# Foundationless Frames



## Bill91143 (Jun 7, 2013)

I don't understand why so many people want to go foundationless. It takes approximately 8 pounds of honey to make 1 pound of comb. Think of how much honey you are costing yourself. If I wanted some honey this year I would definitely use foundation.


----------



## rsjohnson2u (Apr 23, 2012)

Bill91143 said:


> I don't understand why so many people want to go foundationless. It takes approximately 8 pounds of honey to make 1 pound of comb. Think of how much honey you are costing yourself. If I wanted some honey this year I would definitely use foundation.


The foundation has to be drawn out as well. Other than the center rib represented by the foundation, the bees have to convert honey to wax to draw comb, be it foundation or foundationless. Is the difference in honey required to draw the equivalent wax of the foundation really THAT significant, especially given that foundationless is generally acknowledged to being drawn faster?


----------



## brettj777 (Feb 27, 2013)

I don't understand why some people have to scoff at foundationless every time the topic comes up. So what if the bees need more time and resources to make the new comb? It sure is a lot cheaper than $300 extractor!

Maybe people have methods based on things (ideals, goals) they consider more than you would consider them.

So please. If you have nothing to offer except incredulous wonder at why anyone would be so silly as to keep bees any way other than your preferred way....consider posting elsewhere.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

And if you use plastic foundation, there's even less wax in the foundation-- not a significant amount at all.

I see many advantages to foundationless, at least for hobbyists like me. It's cheaper, the comb is not contaminated by acaricides and other chemicals which may have a negative effect on bees, you can make cut comb of the very highest quality, and your bees are allowed to draw whatever kind of comb they want. I don't have an extractor, and cutting foundationless comb off the frames to crush and strain is pretty cool.

Plus, the comb is pretty. 









For someone like me, the wax itself is a significant plus-- I have five colonies now and if they make any honey to speak of, they'll make much more honey than I can use, or even give away as gifts. I'm about to build myself a solar wax melter... it gives yet another facet to an already fascinating pursuit.

Of course, if you're a commercial beekeeper who uses acaricides, I guess there's little reason to use foundationless frames. I imagine you don't have the time to watch every hive to make sure the little devils are making straight comb, for example. They may mess up foundation, but at least the next comb starts straight. And foundation is stronger in the extractor.

But for treatment free dabblers like me. foundationless is great. I've already taken honey from my best hive, and it's completely foundationless and a first year hive.


----------



## scallawa (Jul 6, 2013)

My intention was not to start a foundation vs foundationless debate. I am just hoping to get some advice on how and if I should move forward with that plan this year or not. 

I want to go foundationless because I want to try and eliminate as much pesticide and things like that from my diet as I can. It might be a small amount but if I can stop it then I would like to. I won't knock other people for using foundation but I would like to try without. I also want to see what all the rage is about with comb honey. I do appreciate your input and opinion. Did not know it takes that much honey to make comb. 

I apologize for the lack of information. I am a little excited as a new beekeep and have a lot (this is turning into a small scale obsession at the moment) going through my head. The deep is full of bees. The reference to three frames was from when the beekeep was giving the hive a final once over before sealing it up for my pickup. He only lifted three frames and based on what he saw (full of brood, good pattern) he decided that was all he needed to see to call the hive healthy (guessing that was his thought process).

I believe the medium had 8-9 filled with brood. There seems to be a lot of bees but I don't have much of a reference since this is all new to me. If you need more information please let me know.

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I look forward to anymore thoughts or suggestions.


----------



## Beetastic (Apr 12, 2011)

Go for it! I run 30 hives, all mediums, and they are all foundationless. I eat the comb all the time. I did crush and strain when I first started, but now I spin it (extract). Do what you want - it's fun and there aren't any rules. Observe, adjust, and enjoy!


----------



## scallawa (Jul 6, 2013)

Beetastic said:


> Go for it! I run 30 hives, all mediums, and they are all foundationless. I eat the comb all the time. I did crush and strain when I first started, but now I spin it (extract). Do what you want - it's fun and there aren't any rules. Observe, adjust, and enjoy!


Thanks. Any advice on how to make the transition?


