HID vs CFL debate finally OVER!!!

[greenhead]

For a micro space it's a waste of money when you consider if your 1 150w bulbs goes out you have to buy a new one and your garden suffers from a fucked up light cycle.d

You're arguing something that is a hypothetical.

I've completed 6 grows and not once has a 150 HPS bulb died. I've switched it out once, but not because it was dead.

On the other hand, I've had about 10 fucking CFL's die during those 6 grows. I am speaking from reality and experience, not a hypothetical "what if" situation.

 

[JacuzziSplot]

Its ridiculous the way you guys are attacking Thundurkel in his own thread. His only agenda seems to be you dont need to spend $1000 on lights and fans to start growing good quality pot.

It seems to me you all are just not willing to accept some of the money you guys spent on your grows was overkill. His testing methodology might be flawed but how many of us have marijuana research labs. He is just a regular guy showing photo evidence of his work and answering questions on his techniques. You guys are picking apart his thread like he is submitting this to nature scientific journal. Do I need an editor and lawyer to post on IC mag now?

And in conclusion Pics or it didnt happen

 

[Castelvetro]

what are u talking about??? a 150 hps is 70$ dollars brand new? a 250 117$, a 400 119$.
were do u get your numbers-


theres so much dork pride on theese forums, if u guys werent doing this youd be building remote controll cars and arguing over battery chargers.

beleive me im the ultimate cheepo so i do respect were the fear of 1000s of dollars is coming from, but ask first dont assume.

 

[3dDream]

Is there really any debate? This is a retarded thread in my opinion, and the threadstarter clearly has an agenda, just based on the silly title of the thread.

We all have an agenda. I think the whole cfl vs hps debate is to justify the whatever side of the line you are on.

How about we stop drawing lines between each other and just grow?

 

[greenhead]

Its ridiculous the way you guys are attacking Thundurkel in his own thread.

He invited the criticism, by making a pretty bold statement, declaring - the debate finally over!

And I'm not attacking him personally, his buds in his little red cups in his other thread look pretty good. Good weed can be grown under almost any lights, that is not what is being debated here.

 

[greenhead]

How about we stop drawing lines between each other and just grow?

Sure, I can agree with that. As long as somebody is growing their own weed, and they're happy with it, then that's really all that counts in the end.

 

[JacuzziSplot]

well first off we are in micro forum so I am talking about stealth grows. It costs about $20 per light for 42 watt cfl bulb and base. You can buy 2 for $40 or 6 (252w) for $120 and shop at home depot or walmart. I had 4 42 watt and 2 23 watt cfls at one point and I cooled the cab with an $80 S&P 100x in an air conditioned bedroom. This was an upgrade from 2 free 80mm pc fans when I added 2 more 42w cfls and a carbon filter(diy about $50). here it cost me $80 to get started minus seeds, nutes, and growing medium. and all in it cost me about $250-$300 over a year to reach 214 watts and carbon scrubbed growing.

I have a 250 hps and it cost $120 for the ballast $20 for the cheapo bulb. I had to pay that all at once. had to buy a second $90 fan(s&p 125) in edition to my $80 (s&p 100x). Had I used one bigger I feel stealth would be gone and would save me maybe $30. I also still needed a reflector now to make sure the ends get light as well. I chose a $90 cooltube for temp control. so here it cost me $450 if I include my diy carbon scrubber just to get started using a 250w hps setup.

 

[Anti]

Lumens is pretty fucking important in a grow.

Let's say somebody has 6 - 40 watt CFL bulbs (240 watts) - total lumens would be about (6 x 2600) = about 15600 lumens

And let's compare that to a 250 watt HPS = about 30000 lumens

My flowering chamber uses 252 watts of CFLs. Total lumen as stated is (6x2800) = 16,800. Which is not a huge difference, but is much closer for a watt-by-watt comparison. (Mine errs on the side of CFL by 2 watts whereas yours erred on the side of HPS by 10 watts.)

Electricity is pretty expensive in a lot of areas.

Why would somebody want to pay the same cost in electricity and only get half of the lumens that they could be getting?

Well, lets think about this for a moment, shall we?

your 15600 of CFL lumen can be an inch from the tops of your plants (and evenly distributed over entire region, with mixed spectrums...) which means that the top ELEVEN INCHES of your plant is within that 15600 footprint. The parts of the plant more than a foot below the light are only receiving 3900 lumen/sqft.

Now, with the HPS, how close are you getting to plant tops? How much of your plant is within that 12" space between the bulb and the plant? Because after that first 12" that 30,000 figure drops off to 7500 and more of your plant will be in this range or below with an average HID. And it's all from one source... Plants on the edge of your grow are getting less.

In a small grow, especially a perpetual SOG setup, CFL makes a lot of sense.

 

[Castelvetro]

funny how the inverse square law doesnt work the same for clfs?

most people dont understand the inverse square and how it works, as how can u sqaure something till it hits zero when all u have to do is raise the light up again lets say for arguement another 5 ft, my point if u dont already feel me is after 7500 lumes is acheived as u say from a foot away what happens after 4 ft away? negitve 2000 lumens? neg 5000 lumens. nobody gets the inverse sqaure law and how it works. my plants 3ft from 150 blow away my plants practically touching my clfs. lets not get carried away. there is no winner, the threads title is for someone overzealous not its contributors. just dont think your cfls are cooler or that they produce the same weight is all. after that make your choice.

