Quantum T5 Badboy

[fived]

http://www.quantumhort.com/
Does anyone have any feedback on this? Thinking about giving it a go, the guy at the local shop said 100,000lumens on the 12bulb system, is that correct? It puts out 648watts, supposed to be similiar to a 1000whps/mh. Thanks guys

 

[fatigues]

http://www.quantumhort.com/
Does anyone have any feedback on this? Thinking about giving it a go, the guy at the local shop said 100,000lumens on the 12bulb system, is that correct? It puts out 648watts, supposed to be similiar to a 1000whps/mh. Thanks guys

PL-L lamps would be far more efficient than T5HOs, give you greater lumens per sq. inch and with greater light penetration. That isn't surprising, given that a 96 watt PL-L is, in many respects, a 55w T5HO, bent in half and doubled back on itself in a "U". You can purchase 96 watt PL-L kits and reflectors here., if you are inclined. I'd go with 55w PL-L's instead, personally.

You will not see many grows on ICM which use the longer 96 watt PL-L - almost all of them feature the 55W PL-L lamps instead, due to the fact the 55W PL-L are WAY cheaper. I think you could do VASTLY better just using multiple 55W PL-L's in your own FFOD (Flourescent Fixture of Doom).

PL-L FFOD

4 Fullham Workhorse 8 ballasts = $154.84
16 4100K lamps = $43.52
16 2G11 sockets = $32.00
16 Miro reflectors = $128.00

Total = $358.36 for 880 watts and slightly less than twice the lumens per sq. foot of the T5 Badboy

VS.

BadBoy = $592.00 for 648 watts ( = $399.99 + cost of lamps of 12 @ $16.00 each)

You tell me which is the better deal.

And to be clear, I don't think either of these setups - either a T5 badboy or a 16x55w Pl-L FFOD unit is "similar" to a 1000w HPS.

The only thing similar to a 1000 watt HPS is... another 1000 watt HPS lamp.

A 1000w HPS light is in a league of its own and no other lamp is going to touch it, no matter what the hype suggests otherwise. There may be all kinds of reasons that you have for using flourescent light over HID. Those reasons may be good; those reasons may be bad. That's entirely up to you. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

But a person is not entitled to their own facts. And by any objective measure you could ever employ, a 1000W HID light provides an objectively superior growth profile that cannot be touched by any other light on the market.

 

[fived]

Thanks man, going to give this t5 setup a go. Actually it's 120,000lumen too I found out. What do you think the yield would be on 6 buckets? Rough estimate

 

[BudGood]

Wow....

Wow....

Damn, I guess that goes to show that not everyone is DIY inclined. He just showed you show to make a fixture that is VASTLY superior, yet you choose the ready made, less efficient, more expensive fixture. If I were in your shoes, I'd definitely go the route fatigues just outlined. Then you ask what kind of yield you'll get? LMAO!!


fatigues, nice info! I'm commenting partially because I felt the need to say something to the OP, but mainly because I wanted to bookmark this for later reference. K+!!!

 

[Sam the Caveman]

Thanks man, going to give this t5 setup a go. Actually it's 120,000lumen too I found out. What do you think the yield would be on 6 buckets? Rough estimate

that response is hilarious!!

 

[fatigues]

Thanks man, going to give this t5 setup a go. Actually it's 120,000lumen too I found out. What do you think the yield would be on 6 buckets? Rough estimate

For six buckets? DWC or RDWC I presume? 5-10 ozs I think under T5HOs. Quite modest because your light penetration on T5HOs sucks.

Using 880w of PL-L flourescents? You might get about twice that - might be 10-15 oz. That's damned optimistic, to be sure.

I think a 1000watt HPS on a light mover over the same six buckets, for about the same cost, would get you 35 to 70 (even 100 ozs, depending on strain and grower skill and patience). Some might do much better than that adding in CO2.

If you've got grade 2 math under your belt, it's a pretty straightforward choice. But if the heat of a HID is something you don't want? Ok.

 

[CannaCompulsory]

hey ms.info! gotta boner for t5's huh?

hey ms.info! gotta boner for t5's huh?