----------



## Bill91143 (Jun 7, 2013)

brettj777 said:


> So please. If you have nothing to offer except incredulous wonder at why anyone would be so silly as to keep bees any way other than your preferred way....consider posting elsewhere.


I thought I was offering something. I didn't intend to ruffle your feathers, but If I am not mistaken Scallawa was asking about possibly getting some honey this year from a hive just obtained last week, and if some honey for this year is the goal then time is of the essence. So my thinking is using foundation or better yet, drawn wax if they could find it, would better the chances of harvesting some honey this year. Again, I didn't mean to make you mad. I was just offering what I thought would help yield some honey this year. My humble apology!


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

Alternating foundationless with capped frames is wise-- it'll tend to keep things straight.

Don't put foundationless between _*un*_capped frames, though -- you'll end up with very fat comb in the uncapped frames, and undrawn foundationless frames.

No one who isn't familiar with your honey flows is qualified to comment on whether or not you'll get honey, as flows vary with locality.

On a strong flow, you may.

In my opinion, drawn comb is more valuable than the honey,


----------



## bbbthingmaker (Sep 26, 2010)

If you have one super full of capped frames, pull every-other frame and put it in a new super. Put foundationless frames between capped frames in both supers. Be sure and mark the foundationless frames. I use a permanent marker.
Take a look at www.honeybeesuite.com . She speaks very favorably about comb honey.


----------



## beedeetee (Nov 27, 2004)

I now live near NW Oregon, have hives near Elmira in central western Oregon and grew up in NE Oregon. I suspect that your honey making days are numbered for this year unless you have your hive in a unique spot, such as irrigated alfalfa that they let flower. I think that almost all of Oregon is done for the year by the end of July and most of Oregon my the middle of the July.

I don't know how heavy your hive is, but your goal this year should be to have enough honey for them to survive the central Oregon winter. You should take stock of honey frames and be on the conservative side your first year to see how many frames are needed for winter.


----------



## Beetastic (Apr 12, 2011)

scallawa said:


> Thanks. Any advice on how to make the transition?


What was already said. Alternate drawn comb with new. I take my drawn brood frames that are hatch ready, and even move those up sometimes. They draw really nice comb in the brood nest. Yes, you can get a premium for comb. I sell mine for $16/lbs. It's a special treat that many people have never or rarely ever have.


----------



## scallawa (Jul 6, 2013)

Thanks for all the responses. I am assuming I will want to use a queen excluder then? 

I believe Central Oregon is quite a bit different than the rest of the state. A coworker keeps bees and he gets his best flow (bitterbrush, rabbitbrush) during August. He says it makes really good honey. I am also expecting a significant lavender and wildflower bloom in the next month. Time will tell but I am hopeful. 

I first came across the idea of comb honey on the site you mentioned.

So my hive is comprised of a deep and two supers so far. I am going to add another super. The current top super is all uncapped. I am assuming it is filled with sugar syrup since I have been feeding them since last Sunday. By Wednesday they were drinking a quart a day. I did not refill the bottle yesterday and don't plan to unless I should to allow them to draw out the frames? 

Would I take capped brood frames from the super on top of the hive body and alternate those with the foundationless frames? Once they draw out the frames in the bottom super, would I switch them back with the capped brood frames that were placed in the top super? Or should I wait a few days to a week to see if they will cap the "honey" (sugar syrup) in the current top super.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Alternating foundationless with capped frames is wise-- it'll tend to keep things straight.

In the brood nest, yes. Pull some of them up to the next box and feed your empty combs into the brood nest. Otherwise pull a capped frame up for a ladder for the new empty box. Make sure you have comb guides.

I think using foundation will cost you honey. Foundation is drawn slower and the real advantage is to have comb sooner for the bees to put the nectar in. They will have it sooner with foundationless than foundation.

