Vermonster
Active member
i used large compact floros i think 65 watt to grow 4 nice Blueberry plans in my closet....not the best but def worked ok.....jhust bought the contractor socket set from HD and string two of em up.....
Feelings on CFLs?
- Thread starter AChemicalMind
- Start date
rafterman
Member
I've used CFL's, MH's and HPS at various stages.
CFL's are good for seedlings until they reach a couple of nodes tall and for clones until they become well rooted.
No doubt you can veg and flower with CFL's. I did that with one
big 125W and two or three supporting 42W CFL's on 3 or 4 clones
on a previous grow just out of curiosity.
I intentionally kept them small and got probably a quarter or less of the yield that I did off the same plants that I flowered under a 430W hps.
The bud was fine off the CFL's just got a lower yield.
Nothing wrong with CFL's and they suit a small stealth grow fine but HID gives more yield if you've got the space and secure location IMHO.
CFL's are good for seedlings until they reach a couple of nodes tall and for clones until they become well rooted.
No doubt you can veg and flower with CFL's. I did that with one
big 125W and two or three supporting 42W CFL's on 3 or 4 clones
on a previous grow just out of curiosity.
I intentionally kept them small and got probably a quarter or less of the yield that I did off the same plants that I flowered under a 430W hps.
The bud was fine off the CFL's just got a lower yield.
Nothing wrong with CFL's and they suit a small stealth grow fine but HID gives more yield if you've got the space and secure location IMHO.
myself, i grew under CFL's for about 2 years before upgrading
to HPS for flowering and i only did that because i was moving
and losing my nice big closet, which meant i had to build
a cab to flower in.
i picked up the cab at a local Sally for $50.00 and 2x 150HPS
Vapor Tights for $20.00 each before they were discontinued.
anyway, all that isn't relevant here, i only mention it so folks
will know i've grown using both.
now, CFL's work wonderfully, for vegging and flowering,
producing equal quality buds, just not as much of it.
the advantages to using CFL's are many, the first being
cost, you can find 23 and 26 watters, in various spectra,
in 3 and 4 packs for under $10.00, hell, if you really shop
around you can end up paying a buck a bulb.
also, with CFL's you have the ability to really tweak your
spectra, adding some far reds and blues to attempt to
duplicate sunlight.
as to heat, well, the fact is that CFL's actually run a bit
hotter than HPS, they seem cooler because rather than
all the heat coming from 1 source the heat is spread evenly
over the canopy which makes it much, much easier to
deal with.
recently, i discovered PLL lighting which is really just a
different style of CFL that is far superior to the standard
bulbs, first and foremost because they are remote ballasted,
and then because they are u shaped, think T5 but folded
over into a u.
sorry for the verbal diarhea but i've not had internet for
almost a freekin year so i guess i'm making up for lost time, lol.
anyway, if you want to check out a grow thread using PLL's only this one is one of the best.
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=163229&highlight=pll
...oh yeah, here is a pic of my clone box where you can
see one of my pll bulbs, there are 3 down below in the
vegging area and one above, all 55watters for a total of
220watts, ballast outside the grow area.
to HPS for flowering and i only did that because i was moving
and losing my nice big closet, which meant i had to build
a cab to flower in.
i picked up the cab at a local Sally for $50.00 and 2x 150HPS
Vapor Tights for $20.00 each before they were discontinued.
anyway, all that isn't relevant here, i only mention it so folks
will know i've grown using both.
now, CFL's work wonderfully, for vegging and flowering,
producing equal quality buds, just not as much of it.
the advantages to using CFL's are many, the first being
cost, you can find 23 and 26 watters, in various spectra,
in 3 and 4 packs for under $10.00, hell, if you really shop
around you can end up paying a buck a bulb.
also, with CFL's you have the ability to really tweak your
spectra, adding some far reds and blues to attempt to
duplicate sunlight.
as to heat, well, the fact is that CFL's actually run a bit
hotter than HPS, they seem cooler because rather than
all the heat coming from 1 source the heat is spread evenly
over the canopy which makes it much, much easier to
deal with.
recently, i discovered PLL lighting which is really just a
different style of CFL that is far superior to the standard
bulbs, first and foremost because they are remote ballasted,
and then because they are u shaped, think T5 but folded
over into a u.
sorry for the verbal diarhea but i've not had internet for
almost a freekin year so i guess i'm making up for lost time, lol.
anyway, if you want to check out a grow thread using PLL's only this one is one of the best.
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=163229&highlight=pll
...oh yeah, here is a pic of my clone box where you can
see one of my pll bulbs, there are 3 down below in the
vegging area and one above, all 55watters for a total of
220watts, ballast outside the grow area.