PL-L lamps would be far more efficient than T5HOs, give you greater lumens per sq. inch and with greater light penetration..That isn't surprising, given that a 96 watt PL-L is, in many respects, a 55w T5HO, bent in half and doubled back on itself in a "U". You can ...

t5h0's first off, dont come in 55w nor 96 watts so im not sure if your trying to compare apples to oranges or what youre doing, but here are actual facts...t5ho lamps last longer(35K hours life opposed to 12K hours life for pl's, 2nd grade math should tell you thats almost triple the lamp life dipshit) have higher cri @ 91(ge,quality brands), MORE efficient than pl's @ 54w per 5000 initial lumans while the pls 55W produces 1000 less initial lumenwith a cri of 81(compare both bulbs @4000k just to be fair)???....

I could go on and on how this post is highly inaccurate, how t5's are actually muuch superior and consistent product than pl-ls dont have any "less penetrating powers".. but the poster seems to disseminate HIS FACTS with such 'assuredness'...well I guess he's entitled to HIS own facts it appears... so as you started your post, pl-l's would be more efficient if we subscribed to your fucked up info

 

[Seed Buyer]

I am testing a bad boy now. I usually use (2) Sun Light Supply New Wave 48 units (864 watts) over a 4x4 for veg. I am testing (1) bad boy (648 watts) over a 4x4 and so far so good. I think t5's are the only way to go for veg. Nothing else creates such tight internodal structure. Sun Light Supply has a new 95 watt per tube t5 setup in the works. Those will be epic!

 

[whatissixbynine]

.

 

[fatigues]

t5h0's first off, dont come in 55w nor 96 watts so im not sure if your trying to compare apples to oranges or what youre doing, but here are actual facts...

Ah. A well reasonsed and polite response I see.

Let me save you some trouble. The efficiency of a lamp from a grower's perspective is not its lumen per watt output or the 10,000 vs 30,000 hours of the bulb (we'll all be ditching those bulbs long before either point is reached).

I could have a 55w 15 foot long tube that puts out the highest lumen per watt of any floursecent on planet earth. Yahoo! Notwithstanding that mind-numbing stat, that lamp is overwhelmingly likely to be, in fact, a piece of crap in comparison to many other bulbs of less lumens per watt when it comes to growing, because it is delivering those lumens over FAR too broad a footprint to be useful.

Efficiency, when measured as a function of bulb length, tells a very different story.

Because the issue that a grower cares about is the delivery of lumens over the length of a given bulb. That's what allows you to deliver lumens to your plants in a meaningful manner with significant intensity. And the lumen output on a T5HO is a little more than half that of a PL-L of equivalent length. This is not surprising, given that a Pl-L is, in fact, essentially a 4 pin plug-in lamp verion of a T5HO bent back on itself in a "U". A Pl-L is literally almost twice the light in the same space.

That's it; from a technical persepctive in terms of usefulness for growing plants, we're done. The rest is just details.

It certainly doesn't hurt that one of those details is that the PL-L is significantly less expensive than a T5HO, too.

This means that the Pl-L delivers far more luminosity and intensity to your plants for less money. A T5HO delivers a little more than half the light intensity, in fact, over the same space.

As for the rest of your ill-informed rant, carry on. Don't let the facts get in the way.

 

[CannaCompulsory]

fatigue:tired of talking out ones ass.

fatigue:tired of talking out ones ass.

.. This is not surprising, given that a Pl-L is, in fact, essentially a 4 pin plug-in lamp verion of a T5HO bent back on itself in a "U". A Pl-L is literally almost twice the light in the same space.
...

As for the rest of your ill-informed rant, carry on. Don't let the facts get in the way...

maybe I can splain it easier. If you bent that 54w t5ho into the shape of the pl-l, it would STILL be chukin out more lumen, for a much longer time. OR a bank of t5's put as close together as a pl-l config, get this, STILL puts out MORE LUMENS and longer. What, the light coming from the pl'l is special more penetrating magical pixie light, right? LUMENS? Pifff!I guess i dont understand what the growers are looking for.
The t5ho bulb doesnt have any optical loss, or heat itself as the U shape does.
Heres a cheapy t5ho and pl-l specs on similar bulbs, t5 still better..also some people use their bulbs until they giveout, and dont just chukem every grow, so if the $2.00 extra maybe for t5 and it goes a couple more grows with no noticeable difference, thats big saving$ also.
Not ranting, not arguing that pl'ls suck, just pointing out the misinformation you were disseminating.