Drawn comb is effective for the same reason. Not because of the "cost of making wax" (there is very little weight of wax in a comb of honey) but because it gives the bees a place to put the nectar so they can be harvesting instead of wasting the flow building comb.

http://bushfarms.com/beesharvest.htm#expenseofwax


----------



## scallawa (Jul 6, 2013)

Michael,

Thanks for your reply. I have two other questions. Once the comb is drawn on the empty frames in the brood nest would I move those into the honey super and move the others back down? 
I believe you are an opponent to feeding for long term colony viability but I wanted to know if I should feed until they have drawn the comb?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Thanks for your reply. I have two other questions. Once the comb is drawn on the empty frames in the brood nest would I move those into the honey super and move the others back down?

If the brood box is all brood, and I was feeding frames into the brood nest, I would move some brood up. You will reach a limit on what they want for brood and then they will backfill it with honey. You could move those up when that happens.

>I believe you are an opponent to feeding for long term colony viability but I wanted to know if I should feed until they have drawn the comb? 

I would feed until you have some capped stores and there is a flow. If there is no flow and they need to build up for winter I would keep feeding. If there is a nectar flow, I would stop when they have capped stores and start again in a dearth. If they were an established hive with plenty of capped stores to get them through the winter, I would not feed them at all...


----------



## scallawa (Jul 6, 2013)

Great. Thanks for all the help. I will be sure to post on the progress.


----------



## HeffsBStuff (Mar 18, 2013)

I also started foundationless with all mediums. It is the direction I want to go but I am struggling with a the comb being drawn out too thick on the outer edges (honey) of the frames in the brood box. I have just added a second box so I will try to move some of these up into the new box, but almost every frame in the bottom box is like this. I'm not really sure how to handle this situation. It may be worth noting that I am using 1 1/4" frame spacing. I am hoping as I get enough brood boxes drawn out and that the bees will start storing the honey in the upper boxes and this issue will start to resolve....... This is the only problem I'm seeing so far, the bees are doing a great job of drawing the comb straight and I am really careful to keep the hives level. I am willing to make some sacrifices for clean wax and smaller cell size, I just have to work through the uneven comb problem.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Bill91143 said:


> ... It takes approximately 8 pounds of honey to make 1 pound of comb....


 This is so confusing to me. I sincerely tried to understand this and it just did not sink into my brain. OK, we have two identical beehives with exactly the same weight. On top of each we are adding a super, one with drawn comb and another is foundationless. Let's assume that bees are active equally and have enough to forage. When full, we would extract honey from both supers and weight it. We also would weight wax from the foundationless super(s). We shall continue adding supers and weight the honey and wax until flow stops (number of supers may be different). Finally, we shall have some numbers - amount of honey collected from each hive and amount of wax bees produced in foundationless setup. So, if this 1-to-8 conversion is right, in foundationless crop we shall have 8lb*wax less honey than in the hive with drawn comb. Right? My estimate as following: my bees uses approximately 1/4 lb wax to build 4 thick frames (med) of honey, Each frame holds approx. 2.5 kg of honey. For 8 frames ~ 20 kg honey and 1/2 lb wax. It means that hive with foundation in average must produce 4 lb per super more (if 1-to-8 right) than foundationless. Make any sense?


----------



## Bill91143 (Jun 7, 2013)

You lost me with to much math. 

I don't know for sure, but what I've been told is bees can make 8 pounds of honey for the same amount of effort and resources it takes them to make 1 pound of wax.


----------



## wmsuber58 (Jul 8, 2013)

When comparing foundationless frames to drawn comb, the weights will not make sense. To make a fair comparison, you have to compare a frame with foundation to a frame without any foundation. The bees will only have to make the amount of wax that was in a sheet of foundation, to be back at a place where you can now compare apples to apples. Either way, from that point, the bees still need to draw out the comb.


----------



## NewJoe (Jul 1, 2012)

actually when they draw foundationless...the middle part that the bees make naturally where the foundation would be is so very thin (you can see right through it) that I doubt that a whole deep frame would even weigh an ounce. 

So I don't think there would even be a measurable difference in the use of resources to make comb with or without foundation.


----------



## beedeetee (Nov 27, 2004)

NewJoe said:


> So I don't think there would even be a measurable difference in the use of resources to make comb with or without foundation.


When you burn that wax you can see the energy that it took to make it. Much more than weight. They had to convert sugar to energy.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

But again, how much wax-making does a sheet of foundation save the bees? And how much does the foundation cost? It takes very little wax to make a comb of honey, so the economic calculation should be: is the tiny amount of energy the foundation saves the bees really worth the cost of the foundation and the time it takes to install it?


