AgTalk Home
AgTalk Home
Search Forums | Classifieds (95) | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

AMS with chemical
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forums List -> Crop TalkMessage format
 
jimmys404
Posted 12/24/2010 21:45 (#1505435)
Subject: AMS with chemical


How many people use AMS when they spray their Round up or any other chemicals?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Gerald J.
Posted 12/24/2010 22:10 (#1505467 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical



Every one should to soften the water before the glyphosate hits the tank, then to make some weeds take up glyphosate better.

Gerald J.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Ham
Posted 12/24/2010 22:43 (#1505514 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Standard procedure here..



Blvd d'Espair Bowhill, Sth Aust

50 kg granules in 6000 litres, added BEFORE anything else is added to the water. Reason I use it is because we have water high in calcium and magnesium, which will tend to tie up Glypho otherwise. Also I use a lot of Glypho plus Amine 2,4-D, which is technically incorrect, but works very well nonetheless, and suits my vapour drift concerns better than pretty much anything else. The AMS supposedly helps with the antagonism between those two products, but I don't really think it's very significant anyway.



Edited by Ham 12/25/2010 07:50
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Dan_wcIN
Posted 12/25/2010 06:08 (#1505733 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical



It made a Crop
With our water I've found 15-17lbs of AMS per 100 gal. of water works pretty good. I never add non-AMS treated water to top off the tank after chemicals are in the sprayer tank.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
minn gopher
Posted 12/25/2010 06:18 (#1505734 - in reply to #1505733)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Pine City, MN
3lbs of ams per acre here with all R-up... tried other stuff but ams works best.. Have to put it in before r-up..
Top of the page Bottom of the page
westks
Posted 12/25/2010 07:37 (#1505763 - in reply to #1505734)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Brewster, Kansas
Always
Top of the page Bottom of the page
69roadrunner
Posted 12/25/2010 08:01 (#1505777 - in reply to #1505763)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


North of Iowa
Used 3# @ acre for years, switched to a product called level 7 last two years, works very well. Back wouldn't take the AMS anymore.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Brassring
Posted 12/25/2010 08:39 (#1505819 - in reply to #1505777)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


St.Clair Co. IL.
I use 8.5# of ams per @ again like others say put in at beginning and let mix with the water then add chemical, have heard others on here say they use the full 17@ rate have tried the full rate and can not tell any difference, asked chem rep and he said too they tried various rates and have come up with the 8.5# to be the best bang for the buck. JMO Bob it works for me anyway
Top of the page Bottom of the page
jimmys404
Posted 12/25/2010 09:47 (#1505916 - in reply to #1505819)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


So what sort of things are you referring to, Tommy?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
mac4440
Posted 12/25/2010 13:23 (#1506257 - in reply to #1505819)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical



You guys are quoting per acres rates. Even at 3lb/acre that adds up pretty fast. I was always told it was so much per 100 gallons of water. Main thing is to keep hard water from tieing up the R-Up. Usually 8-17 lb per 100 gal. I usually use a 1 &1/2 bags per 500gal, about 14lb/100 gal.

Edited by mac4440 12/25/2010 13:25
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Dan_wcIN
Posted 12/25/2010 15:13 (#1506388 - in reply to #1506257)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical



It made a Crop
Tom I'm with you. I'm basicly the same as you. I run 1 1/2 bags per 500 gal too. My rate per acre can vary. I spray anywhere from 7 gpa - 15 gpa. But, I still mix 76 lbs of AMS per batch in the 500 gal top-air. I'm going to a 3440 coup next year. I most likely go to 1 bag per 300 gal. batch.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Ham
Posted 12/25/2010 09:36 (#1505896 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Obvious question...



Blvd d'Espair Bowhill, Sth Aust

In my world the amount of AMS used is relevant to the quantity of water. But many guys here quote their use as a per-acre rate. So if you are using 8 pounds   ( or whatever )    per acre, ....how much water are you using per acre..???



Edited by Ham 12/25/2010 09:37
Top of the page Bottom of the page
beef farmer
Posted 12/25/2010 09:47 (#1505918 - in reply to #1505896)
Subject: RE: Obvious question...



Northwest Illinois
I use one bag(51#] per 500 gal. of water. I put on 20 gal. to the acre. I also need a defoamer.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
old-abe
Posted 12/25/2010 11:25 (#1506101 - in reply to #1505896)
Subject: RE: Obvious question...



