200$ bucks too spend and torn between led and t5 type

[Cx2H]

 

[TacoMac]

I agree with most everything but the power statement. Watts are watts.
Unless you're in the mystical world of blurple LED's where a 3w led can make 20 million par and cause anyone in the vicinity to shoot sudo full spectrum rainbows out their asses.

600w of T5's = 600w of MH/HPS @ power usage.
But the 600w HPS puts out more lumens per watt than most everything, other than a sexy cob setup. But the heat with MH/HPS is a bitch.

That's true to a point. But if you're doing a small grow, you can do just as well with 300 watts worth of T5, which is half the power usage and cooler than the MH.

Presently, I'm running an old 175 watt MH light growing two plants. I'm running a 6500 K bulb for the veg state (8400 lumens) and will switch to a 4000k HPS bulb (14,400 lumens) for flower when they get there.

Again, it's relative. It depends on what you're doing, how much of it you're doing, and where you're doing it.

 

[TacoMac]

I'm just not Tim the fuckin tool man!

You don't have to be. The most specialized tool you'll need is a pair of tin snips and a drill.(The drill is optional. You can use a hammer, nail and the tin snips for holes if you need to.) You can get a cheap pair for 10 to 15 bucks just about anywhere. Other than that, you'll just need your fingers and a pair of pliers.

 

[VTMi'kmaq]

T

You upgraded? But we're the t5s producing? I'm just starting out. Not a handy guy around the house. (I'm a blue caller guy I don't wanna "work" at home) plus I have very few tools. After waiting on parts and buying tools I would be over budget and out of time.

Honestly, i could care less what anyone claims until ive used it myself. T-5s will grow almost anything .....hands down. Op asked in 200.00 what his best option is. T-5s. He should just try them out himself. Im not getting caught up in the led outshines everything else grabass sessions that can start here. Ive grown indoors since 1998. Know what has worked for me.

 

[TacoMac]

T

Honestly, i could care less what anyone claims until ive used it myself. T-5s will grow almost anything .....hands down. Op asked in 200.00 what his best option is. T-5s. He should just try them out himself. Im not getting caught up in the led outshines everything else grabass sessions that can start here. Ive grown indoors since 1998. Know what has worked for me.

That's true. T5's have been used for everything from reef tank aquariums to live critter terrariums and underground greenhouses for decades.

The only downside to a T5 setup would be a very, very small grow space. Even then, you could build a vertical fixture that would work well.

 

[Bubblin]

@OP
My vote for your 3x4 space plus the $200 cap = T5.
2nd runner up would be an hid setup if you can deal with the heat.

Best option down the road = COB

To construct a fixture like the Galaxyhydro 300, you would spend double what the GH actually sells for. Not only that, but the labor on led custom fixtures is prohibitive. It's simply not worth it when you have much lower cost, easier, more readily available alternatives.

A Galaxyhydro 300 is not a COB. You're talking about building a blurple lol.

Presently, I'm running an old 175 watt MH light growing two plants. I'm running a 6500 K bulb for the veg state (8400 lumens) and will switch to a 4000k HPS bulb (14,400 lumens) for flower when they get there.

4000k hps? And wtf is running at 14,400 lumens.
150w Hps usually rolls out 16000 lumens and it's the least efficient HPS in existence.

 

[mauricem00]

T

Honestly, i could care less what anyone claims until ive used it myself. T-5s will grow almost anything .....hands down. Op asked in 200.00 what his best option is. T-5s. He should just try them out himself. Im not getting caught up in the led outshines everything else grabass sessions that can start here. Ive grown indoors since 1998. Know what has worked for me.

I've been growing with T5s for 4 years and am very happy with them. I use commercial grade tubes like plusrite or eiko and easily get 2 years out of them. many of us who use T5s are happy with them. I feel no need to convince anyone that these are great grow lights. I do not see T5 growers popping up on every thread pushing T5s. we don't need to. quality sells itself.

 

[Uberknot]

you can get that with one cob, pretty easily for 90 bucks, and the efficiency would crush CFL. as would 10 of the A19 1500 lumen bulbs i mentioned ($50-$70)

like he says it can be done with COB's

Seriously do not jump into anything and take your time researching for a couple days.

 

[Olive Drab Green]

Any issues with the vipars? That's one of the big deals with led lack of info out there. The units you have a super new. So it's hard to get a read

Not one single issue. Only reaping benefits.

 

[TacoMac]

@OP
My vote for your 3x4 space plus the $200 cap = T5.

The only concern is that most T5 fixtures (and regular florescent for that matter) are actually 50 to 52 inches long. So you have to have a little more than 4 feet to use the 4 foot bulb.

4000k hps? And wtf is running at 14,400 lumens.
150w Hps usually rolls out 16000 lumens and it's the least efficient HPS in existence.

I use the visual ratings, not the mathematical ones. A 2000k HPS actually looks like a 4000K MH lamp. I always convert everything to how it looks in MH ratings. That's just an old habit going back 30 years.

I also have a very old pulse start light fixture. The 16,000 lumen bulbs are 30 dollars. I can get 14,400 lumen bulbs for 9 dollars. Sort of a no brainer for me.

 

[Uberknot]

Light doesn't work that way. It's not cumulative. If you put two 600 watt fixtures side by side it doesn't give you 1200 watts; all it gives you is larger coverage area (lumens) of 600 watts.

still waiting for your detailed answer about this.

please endulge how the light doesn't stack.and it NOT cumulative.