Product Code:S20590Light Output:4800 LumensEnergy Used:55 WattsRated Life:12,000 HoursBase:2G11 (4 pin)Length:21.1 InchesColor Temperature:3000CRI:82Bulb Type:PL-L

Product Code:B519540Light Output:4450 LumensEnergy Used:54 WattsRated Life:20,000 HoursBase:G5 - Miniature BipinLength:45.7 InchesDiameter:.625 InchColor Temperature:3000CRI:85Bulb Type:T5

 

[fatigues]

If you bent that 54w t5ho into the shape of the pl-l, it would STILL be chukin out more lumen, for a much longer time.

No. It wouldn't. Your math needs some work.

Let's look at the specs you quoted:

PL-L

Product Code:S20590Light Output:4800 LumensEnergy Used:55 Watts Rated Life:12,000 HoursBase:2G11 (4 pin)Length:21.1 InchesColor Temperature:3000CRI:82Bulb TypeL-L

T5HO

Product Code:B519540Light Output:4450 LumensEnergy Used:54 WattsRated Life:20,000 HoursBase:G5 - Miniature Bipin Length:45.7 Inches Diameter:.625 InchColor Temperature:3000CRI:85Bulb Type:T5

The Math for a PL-L:

4800/21.1" = 227.5 lumens per inch

The Math for a T5HO:

4450 lumens /45.7" inches = 97.4 lumens per inch

Now let's look at the cost of those lamps.

Cheapest cost of a 4' T5HO online is $7.99. You can get a price break if you buy em in lots of 50.

Cost of a 55w PL-L is $3.40 (lots of 10 - only 2.77)

Even after buying TWO T5HOs, you STILL don't have the same lumens that the one PL-L is delivering over its 2' footprint. You are now delivering 194.8 lumens per inch, and the PL-L delivers more light intensity over its footprint. You spent more than four times as much doing it, too.

Add another PL-L lamp to cover the same space of your four feet occupied by 2x 4' T5HO. You have now spent $15.98 (T5HO) vs. $6.80 (PL-L). You have 700 less lumens in that same 4 foot area if you went with T5HO. The PL-L increased your light intensity at less than half the price, too.

End result: If you want to light four feet and compare two 2T5HO to two 55w Pl-L? You save about $10 bucks per four feet lit, and you increased your lumens by about 8%. You want to light two feet? Same result.

It is no comparison. There is no reason to buy a T5HO. It is an inferior lamp and more than twice the price. There is a reason that the growers on ICM have adopted the PL-L as the flourescent light of choice. T5HO is inferior tech and more expensive, too.

 

[CannaCompulsory]

No. It wouldn't. Your math needs some work...

Even after buying TWO T5HOs, you STILL don't have the same lumens that the one PL-L is delivering over its 2' footprint. You are now delivering 194.8 lumens per inch, and the PL-L delivers more light intensity over its footprint. You spent more than four times as much doing it, too...

I understand your point. But thats an unfair comparison @lumens per inch. As well unfair calling the t5's crap when theyre so similar to the pl-l's...
If you have great results with the PL-L lamp thats great, and I truly wish you continued great results...Im not ARGUING for either one.
If you think the PL-L is the greatest for growing cannabis thats great, but will still not make the technical specs go away, i.e. efficiency, lamp life, CRI, of the the two lamps.

 

[fatigues]

I understand your point. But thats an unfair comparison @lumens per inch. As well unfair calling the t5's crap when theyre so similar to the pl-l's...

No, the lumens per inch is exactly the point when it comes to grow light intensity and light penetration. The economic argument? Pretty hard to doubt that, given the dollar numbers floating around which started this thread initally.

As for calling a T5HO "crap" - I didn't. You want to quote where I did?

Inferior tech and more expensive? Absolutely. As for the T5 Badboy wihch started this thread - it is vastly overpriced.

If you think the PL-L is the greatest for growing cannabis thats great, but will still not make the technical specs go away, i.e. efficiency, lamp life, CRI, of the the two lamps.

No, the greatest bulb for growing Cannabis, all things being equal, would be a Phillips Retro-White 400w CMH. But we are here talking flourescents.

