handling perspective.

    I do think that the warre does look pretty good at those dimentions.
    Cheers
    gww

    Ps He did cut the 400 mm to two hundred for the man but was still adamate that ending up at 400 for the the brood nest using two of his boxes was best because he thought that was the best size.

    I have heard some of his frame portion of his arguement was left out of some transulations but the one I read he made a real case for having fixed top bars and gave his reasons of why frames were of no advantage. Mostly due to the unoccupied space causing extra heating and there for useing more stores.
    Last edited by gww; 04-25-2017 at 09:43 PM.
    zone 5b

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    denver colorado
    Posts
    357

    Default Re: Considering changing to Langs

    400 to 220... not sure why the extra 40mm given his topbars were only 9mm or so
    Point being it doesn't matter if you cut it in to 2 boxes, or 3... ie 8.5+8.5 = 17. vs the sam comfort example I gave of 5.5(6" nominal)+5.5+5.5 = 16.5"
    and extra space below the cluster doesn't have a huge effect, ie the whole point of nadireing
    also lets not forget the box sizes given were tuned for Warres area... one size does NOT fit all as show by all the different lang combos with each being the "standard" in different areas, bees don't do absolutes, neither should beekeepers
    Last edited by msl; 04-25-2017 at 10:47 PM.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Rosebud Missouri
    Posts
    1,592

    Default Re: Considering changing to Langs

    msl
    I don't dissagree with that. I do add, and this is for the bee keeper not the bees, it seems having the bees space decent is the real important thing as far as future handling of the comb is concerned. This seems to be more important than actual size of the boxes. I don't mind trying to stick with what some one else has come up with cause when starting, a person needs some kind of guidence and then when he learns a bit off of that it gives him more experiance to maby see the possibilities for variances. I do realize bees can live about anywhere.

    Bee keeping does take a little more then just the bees in a box and for a new guy picking some way to start, Having an overall management practice to follow has to help a bit.

    I like warres ideoligies but for now am running medium langs, but i am probly going to eventually fill the warre and run it simular to what he was preaching and just compare for myself. I feel lost most of the time when using the langs due to there being just so many ways that poeple get from point A to point B and many seem to work and so with to many options it is hard to ever know if you are doing things the best way they could be done (at least for me).

    I have two long langs also an if I don't get overloaded will proby play with them also a bit.

    I have not read much of what sam comfort is doing but it sounds interesting also.

    Its all just a learning experiance right now to me as luckily I don't have to make this a job that keeps my children fed.

    Thanks for explaining the points you made further.
    gww
    zone 5b

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Jamesville, NC USA
    Posts
    9

    Default Re: Considering changing to Langs

    I have not read much of what sam comfort is doing but it sounds interesting also.

    First off, you need to read him. I looked him up when he was mentioned on this thread and he is hilarious to read even if you don't care about his beekeeping. He is definitely a philosopher, writer, and artist as well as a beekeeper.

    What I got from him is that bees don't need us and that we only think they do as a result of our God complex. What's wrong with bees? Nothing. What's wrong with us? Don't get him started.

    For an instance, he is in favor of going without chemicals and letting bees more or less take care of themselves. The solution to the mite problem for him is to let it run its course which will yield bees which are more resistant to mites and mites which are less resistant to bees. When we treat for mites, he says, only the resistant mites survive and their genes get passed on creating a line of super mites. The list of bee disorders and diseases is very long he also points out, and he has nicknamed his strain of bees Zombees because they have to be the flying dead as they haven't been treated.

    I do know this, when my dad died he left us with five or six hives which were stuck in the woods behind the house and left alone until I discovered them at least five years later. They were fine, and I was able to manage them as a hard-headed teenageer and get a lot of honey from them over the next few years. I ended up selling them to a beekeeper when I went to college. Maybe leaving them alone is good advice.
    Last edited by roddo27846; 04-26-2017 at 08:19 AM.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Larimer County, Colorado
    Posts
    15

    Default Re: Considering changing to Langs

    Thanks for this post -- we are new to Warre's, and our bees did not go beyond two boxes. They did well in those two boxes, but swarmed rather than build comb in the under-nadired third box. Maybe this year we'll try supering.

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
  •