IwannatokeNbone
Member
i just read someone say there seventy watt hps vegged way better then there cfls, all i know is my previous attempt with a hps for seedlings n early veg were totally disapointing, to much strech, plants were unhappy untill i added a blue cfl to them, perked right up. im have no idea how differant strains respond during seedlings to red or blue lighting, just what ive experienced
ive experienced the same as you, i use cfls to start seedlings then move them to hps a week or so later. i dont do seeds often mind, most of the time it would be a clone coming from just being rooted under cfl and then being put under the hps and then being lst'd and veg'ed into a bush, which is where the hps will make it a bush faster.
Daffy
Member
cfls work just have to keep them close about 1" away and you will have strong growth, past 6" is where it starts to get tricky.A flat canopy w/o any/barely any shaded growth is key. As long as you keep them within 1" then you will have great results. They work great for micro grows because there aren't any HIDs under 100w that have better intensity. Like justanotherbozo said they produce more heat so if you are going past 100w then you might consider HIDs for better light intensity for less heat. As far as spectrum goes,the ratio of lumens/par lumens is 5% better for cfls so if you going to use solely MH or HPS then you should compliment the spectrum with cfls and buy a HID bulb that has a better spectrum. You also might want to check out CMHs which are even better I've heard.With a 400w HID, the light intensity is strong enough that even if the plant are 2' then they will get the same light as a CFL at 1". My MH and HPS are about about 3"-18" away. My CFLs were about 2" which was fine for veg and flowering simply less yield. In case you are wondering I used 14 26w CFLs for a box that was 69" x 18.5" x 25.5" so that is 1276.5" square and another 2' vertically. A square meter is 1296" square. I used both 3500K and 5000K. There is a difference between the two, the HID yields the 1g/w and the CFLs don't.
for the most part, the highest lumen output i've been able to find is about 67 lumens per watt for a cfl
i do see one odd exception
GE has this 29w cfl, that does 75 lumens per watt, that's the highest i've seen
sadly, this bulb has a bizarre price tag, $55 per bulb over on 1000bulbs.com
i do see one odd exception
GE has this 29w cfl, that does 75 lumens per watt, that's the highest i've seen
sadly, this bulb has a bizarre price tag, $55 per bulb over on 1000bulbs.com
heres my 2 cents after running 250w red (ecolight) CFL for flowering... the bumpf would have you beleive that this is equivelant lumen output to a minimum of 750w.
However, I'm not the least bit interested in science/effciency or any of that crap UNLESS it equates to yield....
And so the results...
9 plants in 12 liter pots under 2 x 125 w eco lights (for better footprint) = approx 10g per plant (plant was 12-18inches at flip)
I wasnt happy with that so the CFL came out and 1 x 600w HPS went in..
9 pots (same strains/cuts) in 12 liter pots under 600w HPS = approx 45g per plant. (same veg time - 12-18 inches pre flip)
I would state that the only change made was to swap out CFL for HPS, the rest of the environment/area was completely unchanged.
my thoughts are that whilst I love using CFL for vegging, I can't say the same about flowering. IF I were stuck and that was all I had, yes I would go for it... otherwise I would try everything I could think of to get a high powered lamp in there....
best of luck in any case
j
However, I'm not the least bit interested in science/effciency or any of that crap UNLESS it equates to yield....
And so the results...
9 plants in 12 liter pots under 2 x 125 w eco lights (for better footprint) = approx 10g per plant (plant was 12-18inches at flip)
I wasnt happy with that so the CFL came out and 1 x 600w HPS went in..
9 pots (same strains/cuts) in 12 liter pots under 600w HPS = approx 45g per plant. (same veg time - 12-18 inches pre flip)
I would state that the only change made was to swap out CFL for HPS, the rest of the environment/area was completely unchanged.
my thoughts are that whilst I love using CFL for vegging, I can't say the same about flowering. IF I were stuck and that was all I had, yes I would go for it... otherwise I would try everything I could think of to get a high powered lamp in there....
best of luck in any case
j
i dont understand what you mean by this
Vegging yes flowering no, the light from cfls doe's not penetrate the canopy. I start my plants under standard flourscent gro-lux tubes ,on the top shelf of my cab when they are about 4'tall in beer cups or yogurt containers, I move them to the bottom shelf which is three 40 watt Sylvania warm whites and three 28 watt Sylvania Daylights under a reflector I made from roof flashing , I use upside down 1 gallon pots to support the trays and keep the plants about 2"from the lights. I water and feed by flooding the trays, but after the plants reach about a foot in hieght the have to go under an hps for flowering or out under the sun( after hardening of in a cold frame or green house) or under a tree if those options are unavailable. It is my experience that the sun will give you the tastiest densest buds. I would also say that cfls are superior to Hps for vegging and give you nice compact plants w/ tight internodes.