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

wmsuber58 said:


> When comparing foundationless frames to drawn comb, the weights will not make sense.... compare apples to apples. ...


 This is why I proposed to measure a honey produced. The individual weight of the frames shall be different with and without foundation, so I was trying to convert everything into honey to measure the difference between two approaches. We also shall assume that we extract most of the honey in foundationless approach. Also - we need to compare *drawn comb * to foundationless. I told you - it is confusing


----------



## Oblio13 (Aug 16, 2011)

HeffsBStuff said:


> I also started foundationless with all mediums. It is the direction I want to go but I am struggling with a the comb being drawn out too thick on the outer edges (honey) of the frames in the brood box. I have just added a second box so I will try to move some of these up into the new box, but almost every frame in the bottom box is like this. I'm not really sure how to handle this situation...


What I *TRY* to do is move those outer honey combs in the brood nest up to the next box, then move the adjacent brood combs outboard and put some empty frames in between frames of sealed brood. My goal is to keep the brood nest open and get frames of nicely-drawn comb.

I smoke down along the edge of the box to move the bees away because I'm always worried about rolling the queen. Sometimes I'll run a bread knife along the side of the box. You can usually get the frame out then without making too much of a mess, and then the subsequent frames are relatively easy. 

If it looks like trying to remove frames will just be too much carnage, then I leave them alone and harvest the box as a whole, either when it's completely filled with honey or when the bees have moved up over the winter and it's empty. Frames with wonky comb can be squished back in line and put back into a hive. The bees will repair it.


----------



## Oblio13 (Aug 16, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> ... It takes very little wax to make a comb of honey, so the economic calculation should be: is the tiny amount of energy the foundation saves the bees really worth the cost of the foundation and the time it takes to install it?


The only advantage I can see to foundation is that it forces the bees to be "neater" by our standards. 

That's outweighed by things like being able to harvest queen cells easily with a pocketknife.

Not to mention coming in from the backyard with a frame, running a knife around the inside, and plopping a slab of beautiful comb honey onto a plate in front of your dinner guests.


----------



## wmsuber58 (Jul 8, 2013)

Cerezha, this can get confusing. Sometimes the confusion means you are at a fork in the road, and both directions seem equally the same. When I get confused, either at my work or in minding the bees, I often realize I have set my initial priorities aside, or I have lost sight of my original (or new) plan. Directions, with a road map or bees, get a lot simpler when you know your destination. If you stop and think about it, what was your main reason for considering going without foundation in your frames. It might have been it seems easier in regards to less work, it seems healthier for the bees, it would help in dealing with the pest, or numerous others. For what ever reason, take your reason and take note of that purpose. Now figure out what is the conflict. If it is healthier for the bees, but will I lose on honey production. Will this be a short term reduction or long term, and so on. By reconsidering and setting your priorities, the choices seem to become more clear. Also continue to gather more information. Confusion is not all bad. Like Mr. Bush says, it proves you are learning. Personally I have some benefits in top bar hives having natural comb. I have some in my Langstroth hives, but am looking at doing so on a bigger scale. But I am reading, looking and learning as I try to get more comfortable with the whole concept. Taking my time seems to help as well.


----------



## Bill91143 (Jun 7, 2013)

When going foundationless is there any way to extract honey and save the comb for future use?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>When going foundationless is there any way to extract honey and save the comb for future use? 

I extract most of mine. The really soft new combs I make into cut comb honey. The rest I extract.

http://bushfarms.com/beesfoundationless.htm#extract

In my experience drawn comb makes more honey than foundation or foundationless. Foundationless makes more honey than foundation. It's all about having a place to put the nectar. With drawn comb there is somewhere to put it. With foundationless they quickly build comb to put it in. With foundation they hesitate building it. It's not about how many pounds of honey makes how many pounds of wax. It's about time.