NW Oklahoma
Same here Ham, when I had a sprayer filling well drilled first thing I did was pull a water sample to find out what I had to over come to keep from binding up the RU. looks to me if you don't do that you are just shooting in the dark.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Tommy
Posted 12/25/2010 09:38 (#1505903 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: RE: Salt load


Iowa
Of course SOMETHING is needed to change the pH of well water, but there is growing evidence that increasing the salt load of the mix--which AMS does_ can be detrimental to plant health.

There are newer and better ways to increase the effectiveness of the herbicide. most are easier to use, some are cost competitive and some aren't.

AS yields increase (and grain prices rise), I would want to eliminate as many potential problems as possible.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
soil-life
Posted 12/25/2010 10:02 (#1505946 - in reply to #1505903)
Subject: RE: Salt load


North Central Ohio, across the Corn belt !

Tommy - 12/25/2010 09:38 Of course SOMETHING is needed to change the pH of well water, but there is growing evidence that increasing the salt load of the mix--which AMS does_ can be detrimental to plant health. There are newer and better ways to increase the effectiveness of the herbicide. most are easier to use, some are cost competitive and some aren't. AS yields increase (and grain prices rise), I would want to eliminate as many potential problems as possible.

I say BULL to That

evedince ? of damage NO way,  This is Mythical information from those selling and Promoting Alternative Products.  Nothing wrong with these alternative practices. BUT do NOT use scare tactics and Spread Crap to sell sonething else

and I sell neither

Top of the page Bottom of the page
Tommy
Posted 12/25/2010 10:57 (#1506055 - in reply to #1505946)
Subject: RE: good for you!


Iowa
Ever heard of Don Huber of Purdue?

I sell NOTHING. Just trying to help. Can you make either of those claims?

Regardless of if you believe in an excess salt load, there are EASIER TO USE products, some of which cost no more, that weren't available when we all learned that AMS was necessary. There are easier ways than lifting thousands of pounds of AMS, pouring it into the cone too fast by mistake, etc.

OK, don't believe the salt deal, but you surely can't dispute there are easier, more modern alternatives that, just by eliminating pallets and pallets of AMS, make a person's operation more pleasant and efficient.

Santa must have brought you a lump of coal. Man, what a terrible attitude, especially today, of all days. I don't see the need for it.



Top of the page Bottom of the page
Gerald J.
Posted 12/25/2010 11:10 (#1506080 - in reply to #1506055)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical



I'm not convinced a couple drops of some magic juice can do both jobs of a couple pounds of AMS. I know from experience that the saturation limit of AMS is long about two pounds per gallon of water. I premixed my AMS in a barrel and mixing 51 pounds on 40 gallons of water was practical, but it was fairly thick. Mixing in an open (plastic) barrel on the ground didn't involve lifting sacks very high, not like up to the top of an injector cone, and an air nozzle on a plastic pipe stirred that barrel very well. The suction hose on my sprayer pump set up in recirculate mode inhaled the volume needed for that tank full with very little effort on my part and marks on the outside of the barrel showed when it was time to quit. It took ten gallons of AMS solution to a 60 gallon spray tank at 10 gpa or 13 gallons at 8 gpa. That's a whole heap more liquid than from a bottle that claims to do the same job.

Remember AMS has at least two jobs, tying up hardness ions, and making velvet leaf accept more glyphosate among other plants. If it improves the effectiveness of the spray by lowering pH that's all the better. I don't recall seeing glyphosate labels calling out alternatives, just AMS. So as far as the glyphosate maker was concerned the supposed alternatives were not approved. Only the makers of those magic juices claimed they were as good as AMS.

Gerald J.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Brandon SWIA
Posted 12/26/2010 13:21 (#1507504 - in reply to #1506080)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


I load into an eductor mounted on the sprayer. I think its almost easier cutting open bags of AMS rather than opening boxes of jugs, taking the lid off, removing the damn foil seals, rinsing the jugs, putting the jugs back in the boxes and then putting the boxes back in the trailer. I'd rather cut open three or 4 bags, dump, and quickly pick the bags up and throw them in the trailer.

Brandon
Top of the page Bottom of the page
soil-life
Posted 12/25/2010 11:39 (#1506121 - in reply to #1506055)
Subject: RE: Glad you are awake Tommy


North Central Ohio, across the Corn belt !

Merry Christmas to you and Yours also

Top of the page Bottom of the page
plowboy
Posted 12/25/2010 19:28 (#1506616 - in reply to #1506055)
Subject: RE: good for you!