Daffy
Member
There are 30w, 50w, 70w, 100w, 150w, 250w, etc. HID bulbs and similar wattaged CFLs but the HID <100w are less efficient as far as input wattage converted to PAR lumens. For example a 26w CFL(3500K) has 1750 visible lumens, 30% are PAR, so 525 PAR lumens times 4 bulbs is 2100 PAR lumens/104watts = 20.19 PAR lumens/w. With four CFLs you also have four source points which has better light penetration than 1 or 2 source points. Now consider the 100w MH, 9000 lumens at start with a PAR efficiency of .25, 9000*.25=2250 PAR Lumens/100w = 22.5 PAR. Alternatively you could try 1 50w MH and a 50w HPS together with a cool tube but in this scenario with such low wattage the cfls would be cheaper and more efficient however as you increase the wattage past 100w then the better option becomes HIDs. For instance a 416w of 26w CFLs still has a PAR lumen/watt ration of 20.19 however a 400w MH produces 60000 lumens * .25 = 12500 PAR lumens/400watts = 31.25. So put those two numbers together in a ratio 400w CFL:400w MH and we have an efficiency comparison of 20.19/31.25 = 0.64608. I'm not going to analyze the other bulbs because you all have the internet and can go look around for the rated lumens. You might also want to check out the CMHs because they blow other grow lights out of the water according to the little unreadable PAR charts I've seen comparing regular HIDs to CMHs. Now to put things into perspective the 400w MH has the best output/wattage for HIDs and 26w CFL has the best output/wattage for fluorescents. So if you are going to use less than 100w use CFLs or if you don't plan on using dual spectrums then you should probably consider the benefits of spectral supplementation easily done with a couple of 26 watters. Hope this answers your question.
Have to disagree with your first sentence Dr Psycho. CFL do a great job flowering. I'm only small scale but i got a 300w dual spectrum CFL over 3sq foot and get light penetrating 18". I've just done two bag seed to get me grow dialed in and was more than impressed. For a small closet grow CFL are a sound option and the dual spectrum give compact plants. I also mounted a 120mm PC fan off the reflector blowing onto the bulb so I can get the light within an inch if needed....but I don't need to. I keep the light to about 3". I also got a decent reflector for flowering so i don't loose much light.
Check out my bag seed grow from the link in sig.
Check out my bag seed grow from the link in sig.
whoops, didn't want to put you through all the work posting that
more or less, that's what i had i mind when i put up that example
for us micro growers in the sub 100w range, cfl's are a pretty good choice
but thanks for the hard values on the PAR
hate to muddy the waters, but all cfl's are not the same in spectrum
the kelvin numbers are reasonable approximations, but fluorescents do not generate light in the 'black body' model
each manufacturer has their own phosphor recipe, with corresponding spectrum mixtures
i've seen some analysis from a few advanced growers here and there, that argue for better results from certain brands
S
Stinktoe
IwannatokeNbone
Member
maybe you need to check my thread..HPS all the way.! lowest quality..lol millions of people must have it all wrong..its what you know..not for which bulb you use to grow! cfl and hps and even MH all produce top notch Nugs.!
i agree with the cfs n mh producing top notch nugs, not the hps, just top notch size. and the blue enhanced bulbs put out most of the 17 percent increase in useless green, with a touch of blue, leaving u with yellow mostly and a little orange n even lesser reds, its the bulb for swollen diet resin buds
C
cannabislover
deleted
F
feral
This Mandala #1 was done with 125 watts of cfl's all the way through:
has for the blue light I have done test and it's true. I use strictly PLL's now at 6400 spectrum and notice my buds are WAY frostier than under the redder end. Fiqure with the blue side your closer to the UV spectrum which will cause the plant to frost up more to protect the bud.
such as this: Mandala #1 at 5 weeks or so.
The proof is in the pudding. If you want big yields, then no cfl's suck, but they do grow great weed once you get your system dialed in. In a micro grow doing a scrog,etc. cfl's/t-5's/PLL's can't be touched. You can get those bad boys almost dead on top of the girls, save electric, etc.
BUT FIND WHAT WORKS FOR YOU!!!! What may work for me doesn't mean it's going to work for everyone else. Experiment and don't let others tell you what can and can't work when they may have never tried, or they did try but it wasn't for their style of growing.
has for the blue light I have done test and it's true. I use strictly PLL's now at 6400 spectrum and notice my buds are WAY frostier than under the redder end. Fiqure with the blue side your closer to the UV spectrum which will cause the plant to frost up more to protect the bud.
such as this: Mandala #1 at 5 weeks or so.
The proof is in the pudding. If you want big yields, then no cfl's suck, but they do grow great weed once you get your system dialed in. In a micro grow doing a scrog,etc. cfl's/t-5's/PLL's can't be touched. You can get those bad boys almost dead on top of the girls, save electric, etc.
BUT FIND WHAT WORKS FOR YOU!!!! What may work for me doesn't mean it's going to work for everyone else. Experiment and don't let others tell you what can and can't work when they may have never tried, or they did try but it wasn't for their style of growing.
so 500w of cfl and you got 7oz, if you used a 250w hps.. you could have got the same 7oz for half the total wattage. goes to show how inefficient cfls can be :/