 

[mauricem00]

The only concern is that most T5 fixtures (and regular florescent for that matter) are actually 50 to 52 inches long. So you have to have a little more than 4 feet to use the 4 foot bulb.




I use the visual ratings, not the mathematical ones. A 2000k HPS actually looks like a 4000K MH lamp. I always convert everything to how it looks in MH ratings. That's just an old habit going back 30 years.

I also have a very old pulse start light fixture. The 16,000 lumen bulbs are 30 dollars. I can get 14,400 lumen bulbs for 9 dollars. Sort of a no brainer for me.

there are many T5 fixtures that are 48 inches long. F54T5ho bulbs are actually only 45.75 inches long. at power levels below 400 watts T5s actually produce higher LPW than MH bulps

 

[TacoMac]

still waiting for your detailed answer about this.

please endulge how the light doesn't stack.and it NOT cumulative.

Sorry. Didn't see your post.

The idea that if you put two lights next to one another, you get a higher wattage of light is wrong. It's the same wattage of light. That never changes. The only difference is the amount of coverage of that light.

The Layman's terms example is the light in the eyes test. If you had a 100 watt light funneled into your left eye, and then you had another 100 watt light funneled into your right eye, you're not seeing 200 watts of light. You're seeing 100 watts with each eye.

Now, does it help? Of course it does. Every light you can add is going to help, but only up to a certain point. Once you reach the maximum coverage in a given area, no amount of that light is ever going to increase your lighting beyond that point.

Example: Say you were growing one plant. You have a single 100 watt CF over it. You add another, then another, then another. You get up to lets say 50 bulbs strategically positioned around the single plant. You do not have 5000 watts of light. You have a great deal of coverage of 100 watts. You could add another 50, but it wouldn't really make things any brighter at that point because you've reached the limit of brightness that any amount of 100 watt coverage can reach within a given area.

But if you were to come along and install 200 watt bulbs in their place, you WILL increase your lighting within the given area because you're adding more power and more lumens to the same area.

 

[Uberknot]

Sorry. Didn't see your post.

The idea that if you put two lights next to one another, you get a higher wattage of light is wrong. It's the same wattage of light. That never changes. The only difference is the amount of coverage of that light.

The Layman's terms example is the light in the eyes test. If you had a 100 watt light funneled into your left eye, and then you had another 100 watt light funneled into your right eye, you're not seeing 200 watts of light. You're seeing 100 watts with each eye.

Now, does it help? Of course it does. Every light you can add is going to help, but only up to a certain point. Once you reach the maximum coverage in a given area, no amount of that light is ever going to increase your lighting beyond that point.

Example: Say you were growing one plant. You have a single 100 watt CF over it. You add another, then another, then another. You get up to lets say 50 bulbs strategically positioned around the single plant. You do not have 5000 watts of light. You have a great deal of coverage of 100 watts. You could add another 50, but it wouldn't really make things any brighter at that point because you've reached the limit of brightness that any amount of 100 watt coverage can reach within a given area.

But if you were to come along and install 200 watt bulbs in their place, you WILL increase your lighting within the given area because you're adding more power and more lumens to the same area.

Ok I misunderstood this part I think.....

"Light doesn't work that way. It's not cumulative. If you put two 600 watt fixtures side by side it doesn't give you 1200 watts; all it gives you is larger coverage area (lumens) of 600 watts."

I know the light is more intense and grows better with 4 cobs than 1 that's how I see it.

 

[Olive Drab Green]

He's wrong. It also increases PAR intensity as the lights overlap, as long as their dispersion patterns overlap along some kind of edge of each.

 

[VTMi'kmaq]

I've been growing with T5s for 4 years and am very happy with them. I use commercial grade tubes like plusrite or eiko and easily get 2 years out of them. many of us who use T5s are happy with them. I feel no need to convince anyone that these are great grow lights. I do not see T5 growers popping up on every thread pushing T5s. we don't need to. quality sells itself.

Lmao right after that post a seagul came down and took a french fry from my hand....lil bastard.......thats karma i tell ya. I do apologize. I forgot how many cats got t-5s rockin at great lvls.

 

[Uberknot]

Lmao right after that post a seagul came down and took a french fry from my hand....lil bastard.......thats karma i tell ya. I do apologize. I forgot how many cats got t-5s rockin at great lvls.

LOL!

 

[Olive Drab Green]

Lmao right after that post a seagul came down and took a french fry from my hand....lil bastard.......thats karma i tell ya. I do apologize. I forgot how many cats got t-5s rockin at great lvls.

You let that little guano factory escape? Should have caught him and fed him healthy fruits and stuff.

 

[Walterwhiter]

@OP
My vote for your 3x4 space plus the $200 cap = T5.
2nd runner up would be an hid setup if you can deal with the heat.

Best option down the road = COB



A Galaxyhydro 300 is not a COB. You're talking about building a blurple lol.



4000k hps? And wtf is running at 14,400 lumens.
150w Hps usually rolls out 16000 lumens and it's the least efficient HPS in existence.

Ya I spent some time out today and I can get a 4 bulb fixture for 89 and 4 bulbs for 10 each 140$ ish with tax 20000 lumens rocking out!

 

[TacoMac]

He's wrong. It also increases PAR intensity as the lights overlap, as long as their dispersion patterns overlap along some kind of edge of each.

Which is exactly what I said. You're adding more coverage (which is what PAR and lumens are) to the mix, but not more wattage. It's simply more effective lighting of that wattage.