Forum home› Problem solving

Bare root v potted (roses)?

FireFire North LondonPosts: 17,116
in Problem solving
Are there advantages to bare root v potted roses, apart from cost? Is there no advantage to having a pre-existing network of small hair roots? Do both types grow at the same speed in the first year? I would like to have a good fence covering this year, if I can.

Posts

  • Hostafan1Hostafan1 Posts: 33,261
    very often roses bought in pots have only been in them for a short time after being lifted from " the field " I'd go for bare root if you can. Still plenty of time to get them planted.
    Devon.
  • AnniDAnniD South West UKPosts: 10,990
    I agree,. If you can get bare rooted ones, go for it  :)
  • DovefromaboveDovefromabove Central Norfolk UKPosts: 82,089
    Another vote for bare root roses here ... with the proviso that they’re from a reliable supplier and they’ve not been kept in a warm dry store. 

    “I am not lost, for I know where I am. But however, where I am may be lost.” Winnie the Pooh







  • B3B3 South East LondonPosts: 24,006
    I thought they were pretty much the same thing. You're paying for compost and the effort it took to bung it in a pot. I'm sure that's the reason that I never see bare root in garden centres.
    In London. Keen but lazy.
Sign In or Register to comment.