Brazilton KS

You are the one pushing snake oil. 

Top of the page Bottom of the page
marlinpain
Posted 12/25/2010 09:55 (#1505935 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


45 miles south spingfield il.
Generic rup has surfatant in it so I quit adding and get along fine. Never liked handleing Dry ams
Top of the page Bottom of the page
braunt01
Posted 12/25/2010 23:31 (#1506919 - in reply to #1505935)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Princeton, MN
A surfactant has a much different job in the spray mixture than a water conditioner/H+ ion source, which AMS is.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
tooth and nail
Posted 12/25/2010 10:29 (#1505995 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


switched to AMS conc. 1gal/100gal. works as good or better MUCH product to handle
Top of the page Bottom of the page
1967806
Posted 12/25/2010 11:25 (#1506102 - in reply to #1505995)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Corydon, IA

There are places to send your water samples that can check them and make recommendations for AMS if its that big of a deal. I never did it myself though. I quit using AMS and switched to a couple other products to replace it and havent missed handling the bags at all and getting the same results from the spray. One of our local custom sprayers told me he quit using AMS too and went to a replacement product with a drift guard and has equal results. He was having pump problems before and does not now after switching.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
white caddy
Posted 12/25/2010 14:47 (#1506358 - in reply to #1506102)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Central Nebraska
my spray guy uses a product called Stay Down. It is supposed to keep drift down and act as an AMS. It comes in 25 lb bags and use 5 lb/ 100 gal. I'm not going to say that it does as good as they say it, but helped last spring with all the wind. Before that he used a liquid product called synergize. I liked it and did some comparasion work on the effect on the weeds, between synergize and stay down and I could see any difference in them.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
braunt01
Posted 12/25/2010 23:33 (#1506922 - in reply to #1506102)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Princeton, MN
It probably doesnt hurt that your applicator/retailer makes their highest margin on those products, so they really like to some up with reasons to sell them
Top of the page Bottom of the page
1967806
Posted 12/25/2010 23:59 (#1506954 - in reply to #1506922)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Corydon, IA

braunt01 - 12/25/2010 23:33 It probably doesnt hurt that your applicator/retailer makes their highest margin on those products, so they really like to some up with reasons to sell them



I dont think it matters to the spray guy. He gets paid by the hour so I dont think hes making anything extra. I use what works for me and so far I get along fine.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
wkoleary
Posted 12/26/2010 08:35 (#1507105 - in reply to #1506954)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Danvers mn
It makes a great deal of sense for a spray company to sell these high margin products. Add an extra .25-.50 acre margin on a large amount of acres and profit starts to add up. I know here the local retailers wont use anything but the high priced adjuvants. Dont even tell you just send an invoice. Here again we need to know what we are paying for. Better yet than hiring the local buy your chemicals the cheapest source possible and do your own spraying. This is an easy job and one of the best ROI a grower can do. bill
Top of the page Bottom of the page
jimmys404
Posted 12/25/2010 13:47 (#1506290 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


What is this product named?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Old Pokey
Posted 12/25/2010 15:18 (#1506393 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: RE: AMS with chemical


 For many years we've been using Setre Chemicals "Quest" as a buffering agent with many of our pesticides with good results.
 http://www.helenachemical.com/specialty/MSDS/QUEST%20(NON-CORROSIVE)%20SETRE.PDF 

 I used to add the dry ams to the tank and agitate untill disolved, but found that because of it's time consumption and our winter water temps slowing the proccess, it was not used when time windows were tight. So we started using Quest, and Request, and have not looked back. In the summer our spray water is a lake water and often has a lot of soil sediment in it. I would like to not use that water for many pesticides, but have no options at this time. We had some of the water tested for various aspects that pertained to pesticide use, and found that approx. 1 quart per 100 gallons solution was the concentration that gave us, on average, the buffering we needed.

 We've also used synthetic penetrators for certain chems that require synthetic penetrating agents instead of ams or Quest.