 

[MrBomDiggitty]

Okay, here is a bright idea. Instead of buying one bulb (400w HPS is #20 at my local store) and waiting for it to blow out, why not buy TWO bulbs so as soon as your bulb blows out, you change it. *gasp*

I feel like I _WASTED_ money on CFLs. The only thing I didn't feel was a waste was all the stuff I had already bought that I could use _with_ my new 400w HPS setup which cost me less than $400 with my vortex fan, ballast, hood, etc.

I easily spent close to $400 on my CFL set up, but that included stuff that I could use for my HPS set up.

Now I got all this CFL stuff laying around I don't even need.

Waste of money.


er, let me edit that. Not waste of money. Waste of time. I got my smokes worth from my investment, but I don't like hunching over and adjust plants so they are close to the lights all the time. Maybe its just how my cab was designed, but I'm much happier working with bigger lights in bigger spaces.

 

[Green Smoke]

I always believed DrBud when he stated that CFLs could produce fully developed buds equal to a main branch of a bush grown under HID. A lot of folks don't think it's true or say they just don't see resin like they do with HID on CFL plants ect

Non believers, DrBud haters, and Thunder haters will always try to turn the debate towards yield and heat so that they don't have to adress the real point of this thread. No one has EVER stated that cfl's are better than HID, it was never the point. The point is that cfl's can and do grow buds that are just as dense and frosty as those grown under HID. Not as many, but the ones they do grow are just as good. Thunder acknowledges this here;

So there ya have it, can CFLs yield like HID not really but can they produce fully developed dense nugs fully of resin as big as the main top of a HID grow plant yes! So grow on Micro guys I'll be keeping my perpetual cab going but I am hooked on the yield I can get with my HID system....

Sorry trolls, but the debate over whether or not cfl's can produce fully developed dense frosty nugs IS over. Frankly, it has been for some time now. Micro growers are posting the evidence every day.

Thunder is right, it's time to close this thread.

 

[Castelvetro]

Non believers, DrBud haters, and Thunder haters will always try to turn the debate towards yield and heat so that they don't have to adress the real point of this thread. No one has EVER stated that cfl's are better than HID, it was never the point. The point is that cfl's can and do grow buds that are just as dense and frosty as those grown under HID. Not as many, but the ones they do grow are just as good. Thunder acknowledges this here;



Sorry trolls, but the debate over whether or not cfl's can produce fully developed dense frosty nugs IS over. Frankly, it has been for some time now. Micro growers are posting the evidence every day.

Thunder is right, it's time to close this thread.

whos hating, thats a pretty strong word, but like i said cfl are the napolean of growers, way to much micro pride to actually listen n remain equanimous. to my knowlege t-8s have been producing bomb weed forever, do i hate them too. how many times do trolls have to hear that cfls produce good nugs before they can feel good about themselves.. i mean bravo!!! the debate is finally over for the 59th time and 64th thread, cfls actually work!! i know someone will read the thread n realize they arent cooler and make a descicion from there, thats all i really care about-

 

[MrBomDiggitty]

Dude. What is the deal with you always trying to say "well CFLs produce buds just as good. I grew with CFLs for a year and they are just as good if not better than the buds I just grew with HID lighting for the first time."

No one ever said you cant grow decent, or even good, or maybe even some of the best with CFLs.

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CFLs.

It has to do with a light source supplied to a well nourished GREAT STRAIN of cannabis.

If nothing else, strain is #1.

Your CFLs are just some light bulbs.

You want to spend 10 bucks a bulb for 5 42w CFLs, totalling to $50?

or do you want to pay $20 for 1 400w bulb?

do you want to water plants every day to have an ounce after 2-3 months?

or do you want to water plants every day and have 8 ounces after 2-3 months?

Whatever, its up to you. Just do it, be happy.

This is a public forum. If you post some nonsense, you'll know about it.

Go back to your troll hunting Green Smoke.

I'm sure you'll catch one, one day.

 

[MrBomDiggitty]

i know someone will read the thread n realize they arent cooler and make a descicion from there, thats all i really care about-

:yay:

 

[Green Smoke]

Sure enough caught you two, now for the second time BACK, BACK I TELL YOU! GET THE HELL BACK UNDER YOUR BRIDGE!

 

[MrBomDiggitty]

Most trolls are green. Perhaps you should be back under your bridge!

 

[greenhead]

Most trolls are green. Perhaps you should be back under your bridge!

Hey now, let's not discriminate against all greenies.

 

[Green Smoke]

Lol, is that the best you can do? You offer no pics, no evidence, nothing that can disclaim what thunder and other micro growers have proven. Yet you continualy show up and try to debunk cfl's, and you take cheap shots at thunder. Sorry buster, but that's trolling.

 

[FreezerBoy]

please close thread

Since you asked, you got it.