As far as the difference in the midrib, it takes very little wax to support a lot of honey. I'm sure the difference is negligible.

http://bushfarms.com/beesharvest.htm#expenseofwax

"A pound (0.4536 kg.) of beeswax, when made into comb, will hold 22 pounds (10 kg.) of honey. In an unsupported comb the stress on the topmost cells is the greatest; a comb one foot (30 cm.) deep supports 1320 times its own weight in honey." --Coggshall and Morse, Beeswax Production, Harvesting, Processing and Products, pg 41


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

wmsuber58 said:


> Cerezha, this can get confusing. ...


 Thank you for nice comment. I actually was confused with understanding how this 1-to-8 wax-honey ratio may be used in my own practical beekeeping? This "wax" argument is often used against foundationless, but I have difficulties to find the way to implement it in my beekeeping practice. I am 100% foundationless for 2+ years (not much, but). I could see the usefulness of the drawn comb, but drawn comb approach may be used with foundation or without (see Michael Bush above). Than, the foundation argument is pointless to me. Thus, I am confused why people use the "wax" argument again again and again?


----------



## ForrestB (May 26, 2013)

cerezha said:


> Thus, I am confused why people use the "wax" argument again again and again?


I think (and I am very new, so take anything I say in that light) that many people feel the weight of a sheet of foundation and assume that that is the quantity of wax the bees have to produce if a foundationless frame or a bar is used. But this is not true - I have broken apart natural comb, and the wax that separates the cells on one side of the comb from those on the other side is paper thin - not at all like manufactured foundation. The work savings to the bees, if they have to make their own "foundation" (wax dividing the comb sides) is minimal. One of these days I am going to weigh a frame with natural comb and one with foundation+comb - and I am sure the foundation comb is heavier by almost the exact weight of a single piece of foundation.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

ForrestB said:


> I think... that many people feel the weight of a sheet of foundation and assume that that is the quantity of wax the bees have to produce if a foundationless frame or a bar is used....


 I agree - this is a very good explanation! Thank you! 
I think, foundationless or not is just a different approach in beehive management. I could see how foundation (and drawn comb) may be better for commercial operation. But, for me, a hobbyist, it is just a fun to observe bees creativity.


----------



## Harley Craig (Sep 18, 2012)

cerezha said:


> This is so confusing to me. I sincerely tried to understand this and it just did not sink into my brain. OK, we have two identical beehives with exactly the same weight. On top of each we are adding a super, one with drawn comb and another is foundationless. Let's assume that bees are active equally and have enough to forage. When full, we would extract honey from both supers and weight it. We also would weight wax from the foundationless super(s). We shall continue adding supers and weight the honey and wax until flow stops (number of supers may be different). Finally, we shall have some numbers - amount of honey collected from each hive and amount of wax bees produced in foundationless setup. So, if this 1-to-8 conversion is right, in foundationless crop we shall have 8lb*wax less honey than in the hive with drawn comb. Right? My estimate as following: my bees uses approximately 1/4 lb wax to build 4 thick frames (med) of honey, Each frame holds approx. 2.5 kg of honey. For 8 frames ~ 20 kg honey and 1/2 lb wax. It means that hive with foundation in average must produce 4 lb per super more (if 1-to-8 right) than foundationless. Make any sense?


what that equation is referring to is comparing frames with no foundation to frames with drawn comb. So if the one colony had unlimited room and the desire to build one pound of wax they would end up 8 lbs behind in honey production to a colony that had unlimited room to just fill comb with honey. You are putting a limit on it by trying to compare when full. That's not the point of course to boxes exactly the same size should hold apx the same amount of honey weather foundation, a topbar or full comb was used as the starting point, the point is the bees with comb could fill up more than one super in the time that the bees drawing comb first could fill up one because the bees that have to draw comb use up a portion of their nectar to make the comb. 


to the point about the argument being applied to the difference between foundation and foundationless, I don't get that either, because that is not what the equation solves. In this case the bees have to draw out comb in either scenario and they will usually draw out foundationless quicker so in this case it's a matter of time, not rescources quicker to comb the more honey you get before a flow stops.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Harley Craig said:


> what that equation is referring to is comparing frames with no foundation to frames with drawn comb. So if the one colony had unlimited room and the desire to build one pound of wax they would end up 8 lbs behind in honey production to a colony that had unlimited room to just fill comb with honey. You are putting a limit on it by trying to compare when full. That's not the point of course to boxes exactly the same size should hold apx the same amount of honey weather foundation, a topbar or full comb was used as the starting point, the point is the bees with comb could fill up more than one super in the time that the bees drawing comb first could fill up one because the bees that have to draw comb use up a portion of their nectar to make the comb. ..