 The quality and characteristics of the water you use to carry the chemical to the plant is just as important as the chemical choice IMO.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
wkoleary
Posted 12/25/2010 16:11 (#1506424 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Danvers mn
LBS/100 gals. 8-10lbs/100 should be adequate for almost all water conditions. Use less water per acre (stronger ratio of gly to water). 10 gals would be about right. Less would work also. More water means more buffering to accomplish. Most ams costs would be only about $.21 acre. Assuming 10lbs/100 gals. 10gals per acre =1 lb per acre ams @ .21lb. Quite cheap. You should be aware that many of these AMS alternatives are high priced crap. I have research many many many. Have not found ONE that was competitively priced. The salesman tells you they are but most times he doesnt know what is in the jug. Which many times is just AMS and sometimes a little surfactant. I have found most of these products are nothing but common ingredients. Many times they are priced at 10x their real value. As far as wearing pumps out. Yes AMS is corrosive like many fertilizers. A necessary evil I believe. The last pump I replaced had 2500 hrs of run time. Not bad I think. I replaced the pump my self for $400 dollars. I doubt that AMS was the only reason I had to replace it. I have found many misconceptions about AMS and its substitutes. Adjuvants can be a significant share of a spray mixtures cost and we need to be better educated so as not to waste money or be scared into using a product that gives no significant benefit. Bill oleary
Top of the page Bottom of the page
kagen
Posted 12/25/2010 17:13 (#1506474 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: FWIW, was talking to our agronomist from the sugar


Panhandle of Ne.
factory and he was saying that in the UNL sugar beet test plots that RUP weathermax, by itself, showed the best control of weeds from several different plots. This was compared to generics with added ams and other adjuvants. We have been using a liquid ams at a qt. per 100 gal water and a product called LI 700 which is supposed to control drift and make the RUP hotter. Have had very good results with it. At the price weathermax is this year, might try some of it w/o addatives. Not for sure what weathermax has in it besides an adjuvant.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
ILLRick
Posted 12/25/2010 17:34 (#1506493 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


ECIL
OK, so I'll be the oddball here. I don't use AMS, instead I use Citron which is a citric acid compound. Eleven lbs/500 gal rate, cheaper and just as effective as AMS. I've used it fore several years now with absolutely no problems. Yell, kick, and scream all you want, I'm convinced and not about to change back to AMS.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
tooth and nail
Posted 12/25/2010 18:22 (#1506539 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


I actually use Gardian + (Van Diest Supply Co) it is AMS and drift retardant , straight AMS replacement is called N-Tense , I've had good results with both , as have all my customers who've tried it.
Haven't had 1 come back to ask for old AMS.

Guess I'm getting old and lazy.


Or as I prefer smart and efficient ;)
Top of the page Bottom of the page
wkoleary
Posted 12/25/2010 18:30 (#1506551 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Danvers mn
Glyphosate is an acid. Best to use in an acid in an acid not alkaline envirnoment. Adding citic helps lower ph. That is good. But citic acid does not provide the benefits of AMS. Not the same thing. If you are getting acceptable weed control with these other products (including citric acid) it is very likely the same results could be accomplished without AMS. Dont get me wrong. I have seen enough research for me to use AMS with my glyphosate. If you have velvetleaf it is extremely important to use AMS. Read university data. It is also important to read and understand plot results. One time plot results are easy to misinterpret. Roundup weathermax is not more effective than any other glyphosate if you compare acid equivalency. This has been proven time and time again. bill
Top of the page Bottom of the page
plowboy
Posted 12/25/2010 19:32 (#1506623 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical



Brazilton KS
All the guys who sell wonder products which a few ounces are supposed to replace 17 lbs of AMS are counting on the fact that most of the time glyphosate will work fine without any AMS....but when you really need all the performance you can get, their snake oil is going to leave you right where you would be with nothing.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
coup
Posted 12/26/2010 15:22 (#1507719 - in reply to #1506623)
Subject: Re: Blazin Fire, AMS replacement


USA
A lot of products on the market where a few oz or fraction of oz per acre will provide better results, than lbs, pints, or quarts per acre. Can't judge the performance of which product is better, according to amount used.

Always kind of wondered how much good Blazin Fire did, till I forgot to put it in one sprayer load. Enough of a difference in performance, is definately no snake oil.

Majority of people I deal with, if gave them the AMS for free and charged them for Blazin Fire. Would still take the Blazin Fire. 1 quart /100 gal H20 @ 10 gal water is around $.25 cents acre. Used to go through 6-7 semi loads of AMS per year, last year moved about half a trailer load. Not saying is any better than AMS, but is definately a lot more user friendly.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
soil-life
Posted 12/26/2010 15:31 (#1507725 - in reply to #1507719)
Subject: Re: you missed his point coup


North Central Ohio, across the Corn belt !

go back and read all of the lead up post's

otherwise I agree with you

But this is a different point for a different reason.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
plowboy
Posted 12/26/2010 18:45 (#1508015 - in reply to #1507725)
Subject: Re: you missed his point coup



Brazilton KS

The idea that you can buffer hard water without using the quantity that it takes to do it just does not stand up scientifically... It's impossible to put 17 lbs of AMS in a quart...just won't fit!

