Which hive if you started from scratch?

[VEG]

A Warré is a top bar hive, but a vertical top bar hive rather than a horizontal one.

Night Owl, PM me if you'd like to.

As I said different

 

[Cie]

As I said different

No. What you said was:

A warre hive is a bit different to a top bar hive.

A Warré hive IS a top bar hive.

 

[VEG]

so they are exactly the same then they are the same size and orientation?

Nope so they are........different

 

[Cie]

The term top bar refers to the piece of wood that the bees build comb on, not the hive.

Kenyan, Warré and Sun are all top bar hives, in the same way that National and WBC are frame hives.

 

[VEG]

I agree with you I was pointing out to the other poster that they were not the same to look at. Maybe I should have explained in more detail.

 

[mbc]

Same name as in 'top bar hive' but radically different style and function.
Kenyan, or horizontal tbh's have more moveable frames due to the sloping sides whereas the type of top bar in the Warre's vertical sides are next to impossible to inspect withoput causing major damage.
FWIW I think both are a nonsense for our conditions, the horizontal ones because they put the bees at a disadvantage with the shape of the nest, and the Warre's for the previously mentioned difficult inspections, though bees do very well in the tall narrow configuration with thick walls, why keep bees if you cant have a look ? Surely you would be missing out on most of the fun of beekeeping, no ?

 

[Cie]

Actually mbc, in both Kenyan and Warré the bees will fix the comb to the side walls, but it's easily cut with a knife; not necessarily causing major damage. I've been into a few Warré hives and once the walls were free, the inspection was easy.

But of course, most people that are using top bar hives have a different philosophy with their beekeeping, prefering to only open the hive when there's a real need to. Personally I get hours of enjoyment watching at the hive entrance, something frame beeks seem to get from inspecting each frame.

 

[pargyle]

Same name as in 'top bar hive' but radically different style and function.
Kenyan, or horizontal tbh's have more moveable frames due to the sloping sides whereas the type of top bar in the Warre's vertical sides are next to impossible to inspect withoput causing major damage.
FWIW I think both are a nonsense for our conditions, the horizontal ones because they put the bees at a disadvantage with the shape of the nest, and the Warre's for the previously mentioned difficult inspections, though bees do very well in the tall narrow configuration with thick walls, why keep bees if you cant have a look ? Surely you would be missing out on most of the fun of beekeeping, no ?

Yes ... Basically the reasons why I decided to change from a TBH to a framed 14 x 12 Long Hive ... best of both worlds as far as I'm concerned.

 

[mbc]

I've been into a few Warré hives and once the walls were free, the inspection was easy.

Really ? I've seen a few Warre's and I've never seen a box where the combs were drawn straight all the way to the bottom of the box with only a few reasonably easily unattached bits of brace comb.
I was very interested in keeping some Warre's before seeing this, but once I saw a Warre being put back together after an attempted inspection I ditched the idea completely as that amount of wincing cannot be good for you.
IMHO the frame is a bloody good invention.

 

[Little John]

IMHO the frame is a bloody good invention.

The frame itself may be - but not the bee-space which surrounds it on all sides.

LJ

 

[mbc]

The frame itself may be - but not the bee-space which surrounds it on all sides.

LJ

Why not ?
The frame only really comes into its own when used with a beespace.

 

[Little John]

Why not ?
The frame only really comes into its own when used with a beespace.

"Great honor is justly awarded Mr. Langstroth for the invention of so perfect a movable comb hive. Hanging comb hives of various patterns had been invented but it remained for Langstroth to combine their various merits into one practical hive and introduce it among the beekeepers of this country. Mr. Quinby is entitled to equal or even greater credit for the invention of his new hives, for greater changes were necessary in order to make the Huber hive practical. Mr. Quinby quickly observed that bees did not winter as well in the Langstroth hives as in box hives on account of the spaces at the end of the frames and he set about to remedy it by making a closed-end frame. Dzierzon says on this subject, "These passages are unnatural, and they carry off the necessary heat and moisture from the brood-nest and winter quarters of the bees, so that colonies generally winter rather badly."