 *colony had unlimited room and the desire* yes, agree, this is the key. But now, I am wondering if equation is actually true? Did they provide _ unlimited room and ... desire _ for bees? My understanding is that they measure amount of syrup consumed when colony was locked in the beehive. I remember Michael Bush commented on it in some thread. Clarification would be highly appreciated.


----------



## Harley Craig (Sep 18, 2012)

cerezha said:


> *colony had unlimited room and the desire* yes, agree, this is the key. But now, I am wondering if equation is actually true? Did they provide _ unlimited room and ... desire _ for bees? My understanding is that they measure amount of syrup consumed when colony was locked in the beehive. I remember Michael Bush commented on it in some thread. Clarification would be highly appreciated.



I totally agree that the numbers are arguable, but common sense tells us that if you extract instead of cut the comb out this go around, you will get more honey the next. In order to get real numbers you would have to have a way to ensure that the only source of nectar is that which you measured, then when the comb was drawn out and capped, you would have to extract all the honey getting all of the residual off, save all of the wax and then weigh it, subtract out the weight of the honey and this will tell you how much nectar went to wax and how much went to honey, you would also have to take into consideration things like How much nectar did the bees eat, how much of the nectar was evaporated out as water etc. There would be no way to duplicate it from one to the next best case would be to do it many times and avg them out. It's like this, If you and your neighbor had a warehouse of bottle water, and each wanted to fill up a swimming pool with it, Which neighbor would get more water in his pool the one that had one sitting there ready to be filled or the neighbor that had to dig the hole first and then pour the concrete. If neither neighbor consumed any of those bottles of water, at the end when their warehouses were empty they would both end up with the same amount of water, but lets say that was their only source of water and some of it will have to be consumed in order to keep working filling the pool , the neighbor that has to dig the hole and work harder/longer will consume more water than the neighbor who has had the hard part done for them. Now then who will end up with more water in his pool?


----------



## BeeGhost (May 7, 2011)

I am running almost all foundationless, except for a few frames of plastic foundation left over from when I started keeping bees, but I have been sticking those in between capped brood this year and they draw them out just fine. I would do as stated and pull atleast one frame of capped brood up into the second box for the bees to have a ladder and a guide.

I didn't do that to one hive this year and they started building comb from the bottom of the frame, we had 108 degree temps for over a week, lets just say that fresh comb turned into a bridge and folded over!

I have also found that the bees do draw foundationless out much faster, and they build what they need, drone comb or worker comb.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Harley Craig said:


> ... Now then who will end up with more water in his pool?


 Again, I totally agree with your logic. I think the same. But, if source of nectar is unlimited (bees do not compete for this) and bees could bring in the hive more nectar than could be stored at the moment and bees could make a comb at night (which they do), when foraging is not possible or non-foragers build the comb... than speed of new comb creation will not limit the whole thing especially if food is unlimited. In another words, we could imagine that bees in drawn comb hive may work 70% from the max (unmotivated etc) and it is possible that bees in foundationless hive may be more motivated and work harder, 85% for instance. If so, the difference in honey production may be independent from wax production and depends from other factors such us general well-being, motivation etc. I heard somewhere that bees actually love to make a comb - they used it as a stress-release. Thus, it is possible that foundationless bees are simply happier and therefore more productive and healthier perhaps  

I think, many foundationless beekeepers do this in believe that it is better for bees and they are OK with idea that they have less honey because of foundationless


----------



## Harley Craig (Sep 18, 2012)

cerezha said:


