# Comb honey production cost comparison



## Ross (Apr 30, 2003)

At least two of your assumptions are wrong in my case. 
1) Why would you ever need to re-assemble a medium frame just because you cut comb out of it?

2) I don't use foundation. Maybe that relates to #1. With foundationless, you just cut out the comb and replace the frame in the hive. No extra work. If you leave an edge of comb at the top, you can do this whether you are foundationless or not.

Since I am already in all mediums and foundationless, there is essentially no additional cost to producing comb vs extracted honey other than packaging, about $1 by your figures.

[ February 17, 2007, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: Ross ]


----------



## Boris (Jul 12, 2006)

"Why would you ever need to re-assemble..."
"I don't use foundation..."

Ross,

People use it in my area because the honey flow
is not so high. With foundations, bees make combs more quickly. 
For examle, according to the Lloyd Spear (a round comb honey producer from up-state New York): 
"...When four rings are in each frame half, place a sheet of foundation on one frame half, and close the two halves. The frame is then complete and can be placed in the super..." 

But anyway, I have added your approach to my calculations.

Boris

[ February 17, 2007, 10:52 AM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>With foundations, bees make combs more quickly. 

That has not been my experience, nor have I heard that from anyone who has tried foundationless frames.

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


----------



## Boris (Jul 12, 2006)

[ February 17, 2007, 12:54 PM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Boris (Jul 12, 2006)

Note: Lloyd Spear's a round comb honey experience is over 20 years. 

Boris

[ February 17, 2007, 01:06 PM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

And you are saying Lloyd is/was doing foundationless?


----------



## Boris (Jul 12, 2006)

"And you are saying Lloyd is/was doing foundationless?"

No. It was just additional Note. This summer I will try Lloyd's approach (see above statement).
But may be Ross's foundationless approach is acceptable for some areas?

Boris


----------



## ekrouse (Aug 26, 2004)

Hi Boris,

You're in the Catskills. I am a few hours from you in Central New York (Upstate). I've switched over foundationless frames for all my cut comb. The advantages are numerous:

1) No foundation cost
2) No time/labor needed to install foundation
3) The bees build larger cells (drone size) meaning a lower wax to honey ratio. As a result, my customers prefer the foundationless because they end up with less wax in their mouths per bite and they don't have that thick center (foundation). That's because the bees build a much thinner foundation layer than even cut-comb foundation. Boris, in addition to trying Lloyd's approach, how about trying the foundationless approach. It's suitable for ALL AREAS, not just those with a long nectar flow. When the nectar flows, the bees draw wax. One Note: be sure to place the foundationless frame between two fully drawn frames (with a 1/4" starter strip protruding below the top bar).

-Eric


----------



## Ross (Apr 30, 2003)

I find the bees draw foundationless in about 1/2 the time of wax foundation, and about 1/5 the time of plastic foundation. We don't have an extended heavy flow either. That's one of the reasons I went to foundationless.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

We ran Basswood Boxes for about 10 yrs (500-1000 sections a year-8 frame) and due to labor concerns crossed over to all cut comb this past year and are extremely happy with the results.

I have never run foundationless intentionally but the reasoning here sounds, well, sound. Are you fellows running starter stips and if not what is to keep the bees from running combs diagonal accross the frames which I've seen happen in foundationless brood frames? Could you please describe the equipment configuration you're using as well as the timing of supering (ie 4 foundationless supers added beginning of flow, 1 added, half complete, 2nded added etc.)

Thanks


----------



## Ross (Apr 30, 2003)

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

This is what I do, although I know longer bother to glue the small triangle back in. I just rip both sides of a WTB frame at 45 degrees. I can do 100 in about 15 minutes. I typically add a super of foundationless with a single drawn frame near the middle, or I checker board them into the brood chamber as need be.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 1, 2004)

I know a guy running 400 hives solely for cut comb, using foundationless frames. If this technique gets around it may mean trouble for Ross Rounds, as our tremendous advantage is that frames can be reloaded without having the endless cleaning associated with used cut comb frames. (We are finishing our 200 supers of Ross Rounds, and are about to start on our 500 frames (50 supers) for cut comb and are dreading the job. These 50 supers will take more time than the 200 Ross Round supers!

He runs his cut comb in deep frames. When he uses a new frame he applies a coating of beeswax to the top bar. For used frames he does nothing. He says that the microscopic traces of beeswax from the previous year are enough to get the bees started. He has a bottom bar on the frame as otherwise the bees will draw down to the queen excluder.

