Ed Rosenthal Say's CFL's May be Better than HPS for Micro Growing
- Thread starter Thundurkel
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cfl hps vs cfl micro micro cfl grow
tejashidrow
Active member
Hey 1Q.. Thunder and the DR. BOTH have threads going in micro forum. Check em out....
I been reading thru this for a while now and its clear there are haters..lol oh well guess there always will be ignorance.. But anyways its a no brainer that cfls are gonna bring up the ladies better in a smaller enviroment. Better colour spectrums available now and much better spread of light across the plants with multiple cfls.. Someone mention the smaller the better for lumen output, now thats true but dont forget theres always pro's and cons.. For example smaller wattage cfls have alot less light penetration than slightly bigger ones and even tho when scrogging u dont need much you still need an ample amount!! My personal opinion is that T5's are far far better than cfl's as they solve all efficiancy problems associated with the bad design of cfl lights.. dont foget only a small amount light from a cfl is going directly onto the plant.. nearly half is going into the middle of the tube before bouncing out and even then half of that is going upto the reflector before coming back down to the plants.. T5 are essentially a cfl with all the tubes in one long line..U get the picture?? and so have even better light spread!!! In due course i should imagine that hps will have a hard time keeping up with certain high output flouro's in the right set up!!! we shall see... Lumens aint everything. Spectrum of light and spread are just as if not more important..Peace!!! 
knna
Member
I been reading thru this for a while now and its clear there are haters..lol oh well guess there always will be ignorance.. But anyways its a no brainer that cfls are gonna bring up the ladies better in a smaller enviroment. Better colour spectrums available now and much better spread of light across the plants with multiple cfls.. Someone mention the smaller the better for lumen output, now thats true but dont forget theres always pro's and cons.. For example smaller wattage cfls have alot less light penetration than slightly bigger ones and even tho when scrogging u dont need much you still need an ample amount!! My personal opinion is that T5's are far far better than cfl's as they solve all efficiancy problems associated with the bad design of cfl lights.. dont foget only a small amount light from a cfl is going directly onto the plant.. nearly half is going into the middle of the tube before bouncing out and even then half of that is going upto the reflector before coming back down to the plants.. T5 are essentially a cfl with all the tubes in one long line..U get the picture?? and so have even better light spread!!! In due course i should imagine that hps will have a hard time keeping up with certain high output flouro's in the right set up!!! we shall see... Lumens aint everything. Spectrum of light and spread are just as if not more important..Peace!!!
Very good points, urbanfunk. Light spreading is very important. Bulky CFLs are bad on it, its very true. Some tubes blocks light from the others.
But very often on small cabs tubes simply dont fit. You need at least 2 ft for them. Aditionally, T5 tubes are relatively expensive, watt per watt, compared to CFLs.
Due that is why i love PLLs. They are a T5 tube bended by half. They fit on only one socket and have the same advantage spreading light than single T5 tubes. But a 55w one cost the same than a 24w T5. And if there is no enough space avalaible to them (they are 21" long), you can always use the 36w ones, that are 17" and have similar efficacy. 36w ones have the added advantage of being able to run on conventional 36w floro ballasts. And they are very easy to find (opposite to 55w), due they are used on office reccesed luminaries.
Another advantage of CFLs vs T5 is the operating temperature. T5s emits about 15% less light when running at a 25ºC (~75F) than when running on 35ºC (~95F). They are designed to work on semienclosed luminaries, which have higher air temps. While CFLs are designed to work at 25ºC, still those using T4 or T5 tubes. As we want our cab closer to 75F than to 95F, if you are going to use them in open air, as usually most of us use them, PLLs are more efficients than T5 tubes.
Only advantage of short (2ft) T5 tubes over CFLs is the duration, which is near double. Although PLL, due to be remote ballasted, last about 50% longer than typical self ballasted CFLs.
For those who have tall but narrow cabs, CFLs have the added advantage of run better on vertical position (than T5s). On these situations, placing PLLs vertical (better if base down) allows to increase growed surface area very easily. This configuration may be used aswell to give side or intracanopy lighting to increase production of bottom areas on conventional (flat) setups.