Top of the page Bottom of the page
coup
Posted 12/26/2010 20:32 (#1508237 - in reply to #1508015)
Subject: Re: you missed his point coup


USA
AMS replacement products are not AMS, like Capreno is not Atrazine. Can get about 11 acres of weed kiling power in a quart of Capreno , not much in a quart of Atrazine. 1 quart of Atrazine is no match for what 3 oz of Capreno will due.


Top of the page Bottom of the page
wkoleary
Posted 12/26/2010 20:42 (#1508259 - in reply to #1508237)
Subject: Re: you missed his point coup


Danvers mn
Could you please tell me the ingredients in Blazin Fire? Percentages? Have a label or msds. Cant find on search engine. Bill OLeary
Top of the page Bottom of the page
coup
Posted 12/27/2010 08:04 (#1508843 - in reply to #1508259)
Subject: Re: you missed his point coup


USA
Blazin Fire label

Phosphoric and carboxylic acids, sulphurated amines, and spray-deposition aids, Blend of Ammonium Salts...92%

Adjuvants....8%
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Ham
Posted 12/26/2010 18:08 (#1507956 - in reply to #1507719)
Subject: Are induction hoppers uncommon there..?



Blvd d'Espair Bowhill, Sth Aust

I am surprised that so many claim to find using granules of AMS to be at all difficult.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
loran
Posted 12/25/2010 19:34 (#1506625 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: RE: AMS with chemical


West Union, IOWA FLOLO Farm 52175

Been using liquid 28-32%(depending on when/where delivery)  for quite a few years now, I just have a tote on the trailer and go quart for quart with RUP.....

Top of the page Bottom of the page
earp
Posted 12/25/2010 20:15 (#1506672 - in reply to #1506625)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical



Manila, Ar
we use city water..........and i'm not sure but i don't think we use any adjuvants with our RUP
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jon S
Posted 12/26/2010 06:38 (#1507044 - in reply to #1506625)
Subject: RE: AMS with chemical



I have plans to try melting dry AMS into an 8-0-0-9 and setting up a mini with a meter.


Top of the page Bottom of the page
Gerald J.
Posted 12/26/2010 11:14 (#1507345 - in reply to #1507044)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical



I had very good results dissolving AMS in water, 51 pounds to 40 gallons. I built and air agitating wand that helped speed up the process. It was a length of 1/2" plastic water pipe with an elbow and a short pipe at the bottom with a cap having a small hole. I put a male air hose fitting on the top. Moved around the bottom of the barrel it stirred that batch in a hurry.

Gerald J.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
wkoleary
Posted 12/26/2010 08:51 (#1507122 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Danvers mn
We farmers must be making way to much money when we can afford to throw money away on expensive AMS alternatives because of convenience. You can buy AMS-SURFACTANT-DRIFT RETADANT individually much much cheaper than having someone mix it for you and put it in a fancy bag or pail. Use the different components as conditions warrant. Take drift retardant. The most expensive component of some of these products. You only need it on special circumstances not every acre or every day. I am all for convenience but at what cost? There is a saying you pay for what you get. In the adjuvant business many times you pay TOO MUCH for what you get. bill

Edited by wkoleary 12/26/2010 08:52
Top of the page Bottom of the page
tj_farmer
Posted 12/26/2010 09:54 (#1507202 - in reply to #1507122)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


NW central IL
now unless you have my price sheet in front of you , how can you make that statement
Top of the page Bottom of the page
wkoleary
Posted 12/26/2010 11:26 (#1507356 - in reply to #1507202)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Danvers mn
I dont have your price sheet in front of me,you are correct. I am making generalities on what I see on my costs from my multiple distributors. bILL oleary
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jim
Posted 12/26/2010 16:34 (#1507797 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: RE: AMS with chemical


Driftless SW Wisconsin

My WI limestone water is good for drinking but very hard.  I use about 20lb of AMS per 100 gal tank of RU mix. Just have to make sure the AMS is agitated and completely dissolved before adding the RU. Never done it any other way and generally get very good weed kill. We are also usually needing S on soil tests so maybe the AMS helps a bit there also in addition to softening the water.

Jim at Dawn

Top of the page Bottom of the page
tooth and nail
Posted 12/26/2010 19:31 (#1508112 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


I think what I and most others here are useing isn't actually AMS , but an AMS replacement , and in a concentrated form.

