Anybody ran a pl-l and been unhappy and gone back to cfl's

[IwannatokeNbone]

Im always looking like you guys are for the best new tech to use. what ive noticed is most peoples cfl buds look better then most peoples pl-l buds, has anybody gotten a pl-l setup in the hopes of it being something better then there cfls set up and decided to go back to the cfls? i know pl-ls put out more lumes per watt but cfls concentrate light in one source more intensely which we know plants luv. thx for the shared wisdom in advance-

 

[el dub]

Go MH and HPS and never look back.

lw

 

[habeeb]

I guess I need a schooling on what PL-L is ???


also I can say, what about the small LED lights? kessil and the 63 watt hydroled

 

[fatigues]

I have never seen CFL buds look "better than" PL-L buds. If that is something that your eye detects -- mine has not. Moreover, I don't think there is any objective basis upon which this could be said to be, fairly stated, a matter of opinion.

And no, I have never read of anyone on ICM who went PL-L and switched back to CFL.

PL-L's ROCK.

 

[Marijuanasaur]

I have never seen CFL buds look "better than" PL-L buds. If that is something that your eye detects -- mine has not. Moreover, I don't think there is any objective basis upon which this could be said to be, fairly stated, a matter of opinion.

And no, I have never read of anyone on ICM who went PL-L and switched back to CFL.

PL-L's ROCK.

Yeah, what he said. In my findings, there is little competition between them, the PLLs are just better by design. Better ballast efficiency and the light shines outwards from the bulb and isn't blocked as much by the coil shape of the CFL.


Just go look at a few of the PLL threads. People like ScrubNinja are doing great with them.

 

[IwannatokeNbone]

when i get an extra 80+ bones ill probally get one from htg. they do look amazing

 

[superpedro]

Nope, IMO pl-l's and ordinary t5 are superior to other fluoro light sources.

 

[fatigues]

when i get an extra 80+ bones ill probally get one from htg. they do look amazing

Grab a Fulham Workhorse 8 and 4x4100k 55w lamps from 1000bulbs.com. Order 4 x 2g11 sockets from a local lighting supply shop for about $8.00. Wiring is brain dead easy -- and it goes where you want it.

The total cost for a 4x55w PL-L setup is about $65.00. That's twice the light of an HTG fixture, too.

If you want to add mirro reflectors to that? You can grab those from here if you like.

HTG does sell 2x 6500k 55w lamps for about $16. That's a good price and a good deal. Thing is, the spectrum profile from Pl-L triphosphors is very balanced and what they call a "4100k" lamp has a whole lot of other colors in its spectrum. That cheap-ass 4100k lamp will do you just fine for both veg and flower. (Really, I promise.)

Otherwise, I would recommend making your own fixture and not buying the HTG fixture. You can get twice the light for the same cost if you DIY. And your setup will work very well.

General rule of thumb? 1x55w lamp = 1 oz of dried weed per harvest.

Figure out how much weed you need per harvest, do the math and buy your PL-L gear - crack a few seeds and have some fun.

 

[weedobix]

I use PL-L for veg and tbh get far better results using 440w of pl-l than i do with 400w of mh. For me though i would imagine its to do with the awesome spread and coverage you can get with a bunch of pl-l units. I wouldn't go back, it's the best vegger i've ever used, giving stocky plants with little to no stretch between nodes and fast growth.

 

[feral]

Agree.
I use PLL myself and have the HTG Supply unit, only because I don't trust myself when it comes to DYI electricity matters.
With that said, I'm happy with it. If your growing for personal use and don't smoke like a chimney you'll be fine.
Check out the grows esp. Garuda. Dude is rockin 110 watts of PLL with Original Haze.
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=180550

 

[420ish]

been using pll's for a few years now in veg and love them!40 bucks for a ballast 8 to 12 bucks for for 4 sockets and buy the 4100 cheapo bulbs.1000bulbs.com has everything you need and home depot or lowes has 1 by 4 lumber to make the frame.buy a 10 foot section of cheap gutter and coat with silver tape for a reflector.if 1000bulbs doesnt have the sockets online call them and ask i just got some from them.good luck!

 

[staff11]

Just about any light source will work in veg.... CFL's work fine. Flowering with low intensity light though not a big fan.

 

[StealthDragon]

Go MH and HPS and never look back.

I've "gone" hps, cmh, mh, led, and ccfl and I still look back all the time. Everyday actually. IMVHO cfl quality can't be beat whether it's plls or cfls, but I prefer plls.