Nice post Knna but I totally disagree with Urbanfunk ... i have a 4ft 54w Sunblaze T5 6500k in my veg/mother cab and my 26w 6500k CFLs are brighter pal and penetrate better so sorry you are wrong on that one.. I thought that the 4ft sunblaze would be perfect for my moms but they were growing slow as shit until I added 2 26w daylight cfls and they are much harder to look at than the 54w T5 and yea they are harder to fit in cabs. I had argument about this with my buddy who is a HID guy and he was saying that 2ft T5s would be better in one of my cabs and HELL NO they wouldn't be, I can fit no more than 4 2ft 24w T5s which gives me 8000 lumens in 2.4 sq ft opposed to my 6 42w CFLs that give me 16,000+ lumens and with mylar on all the walls the light is bouncing everywhere so you don't need to keep your plants so close. Like I've mentioned my plants are always about 4-6" when they finish and before that it's 8-10".. I say light penetration means shit when you have SO MANY usable photons floating around ... Also everything people have seen me pull off on this site has been with very little money at all and shit that I've found like my desk... When I can build my cab how I want be prepared to see some amazing work
besides 42w CFLs are T4s anyway and I would say the penetration( though I don't think it matters) is better from CFLs over long tubes (besides the PLLs) because the light is more concentrated from one space. So instead of having a little of the same amount of light you get a bunch of light which over laps giving doubled lumens in certain spots. That makes more sense if you have Jorge Cervantes Grow Bible 5 where he talks about more points of light saying 3 400w HPS is better than 1 1000w HPS cuz of the overlap of light giving more chance for all parts of the plants to be lit...
besides 42w CFLs are T4s anyway and I would say the penetration( though I don't think it matters) is better from CFLs over long tubes (besides the PLLs) because the light is more concentrated from one space. So instead of having a little of the same amount of light you get a bunch of light which over laps giving doubled lumens in certain spots. That makes more sense if you have Jorge Cervantes Grow Bible 5 where he talks about more points of light saying 3 400w HPS is better than 1 1000w HPS cuz of the overlap of light giving more chance for all parts of the plants to be lit...
Anyone interested in learning how to wire up PL-L lamps..... I've just posted a new thread with pictures.
It's really simple and definitely worth looking into. The Fulham Workhorse 8 ballasts I've been using will run up to 6 lamps with a total of 220w. The 55w lamps represent the most efficient CFLs you can use today and they range from 2700K (not found easily in the U.S.A.) to 10,000K and 03 actinic Blue/White. In other words, you can get spectrums you can't normally find with screw in CFLs.
after looking at that cab size again, im not so sure he was right to say he should use cfl's, 150hps would have been far more suitable. but at least he recommended a reasonable amount of cfl, id have said 6x42w tho
cfl for veg and hps for flower works best, so i always say if you can get a hps in there and keep temps ok, then its worth the effort.. and it is
some of you have probably seen the cmh thread on icmag, thats best of both, cfl blue and hps red. there are low powered ones like 70 and 150w, those would be something nice to try in a 1.5x1.5ft micro cab.
cfl for veg and hps for flower works best, so i always say if you can get a hps in there and keep temps ok, then its worth the effort.. and it is
some of you have probably seen the cmh thread on icmag, thats best of both, cfl blue and hps red. there are low powered ones like 70 and 150w, those would be something nice to try in a 1.5x1.5ft micro cab.
they tend to go BANG after 7-8000hrs use. that is one year of being on constantly.
probs best to change after 10-11months
journeyquest
Member
I agree w/you on the point that more lights are better. One 400w hps, one 400w mh w/cfl on the sides vs 1000w hps gets my vote. Or for smaller setup smaller lights. You can have a better spectrum and coverage. And this is really the key to ultimate lighting.
$120 will get you a 220w ballast, 4 TG11 sockets, and 4 55w 3000k PL-L lamps at 1000bulbs.com. It will easily cover a 2x2 area. One more ballast and a few more lamps and you're golden.