> Again, I totally agree with your logic. I think the same. But, if source of nectar is unlimited (bees do not compete for this) and bees could bring in the hive more nectar than could be stored at the moment and bees could make a comb at night (which they do), when foraging is not possible or non-foragers build the comb... than speed of new comb creation will not limit the whole thing especially if food is unlimited. In another words, we could imagine that bees in drawn comb hive may work 70% from the max (unmotivated etc) and it is possible that bees in foundationless hive may be more motivated and work harder, 85% for instance. If so, the difference in honey production may be independent from wax production and depends from other factors such us general well-being, motivation etc. I heard somewhere that bees actually love to make a comb - they used it as a stress-release. Thus, it is possible that foundationless bees are simply happier and therefore more productive and healthier perhaps
> 
> I think, many foundationless beekeepers do this in believe that it is better for bees and they are OK with idea that they have less honey because of foundationless



the only thing that throws all that out of the window is in most areas nectar is limited and the bees do compete otherwise there would never be any robbing and we would not have to worry about them building up for winter. I use mostly foundationless, and my bees will skip right over foundation and go on to the next open frame and fill all of them before they start on foundation I have no drawn comb to give them so I have no comparisons for that. I do have one from a cut out that I gave them brood comb and one frame of empty so they could immediately store nectar in it, I put them in a 8 frame med and they have expanded to a second box, Been a month and they have drawn out 12 combs and filled most of them with brood or nectar, and have not put a thing in the one empty comb I gave them, they haven't even added to it yet so that throws the whole theory off as well but I would say that's not the norm.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Harley Craig said:


> the only thing that throws all that out of the window is in most areas nectar is limited and the bees do compete otherwise there would never be any robbing and we would not have to worry about them building up for winter. ...


 Sure. I am in the same boat.
I think, the variation in productivity between beehives is much larger than difference between drawn comb and foundationless. I also noticed that a few foundation frames I inherited with hives had literally twice less honey than my "normal" foundationless "bar" of the same size - it is not a proper comparison, but I love my bees fat golden comb!


----------



## BayHighlandBees (Feb 13, 2012)

the nectar is finite, but it also is the limited time that the nectar is available. You need a solid flow for them to want to draw comb.


----------



## Connie1 (Jun 19, 2013)

what are the advantages of wax foundation vs plastic foundation? How does the advantages of either relate to foundationless? Thanks.


----------



## Connie1 (Jun 19, 2013)

So am I correct in thinking you are pro foundationless?


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

Wax foundation advantages:

It is drawn more quickly by the bees.
It's a natural product.
It's lighter then plastic foundation

Disadvantages:
Wax is more fragile - breaks when handled at cold temperatures, warps if it gets too hot after mounting in frame, and will not bear rough handling.

Run of the mill wax carries traces of the the chemicals that were applied to the comb from which it was made

Plastic advantages

Saves time - plastic frames need no assembling saving time or labor expenses.

Tough - bears rough handling. More resistant to warping in heat, less likely to break when cold.

Cost: Plastic frames are sometimes cheaper than frame/foundation combined cost.

Eggs are easier to see against black plastic foundation that against wax


Disadvantages - 
Bees usually initially resist drawing plastic foundation after it is put in the hive, esp if not wax coated.

I find that there is generally more burr comb when using plastic.

Plastic is heavier - if any amount of moving hives is anticipated, this is a factor (esp if you have a whole truck or trailer load of plastic.

If left in direct sun, heats quickly, liquifying the wax coating and warping if allowed to overheat - which can happen quickly.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Connie -

This all depends on what your objective is. Since you posted this in the TF forum, I'll assume you're looking to be TF yourself. I've used both wax and plastic, and have now decided to convert all over to plastic, namely, PF120's which are small cell.

I've not noticed any difference in the bees drawing one any quicker than the other, as long as you are only using one or the other and not combining them.

The disadvantages I've had with wax is getting consistent small cell drawn. If you aren't trying to get small cells, wax is fine.

Plastic frame/foundation combo I do not recommend. Plastic frames stink! They bend when you pry on the top bar to separate. I'm using the foundation from the PF120's and putting them into my wood frames.


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

Plastic does bend when you go to lever them apart.

But the edges of the end bars don't split easily like wood does, and allow you to slip a hive tool between them and lever then apart there, and that works quite well.