Still. Man-oh-man. I've already shown you it's a less efficient lamp in terms of lumens per watt, watt per inch and any economic scale you care to name.

In terms of duration of the bulb, we are talking about *growing*. Apples to apples, you will be getting about 10,000 hours out of a Phillips PL-L before it dips below 90% efficiency. You'll get 15,000 hours out of Phillips T5HO before it drops below 90%. 50% more bulb life length for more than 200% the price. That's not math that is helping you at all.

As for CRI, you're wrong again. Phillips lists their T5HO with a CRI of 85. The Phillips 55W PL-L is rated as a 90. So apples to apples, if CRI was a measure of anything meaningful, the PL-L is superior.

Except it really isn't anything meaningful once it's above 80. Anything above an 80 is very good. And remember what the CRI is really measuring: how much like an incandescant bulb the light produced by the flouro looks like.

There is no other magic to CRI at high values and the color spectrums the plants need are present in both. And in terms of growth, the proven success of the PL-L speaks for itself.

 

[CannaCompulsory]

In terms of duration of the bulb, we are talking about *growing*. Apples to apples, you will be getting about 10,000 hours out of a Phillips PL-L before it dips below 90% efficiency. You'll get 15,000 hours out of Phillips T5HO...

Actually 95% lumen maintenance for 30,000 hrs.thats the specs on these GE bulbs(EDIT:ACTUALLY <90%"efficiency" still at 22,500hrs)(48"54W) anyway, or at least what the manufacturer claim...
but you seem to keep coming up with data to prove otherwise.
Im wondering what PAR values for t5's compared to Pl-L's and HID for that matter are.
Par is what REALLY matters anyway not necessarily watts per anything, right?
Anybody got a par-o-meter handy?

 

[fatigues]

Actually 95% lumen maintenance for 30,000 hrs.thats the specs on these GE bulbs(EDIT:ACTUALLY <90%"efficiency" still at 22,500hrs)(48"54W) anyway, or at least what the manufacturer claim...
but you seem to keep coming up with data to prove otherwise.

I'll give you that one. I'm too cheap to buy GE

Im wondering what PAR values for t5's compared to Pl-L's and HID for that matter are.
Par is what REALLY matters anyway not necessarily watts per anything, right?
Anybody got a par-o-meter handy?

We're going PAR now?

Well - if we're going to go have a fight about PAR, what's say we call a truce, grab a beer - smoke a spliff - and go beat the crap out of some LED weenies. :friends:

 

[CannaCompulsory]

We're going PAR now?...

smoke a spliff - and go beat the crap out of some LED weenies. :friends:

yea, clearly, i got no where with the watts

...sounds good, or we can get ledgirl high and "borrow" those REALLY expensive led bulbs : )

 

[Maj.Cottonmouth]

Oh my god LED heard you say that and is coming this way,

I agree with fatigues, you want best go with 400w CMH for veg, mininodes is what you will call them.
But I am a hypocrite and I veg under a T5 8 bulb bank and flower under two 400w CMH but in my defense I was duped by city slickers and would never have paid $275 for my Sunleaves T5 bank if I had found ICmag first.

 

[Mist]

Gentleman, Gentleman, if I may use that term loosely. You can argue your "facts" for 20 more pages on this thread and never agree. That is fine, but if you want to proove something lets see some pictures of your "facts" in action. It is like people on here argueing about which brand of HID bulb has the better color spectrum for vegg or flowering. Then you find out that they are growing in a stealth cab with CFL's.
So Fatigues if your home built Pl-L system is badass it would be nice to actually see one in action. Hell, get a cheap light meter and proove your case.
I have a 4' eight bulb T5 over my ebb and flow staging setup and it kicks ass. The large footprint is what I love about it and it is way superior and more efficient than any other floro setup I have ever bought or built. So if you have a better one.......

I personally would love to see the Quantum setup in action too. It would be interesting to see what it would produce with two of them over a 4X8 SOG. I have two Quantum 600's in my 4x9 tent so I know they make a quality product.

 

[Kcar]

T5 Badboy 12 bulbx54w= 648 watts x 88 lumens per W(Grow bulb) = 57,024 lumens
x 93.5 lumens per W(Bloom bulb) = 60,588 lumens

This set-up is roughly comparable to a 400W hps