 

[420ish]

I've "gone" hps, cmh, mh, led, and ccfl and I still look back all the time. Everyday actually. IMVHO cfl quality can't be beat whether it's plls or cfls, but I prefer plls.

i have done the same thing and am going back to plls for a new flower cabinet.i think the buds are way more crystally under any kind of t5 be it pll or regular t5.it is much easier to control heat in limited grow space with pll then with hps.i have been battling heat with my 600 aircooled hps and never had problems in same space with t5.if you want to grow trees these are not the way to go but for 3 foot and under plants i love them.

 

[H&L]

If I were looking for stealth, I would cool tube a small hps. A 150 watter from HTG is $69, remote ballasted. I have grown with hid's, cfl's, t12's, t8's, and t5's. T5 offers quite a bit more light per lamp than other flourescents and is always better with proper ventilation in my opinion. CFL's run a bit hot for my liking but I still use them. Just wouldn't want to use more than a couple bulbs at a time.

It's a lot easier for me to cool one 150 watt hps bulb than to cool five ballast-attached 42 watt cfl's and the return is better.

And while flourescents provide great smoke, I hardly agree that it actually produces better quality. And I have flowered quite a few plants with both through the years.

 

[IwannatokeNbone]

yeah ive noticed for a long looooooooong time that cfls' floros and pl-ls produce more resiounous buds, hid guys HATe to hear that but evidence doesnt lie. the hps(street light) spectrum is for shit, swollen puffy strecthy hay, mh im impressed with though. imo an hps witout added blue light is foolish and enhanced hps bulbs put there max lumen outpoot in green, then yellow. two largely useless spectrums for plants, yeild of green base matter however cant be beat.

 

[Shred42O]

wow you must know nothing about the different bulbs made with a fuller spectrum and to call all bud grow with a hps "swollen puffy strecthy hay" is just ignorance cfl's and pl-ls can not penetrate nearly as well as hps

 

[fatigues]

I honestly don't think this is true in even most cases and there is precious little evidence of it. If any bulb has a claim to superior resin production, it is probably CMH. Even then, it's a rather dubious claim.

I'm not saying HPS resin production is better than PL-L or CFL or CMH. I'm saying it isn't clear that there is a clear winner between any of these lamps in terms of resin production.

I do think it is true that most photographs of flowering plants under HPS are inherently unattractive; however, this is a matter of appeal to the human eye, more than it is any attribute of the spectrum of HPS.

I'm not saying that you are necessarily wrong; but there has been no scientific study that would support this conclusion. For as many anecdotes to support it, there are at least as many anecdotes that go the other way, too. In the end, anecdotes aren't worth very much at all.

So, if you wish to believe it to be true -- by all means -- go right ahead.

That said, there's a difference between a fact and an opinion. This conclusion falls into one of "opinion", and not "fact", in my estimation.

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, imo. Those making superior claims of the HPS are similarly undeserved. There is no doubt that overall yield under 1k HPS is higher. Then again, would you make the same claim if there was a 1kCMH bulb available? I'd think not. 400w HPS vx. 400w CMH favors the CMH in most cases, overall.

What does it matter, really? The initial question was CFL vs. PL-L. In that case, the overall yield for PL-L is clearly ahead of CFL for reasons of efficiency. Moreover, the heat produced by a PL-L is significantly less. It's easier to keep your cab cool with a PL-L and grow more bud. No brainer, imo.

 

[IwannatokeNbone]

hps has no blue light, what dont u get? your missing crucial wavelengths, read the forums, the bud under mh bulbs is always tigher n more oily then the ones next to the hps. be it my past mh grow or my outdoor runs, when u get uv light on your girls the high is stronger n more complex. hasnt anybody noticed how all the bud back in the 90's was way more oily then today? todays erb is largely salt parched over fed empty green matter grown under street lamps, people used to run more metal halides back in the day much more.

 

[IwannatokeNbone]

congradulations calitrichs, u just made my ignore list, new member with nothing to add but negativity, u just pm'd me telling me im an idiot, now this, one insult wasnt enough, lmao, bu bye youll be missed but not really-


shred- i described your ''enhanced bulbs'', tiny little spike in blue(not enough) and instead of maxing in yellow they max in green, look at a hortilux bulb, your paying mostly for green, then yellow, then orange n red lastly with a little blue, sure it might help but its wastefull n way overpriced for u hobbyist out there-