I would much rather handle 400 gal. than 20,000+ # of AMS

I'm wondering if some of you refuse to use some of the new more concentrated chem. as well? cause there's NO WAY 1/10 of an oz. A. could work as good as a qt. , gal. ect. ;)

Edited by tooth and nail 12/26/2010 19:31
Top of the page Bottom of the page
wkoleary
Posted 12/26/2010 20:22 (#1508213 - in reply to #1508112)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Danvers mn
I thought you said (earlier post above)you had great luck with guardian PLUS(AMS with drift retardant) and your customers wont go back to AMS. Please clarify only using 400 gals= 20000lbs. Doesnt equate. Typical sales pitch. That product has 3.4 lbs per gallon AMS (34%). AMS cost at $.21 lb is $.714 gal +cost of drift retardant. .85LB AMS per quart. 400 galsx3.4lbs =1360 lbs. not 20000lbs. This is info taken right off the label. Info anybody can easily get on a google search. This is almost exactly the same concentration found in many other so called ams substitutes. Is there something wrong with basic math. Bill OLeary
Top of the page Bottom of the page
FarmerFrank
Posted 12/26/2010 21:04 (#1508301 - in reply to #1508213)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


NE Iowa
we use the 17#/100 gal rate, have tried other products and keep coming back to AMS. We try to get the AMS dumped in the nurse truck and then add the chemicals and have it all mixed and ready to pump onto the sprayer. This has solved alot of our pump and nozzle trouble. We have gone to all corn so we don't have to switch between bean and corn chemicals, really makes it easy/easier...

I'll add that it also works as my subscription to the local "Y" keeps me in shape.....never understood people that pay to go to the fitness center then drive around the parking lot at wal-mart finding a parking place by the entrance.

Maybe someday, I'll understand...




Edited by FarmerFrank 12/26/2010 21:08
Top of the page Bottom of the page
jimmys404
Posted 12/26/2010 21:56 (#1508440 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


So if I am using rural water, not well water would that make a difference?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Gerald J.
Posted 12/27/2010 01:04 (#1508713 - in reply to #1508440)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical



Depends on the water supplier, my rural water is very soft and clean, but I used a full rate of AMS anyway because I had velvetleaf that rakes in glyphosate better with AMS. There may be other weeds that do that too.

Gerald J.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
wkoleary
Posted 12/27/2010 08:25 (#1508860 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Danvers mn
Thank you Coup. The first 3 compounds would be used for lowering ph(not the deposition aid). The ammonium salts would most likely be derived from AMS.bill
Top of the page Bottom of the page
coup
Posted 12/27/2010 08:33 (#1508869 - in reply to #1508860)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


USA
Bill,

Is supposed to contain half rate of antidrift at a quart rate. Kind of hard to tell from the label, how much of what it has in it. Has worked as good as dry AMS here, don't know how it's performance would be compared to dry AMS elswhere.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
tooth and nail
Posted 12/27/2010 11:23 (#1509120 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: Re: AMS with chemical


Being a custom app. I have to use a drift retardent(G+) for ins. purposes on most A. I spray.

Many farmers applying use the N-tense

N-tense 1qt/100gal.
400 gal N-tense = 16,000 A sprayed @10gpa.
20,400#AMS /1.27#/A(rate in our area) =16,000 A sprayed

You are right my math was off, I'll make sure to use a calc. next time ;)

Edited by tooth and nail 12/27/2010 11:33
Top of the page Bottom of the page
tmcalister
Posted 12/27/2010 22:38 (#1510354 - in reply to #1505435)
Subject: RE: AMS with chemical



North Central Texas
What I do and why. We induct the dry AMS into the nurse trailer when we load the water and then it is ready to go. I have used the replacement products and they have seemed to work fine. What I have noticed is when I talk to consultants, chemical company reps., and those so called experts about tough weed problems I commonly hear the same thing. Double the AMS, Double the Surfactant and use real AMS. I can't help but believe if they think real AMS is what you need in tough situations it will work best under all conditions. We put 3 bags in 1000 gallon and like having it ready to go so I don't have to mess with that when I load. I have used the liquid fertilizer in the water also. We put about 100 gallon of 32% in 1000 gallon and think it works the best. The problem I have with it is that it is messy. The sprayer is always greasy with that fertilizer and all exposed metal turns to rust. We find that the AMS mixed in the nurse tank is best for us.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete cookies)