# Top Bars vs Langstroth Productivity?



## beegee (Jun 3, 2003)

One problem I see with TBH is that bees tend to want to expand their space vertically, not horizontally. I suppose if they have no choice they will expand horizontally. Another is how to how to harvest honey as the TBH frames don't work so well for extracting. 

I think the ideal environment is the hollow tree trunk, but unless someone can come up with a vertical hive with moveable frames that work easily, the LH is the most practical. If I had to start over, I'd probably go 8 frame equipment for the compactness of it. I still may do 8-frame with any expansion for next year. I do plan to try a TBH just for the experience of it.


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Guys,

The bees will expand a broodnest, either horizontally or vertically, without any problems.

What reduces a tbhs productivity when compared to Langs is the total lack of vertical management above the broodnest. When the bees get ready for winter, they pack the area directly above the broodnest(food above their winter cluster area) leaving any extra food in the honey storage area. Once that area is full the bees reduce their activity and get fat for winter.

In a tbh, the bees will quickly reach that condition. And the honey in those combs can't be harvested above the broodnest, no matter how tall they are.

In contrast, a Lang hive, with it's vertical management potential, can keep the bees packing the area directly above the broodnest when empty supers replace full ones.

I've got a more detailed account of broodnest structure and behavior I've call "Nest Function and Form" at:

http://bwrangler.litarium.com/seasonal-dynamics/

Regards
Dennis


----------



## MGBee (May 25, 2004)

Samak,

I use both styles of hives in my small yard. 

As Dennis has stated, the vertical Langstroth arrangement is by far the most productive (honey). If I were a trying to make a living with bees, Langs would be my choice. 

I am a hobbyist, though, and maximum honey production is not my goal.

My preference of the two styles, though is the TBH for these reasons.
1. They are cheap to build. I build them from scrap.(Can't beat free) A complete Lang setup is $150 - $200.00.

2. Using TBH, all of my equipment stays in the field. (My basement is alot neater without all the boxes with drawn comb stacked around in garbage bags with PDB in them).

3. TBH require NO heavy lifting. (Go ahead, ask my wife. I AM LAZY!)

4. I can work them with little or no smoke, which allows me to go in as often as I wish. With Langs, you have to tear the beehive up to get to the bottom of things.

5. The bees don't care which style box they're in. The TBH IMHO is a healthy way to keep bees(natural comb, small cell, clean comb etc. Whether it's healthier than the Lang, I don't know, but our TBH are 3 years without chems.

6. I like the extra wax the TBH produce and I don't need an extractor.

These are some of my reasons for favoring TBH.

The question is, though, what is your ultimate goal(s) in keeping bees? Your equipment choice will be dictated by your answer. 

Regards,
Miles


----------



## suprstakr (Feb 10, 2006)

TBH's make new comb on every TB (Honney = wax).Naturaly using foundation you'll get more honey


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

If you have the time to treak things all the time, I think you can get the same amount of honey from either. But you can't get it for the same number of trips to a beeyard. With a Langstroth you can pile on the supers at the first of June and come back in the fall and harvest. With a top bar hive that would not produce very much honey. But if you worked at keeping the brood nest expanded and harvested periodically to keep an open space for storage, I think you could get the same amount. I've often gotten more from a long hive. But I sometimes put supers on too.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beeshorizontalhives.htm


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Guys,

There are reports that tbhs will equal or out produce Langs. Most of these are in climates without much winter.

This year, my best producer was a tbh. I've posted (in the bio forum, I think) the circumstances involving this hive and some comments on the importance/effects of collective decisions hives make.

Until this year, my combo hive (long hive with supers) had always been my best producer.

There are so many variables concerning production. Pounds per hive is almost a meanless figure. I think a better measure might be cost/lb. But all that really doesn't matter much for a hobbiest like myself as one or two hives produce far more honey than I want. If I wanted more, I just add another hive.

Regards
Dennis


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

My most productive hive this year was a horizontal medium with half foundationless and half PermaComb with four supers on top of that at one end.


----------



## girl Mark (Oct 25, 2005)

So what's wrong with supering a TBH (other than some limits on how much weight you can pile onto the box)?

How many of you have supered one- I didn't get a chance to this year, but really want to try it next year.

Mark


----------



## Finman (Nov 5, 2004)

The hive type is not a base of productivenes. 

The queen lays eggs and I hope that it makes a bigg hive.

Good pastures give the yield. 

I have seen that smalles hive gives more honey on good pastures that good hives on poor pastures.

Hive sites may be 3 miles and yield differences may be 3-5 fold. 

Hive furnitures means only rational handling and expanding the hive.

.


----------



## Finman (Nov 5, 2004)

.
When you harvest you honey by crushing combs you will loose 50% of your yield by this method. It is same if yuo produce comb honey.
.


----------



## girl Mark (Oct 25, 2005)

I disagree about losing yield through crushing- I think manual-cranked extractors leave far more honey behind than is left behind when I crush.

It sounds like maybe you mean to say that it gives less productive hives because the bees need to rebuild the comb, which many people agree with.

Mark


----------