Abbott, late editor of the British Bee Journal says "There is nothing more unnatural in hive arrangement than the absurd practice of making or leaving spaces round the frame ends." It is not necessary for me to draw any comparison between this hive and any other as a practical working hive for the beekeeper, but will content myself with stating that Capt. Hetherington, probably the largest producer of comb honey in the world, uses the New Quinby hive in his extensive apiaries; and that Chas. Dadant, the largest producer of extracted honey in the West, uses the same.
I call particular attention to the last named because it has been said that the hanging frame is far superior for the extractor - a statement that after another year's experience I most emphatically deny. Let those who consider the hanging frame hive the only fit domicile for the honey bee recall this list of names: Quinby, Dzierzon, Abbott, Hetherington, Dadant, and then acquaint themselves with the merits of this new hive before condemning it. " The American Apiculturist. Vol. III, 1885


The Quinby New Hive was a variation on Huber's 'Folding Book' hive - the frames having parallel top, bottom and sides (i.e. having no beespace) so that when butted hard together with a pair of end-plates they formed the hive body in the process.

Admittedly, it was not a success, because it was not as convenient for beekeepers to use - but the basic problem remains to this day that when a fixed-size box with internal removable frames is used, then beespaces are required in order that the bees do not glue the whole lot together.

But why on earth should the bees keep insisting on doing this ? It is of course their attempt at making the hive 'fit for purpose'. (but only where they are able to do so - the 'beespace' thwarting so much of their efforts)

And what do the beekeepers keep doing in response ? They keep removing any 'modifications' which the bees have deemed necessary.

And so the battle of attrition continues, year after year ...

Perhaps at some point, 'the penny will drop', and beekeepers will begin asking themselves whether there might not be another way of keeping bees, to avoid this ongoing conflict.

For myself, I've more-or-less settled on wire frames, which support the combs adequately, but without requiring any provision whatsoever for 'beespaces'.

LJ

 

[mbc]

"Great honor is justly awarded Mr. Langstroth for the invention of so perfect a movable comb hive. Hanging comb hives of various patterns had been invented but it remained for Langstroth to combine their various merits into one practical hive and introduce it among the beekeepers of this country. Mr. Quinby is entitled to equal or even greater credit for the invention of his new hives, for greater changes were necessary in order to make the Huber hive practical. Mr. Quinby quickly observed that bees did not winter as well in the Langstroth hives as in box hives on account of the spaces at the end of the frames and he set about to remedy it by making a closed-end frame. Dzierzon says on this subject, "These passages are unnatural, and they carry off the necessary heat and moisture from the brood-nest and winter quarters of the bees, so that colonies generally winter rather badly."

Abbott, late editor of the British Bee Journal says "There is nothing more unnatural in hive arrangement than the absurd practice of making or leaving spaces round the frame ends." It is not necessary for me to draw any comparison between this hive and any other as a practical working hive for the beekeeper, but will content myself with stating that Capt. Hetherington, probably the largest producer of comb honey in the world, uses the New Quinby hive in his extensive apiaries; and that Chas. Dadant, the largest producer of extracted honey in the West, uses the same.
I call particular attention to the last named because it has been said that the hanging frame is far superior for the extractor - a statement that after another year's experience I most emphatically deny. Let those who consider the hanging frame hive the only fit domicile for the honey bee recall this list of names: Quinby, Dzierzon, Abbott, Hetherington, Dadant, and then acquaint themselves with the merits of this new hive before condemning it. " The American Apiculturist. Vol. III, 1885


The Quinby New Hive was a variation on Huber's 'Folding Book' hive - the frames having parallel sides (i.e. having no beespace) so that when butted hard together with a pair of end-plates they formed the hive body in the process.

Admittedly, it was not a success, because it was not as convenient for beekeepers to use - but the basic problem remains to this day that when a fixed-size box with internal removable frames is used, then beespaces are required in order that the bees do not glue the whole lot together.

But why on earth should the bees keep insisting on doing this ? It is of course their attempt at making the hive 'fit for purpose'.

And what do the beekeepers keep doing in response ? They keep removing those 'modifications' which the bees have deemed so necessary. (but only where they are able to do so - the 'beespace' thwarting so much of their efforts)

And so the battle of attrition continues, year after year ...

Perhaps at some point, 'the penny will drop', and beekeepers will begin asking themselves whether there might not be another way of keeping bees, to avoid this ongoing conflict.

For myself, I've more-or-less settled on wire frames, which support the combs adequately, but without requiring any provision whatsoever for 'beespaces'.

LJ

Lol, no wonder they didnt catch on

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Really ? I've seen a few Warre's and I've never seen a box where the combs were drawn straight all the way to the bottom of the box with only a few reasonably easily unattached bits of brace comb.
I was very interested in keeping some Warre's before seeing this, but once I saw a Warre being put back together after an attempted inspection I ditched the idea completely as that amount of wincing cannot be good for you.
IMHO the frame is a bloody good invention.

As thw RBI for Wales puts it - Bl**dy Warre

 

[drstitson]

Poly Dadant/ LS jumbo for me.