It may be more than $100 but that's ok as you have time. There's still a lot of reading you'll need to do.
This isn't something you'll want to rush into and it's best to take your time and save up for the right equipment the first time. Sooooo much better, soooooo much less frustrating. You'll love it.
I'd change out cheaper CFLs within about 4-6 months personally, Cheap PL-Ls after a year and a half probably.
The quality PL-L 55w lamps have been known to be just fine for up to 2 years per Knna. He knows his stuff so I'll take his word for it.
If you're going to be growing with CFLs for a long time you would be wise to switch to the 4-pin TG11 CFLs, as soon as you can conveniently manage it.
The only drawback so far is if you have a tiny, tiny grow space. The 36w lamps are around 17" and the 55w are 22" max. Your spectrum choices are going to be more limited with lower wattage TG11 base lamps(the smaller sized lamps).
Thanks for the wiring tutorial HydroSoil!!! Those are TOO easy to hook up! The HID world will bow to me when I run those!! just look what I do with 42w twist bulbs hmmmm
Thunderkle, my questions.
Thunderkle, my questions.
1. In your opinion, could a rack of vertical CFLs out proform a 250hps?
2. Should a grower match watt for watt what they would use for HID in CFL form?
3. Is it possible to achive good g/w results with non-perpetual growing, or is it perpetual growing the way to achive such good results with CFLs?
For starters.
quality
Thunderkle, my questions.
1. In your opinion, could a rack of vertical CFLs out proform a 250hps?
2. Should a grower match watt for watt what they would use for HID in CFL form?
3. Is it possible to achive good g/w results with non-perpetual growing, or is it perpetual growing the way to achive such good results with CFLs?
For starters.
quality
My pleasure
I've actually been looking forward to you and DrBud testing them out. I really appreciate how well you guys lay out the pics and info on what you're doing. Would be great to see the same with these lamps I'm using. I'm dedicated to spreading the word about these and am glad to see it happening.
I read that the aquarium forums are good places to find great deals on this type of equipment. That crowd has been using these ballasts and lamp types for a few years now.
I think the quote was $35 for 2 Fulham Workhorse 8 ballasts shipped. Used, of course but still.
1. you would need more than 250w of cfl to equal a 250w hps, more like 350-400w
2. see above
Yes. If you're using screw in coiled CFLs, you're going to need to go with a much higher wattage.
However, I'll go out on a limb and say that using 55w PL-L lamps, you'll actually be pretty close. Around 300w, I'd say, with a good reflector would give about the same results as a 250w HPS.
Waaaay less heat too as there's really not much infra-red put out by these CFLs. Can't say the same for the HPS. CMH would be a bit cooler.
This also only holds true if you use LST properly or Scrog. The PL-L lamps provide a very large light source as opposed to the single (4"??) elment of a 250w hps. A 55w PL-L is 2" wide and up to 20" long of brightly lit element.
Makes a huge difference when you can keep the entire plant within the 8" effective range of these baby's.
These are definitely Scrogging lamps.
C
Cozy Amnesia
This is where it's at:
B
banjobrain
$120 will get you a 220w ballast, 4 TG11 sockets, and 4 55w 3000k PL-L lamps at 1000bulbs.com. It will easily cover a 2x2 area. One more ballast and a few more lamps and you're golden.
It may be more than $100 but that's ok as you have time. There's still a lot of reading you'll need to do.
This isn't something you'll want to rush into and it's best to take your time and save up for the right equipment the first time. Sooooo much better, soooooo much less frustrating. You'll love it.
Hmm...I'm building my first cab. Mother room is 2x2. I've been thinking about CFLs vs HPS. Perhaps I've found my lighting of choice?
I am planning on being able to easily implement HPS if I desire in the future, but to start, I think CFLs might be the way to go.
This setup is adequate? Would it be beneficial to go with more CFLs?
This is where it's at:
That is where it's at!!! Those are the Phillips true blue and true red fluoro's aren't they?