A disadvantage to palstic frames I didn't mention because it is not an issue here and didn't come to mind is that he grooves in the top and end bars allow small hive beetles hiding places.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

I've found the discussion regarding wax interesting, so when I recently harvested 2 deep frames of honey, I rendered the wax. We got 3.1 oz of wax from each frame, but there was probably some wax left in the stuff I strained out. We got about 5 lbs of honey per frame. So if you do the math, a pound of wax holds at least 25 lbs of honey. If the cost of making that wax is indeed 8 pounds of honey, then you're making 75% of what you'd make if you were re-using comb, minus the energy cost of the cappings. But to be fair, you have to factor in the money you can get from selling wax. If you make little candles out of that wax, I've seen 2 oz. beeswax candles going for 4 bucks, so that pound of wax can be sold that way for 32 bucks. That doesn't quite make up for the loss of honey at retail prices, but comes much closer to evening out.

Of course, as a hobbyist, all these calculations are outweighed by the sheer beauty of foundationless honeycomb. 









You could make cut comb from this frame that would bring a lot more than the price of the honey and wax sold separately.


----------



## Cub (Feb 14, 2013)

rhaldridge said:


> And if you use plastic foundation, there's even less wax in the foundation-- not a significant amount at all.
> 
> I see many advantages to foundationless, at least for hobbyists like me. It's cheaper, the comb is not contaminated by acaricides and other chemicals which may have a negative effect on bees, you can make cut comb of the very highest quality, and your bees are allowed to draw whatever kind of comb they want. I don't have an extractor, and cutting foundationless comb off the frames to crush and strain is pretty cool.
> 
> ...


rhaldridge,

That is some nice looking comb. I was wondering the the strip you have at the top is just the normal wedge nailed in sideways, or if you make an extra splint of some sort and glue it in th eexisting slot?


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

John. I use a comb guide with a triangular cross-section. Pics:















The first image shows the monofilament fishing line I string through the 2 center holes of the deep frames. The second image is from a frame that I harvested, so you can see how the bees attach the comb.

One of the reasons I think these triangular cross-section comb guides are far and away the best is that the attachment of the comb is so much stronger. The downward pull of the comb is mostly in shear. Engineers will understand what I'm talking about here, but another way to look at it is that because of the acute angle of the guide, there's much more surface for the bees to attach the comb to. I haven't a a single comb wander off the center line, so evidently the bee engineers are pretty happy with the guide.

I find the arguments against putting any wax on the guides convincing; seems to me the bees can do a better job of this attachment if there's no layer of wax between wood and comb. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the first wax the bees put on the guide is mixed with propolis for a stronger attachment. When I look at partial, or newly-started comb, I see some evidence of this, I think, but that might be my imagination. Anyway, I haven't had any comb fall off yet.


----------



## scallawa (Jul 6, 2013)

I know this is old but thought I would update with what I did. I added 10 frames of foundationless frames. I used the wedge top frames, broke the wedge out and glued it in as a guide. In all, I have 40 frames, 30 foundation and 10 not. My hive is 1 deep and 3 supers. I mixed the foundationless frames between the three super boxes and and surrounded them by either capped brood or honey frames. The foundationless frames in my second box(my first super) is practically fully drawn out and have capped brood in it. I have two frames in my top super that haven't been drawn out and one that is only partially drawn. I didn't have much in the way of issues with crazy comb etc. They did extend one of the honey frames into the foundationless frame and I merely scraped it back to size. They have since recapped that honey frame and did not draw it into the other frame. Overall things look well from a foundationless stand point. I do still see a need to have some foundation frames around and will probably try the PF120s.

Thanks to all for your advice and comments. This has been a really fun experience.


----------



## jimsteelejr (Sep 21, 2012)

We were at a beekeepers meeting Thursday night and one keeper was really hyping foundationless . So my thought was we would try it and sell some of the production as comb honey. I figured we would have to crush and strain the rest. Can you really use an extractor instead? any special procedure?


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

If you search BeeSource for foundationless, you'll find lots of info on the subject. A number of members have said that foundationless frames can be extracted with a little care. My understanding is that the extractor should be slower, and the frames flipped before the first side is finished extracting, then switched back after the second side is empty to finish the first side-- I guess this is with tangential extractors.


----------