He goes for a 12 ounce cut, so he can get several from a frame. He does not hesitate to combine 2-3 cuts in a single container to make up the 12 ounces. He does not drain the edges, and will add 1-3 ounces of liquid honey if necessary to get to 12 ounces.

His package is not pretty as the combs are all different sizes and thicknesses. And late in the season the liquid honey is always crystalized. He cannot use the standard jewelry boxes for packaging as most of his combs are too thick, so he uses a lightweight box not unlike the clamshells sold by some dealers.

But...in a normal year (meaning most years) he produces some 20,000 12 ounce cuts and always sells out. He has effectively 'trained' his customers to this package. The only downside is that he takes a real price cut compared to either Ross Rounds or 'regular' cut comb. But his price is part of what lets him sell 20,000 a year, and considering that he has far less labor than cut comb and somewhat less labor than Ross Rounds, he may come out ahead of the game! Last year he sold his cut comb for $2.25 (wholesale, in a carton of 24), compared to my $4.00 for Ross Rounds or $4.50 for my cut comb in a jewelry box. The $2.25 is also what the big comb honey producers in Florida and Michigan were getting in 2006 for their cut comb in jewelry boxes.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

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

Here's how I do it. Also old combs with even a little bit of the last comb on them work fine without any kind of guide.


----------



## Boris (Jul 12, 2006)

Eric,

My area flowers are here:
http://www.beebehavior.com/bees_and_flowers.php 

What do you have in your area?

Thank you.
Boris

[ February 21, 2007, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Patrick Scannell (Jul 3, 2004)

Boris, nice website.


----------



## Boris (Jul 12, 2006)

Thank you, Patrick

Boris


----------



## Tia (Nov 19, 2003)

"Also old combs with even a little bit of the last comb on them work fine without any kind of guide." Thanks, Michael. I'm in my 5th year of beekeeping and I can't tell you how many "holey" combs I've tossed out because other beekeepers told me they were no good. My own logic told me to keep them this year and your statement's just confirmation of what I was thinking.

Too, when it comes to foundationless frames, can you please confirm for me that you can give a hive a box of ten foundationless frames to build on; that you don't need to alternate drawn comb with the foundationless so that the bees draw it straight? I've never done 100% foundationless, but was planning on doing it this year. Other beeks are telling me it can't be done 10 frames at a time. Help!


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> I know a guy running 400 hives solely for cut 
> comb, using foundationless frames. If this 
> technique gets around it may mean trouble for 
> Ross Rounds

Not at all, Lloyd!
What you need to do is hand out free foundation
at the meeting you attend, one sheet per person.
*Colored* foundation.

Maybe you've never seen it, so I'll describe the
"experiment". I wish I still had my photos:

1) Put some of that colored foundation that is
sold to make those tacky "rolled candles"
in a frame. (Any color will do.)

2) Let the bees draw out that comb.

3) Observe the color, and note just how much of
the foundation was "drawn out" to make the 
comb. Observe just how much of the total
mass of the comb clearly was fabricated from
the foundation, rather than fabricated from
wax scales.

That's a LOT of wax that the bees were given, and
did not have to produce themselves, which is a
costly and slow process, often made slower by
poor weather for brood rearing to get the young
bees to make those tiny wax scales.

So, foundation is a *big* advantage, one that
results in more drawn comb much faster than one
can get from empty frames, and when making comb
honey, you want to use every little advantage you
can provide the bees, as the opportunity to 
first draw comb and fill it is brief. 

I guess most folks think that bees just attach
wax scales to the foundation to make comb, but 
the little "experiment" I mentioned blows this 
misconception out of the water in short order.

Foundationless frames are a great way to slow 
down one's entire season, limit one's harvest, 
and keep colonies small and wimpy.


----------



## forestbee (Sep 11, 2003)

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

Thanks


----------



## Boris (Jul 12, 2006)

"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


----------



## Boris (Jul 12, 2006)

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

Jim,
Your "experiment" is great!

Thank you.
Boris


----------



## flathead (Nov 1, 2006)

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?


----------



## Ross (Apr 30, 2003)

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.

[ February 23, 2007, 04:25 AM: Message edited by: Ross ]


----------



## Ross (Apr 30, 2003)

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.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>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.


----------



## Boris (Jul 12, 2006)

"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

[ February 23, 2007, 10:15 AM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------

