1000w cool tube hanging vertical down the middle and 2x400s on top or vice versa?

Well guys, the title says it all, would you care to weigh in? I'm thinking about doing it like in the title, but the guy at the hydro store told me I should put my 1000 watter on top and my 400 watter down the middle, to utilize the main colas on top, but wouldn't the main colas all grow towards the best area for light, as in towards the 1000 watter?
Or would the penetrating power of the 1k be better used on top?

77 views and no replys? I take it nobody has experimented with side or vertical lighting? I must be doing it wrong

put all the lights you want to use on top, if you go with your idea you probably will lose yield. all lights on top and prune all lower growth

yesGrowingPassionyes said:

put all the lights you want to use on top, if you go with your idea you probably will lose yield. all lights on top and prune all lower growth

Click to expand...

And may I ask why you would say this?

Vertical produces some serious yields.
I'd do the 1000 on top and the 400's vert mainly because you can let the plants hit the glass on the tube with the 400's given good airflow through the tube.............but yeah should produce seriously if you can handle the heat.

The room layout should determine the light layout. If you are growing in a circle room or just have your lights in a circle, then vertical will work for you, otherwise just get a hood and put them above like the rest of us do.
Not a whole lot of layouts lend themselves to the vertical set up, can be better production per watt, but IMO you lose yield per square foot due to the forced layout.

onephate91 said:

And may I ask why you would say this?

Click to expand...

if i understand correctly he wants to put 800w oh HID under the plants??.. i would use soo much light, i dont think the under leaves can absorb that much. plus the heat produce with the hid lights will be too much even with cool tubes, hot air goes up.. you dont want hot air under the plants making its way up the canopy... i hope you understand me dude... im just cant explain my self hahaha...

yesGrowingPassionyes said:

if i understand correctly he wants to put 800w oh HID under the plants??.. i would use soo much light, i dont think the under leaves can absorb that much. plus the heat produce with the hid lights will be too much even with cool tubes, hot air goes up.. you dont want hot air under the plants making its way up the canopy... i hope you understand me dude... im just cant explain my self hahaha...

Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, but I do not mean to put them under the plants, sort of next to the upper portion of the plants.

like on the sides? yeah side lighting would be perfect.

very interesting question. i also would like to increase yield from lower parts. but not with either of those suggestions. i am thinking of using red spectrum cfl, maybe 2x300w.. any thoughts? less heat???

the 125cfl bulbs work perfect for lower growth, they sell them on 2700k spec. i used them before and i got no popcorn nugs.

im talking about the 125w real cfl not the 125w equivalent. i dont use them anymore, i think its easier to lolly pop the plants and get all big nugs on top.

I would put the 1000w vertically and the 2 400s up top - preferably on a spinner (you can get just 2 bulb versions)



You are looking for maximum light use as well as maximum growing surface area. If you have a 1kW bulb hanging vertically and lets say your plants are 5' tall and 2' from your bulb. That's 4*Pi*5 = 62.8 sq ft of vertical canopy + the horizontal canopy up top.

With the 1kW up top you cover a 4x4 area - 16sq ft of canopy up top and if the plants are 1' from the 400s another ~20 sq feet of vertical surface area within the 4x4. That's a ton less area exposed to direct light and also prevents you from expanding much past 4x4 which means you can't run very large or bushy plants as there would be little room for the 400's.

yeah im not too confident lollypopping, going to leave my next girls whole so to speak, untrimmed etc. my point is that after the burst of growth in the early flwoer stage, the girls wont benefit from a blue spectrum cfl, (as is in my nursery), but a red spectrum 300w cfl bulb is an alternative to flowering under 300w hps. but a lot less heat ?? what dya think.

put all the lights you want to use on top, if you go with your idea you probably will lose yield. all lights on top and prune all lower growth

Click to expand...

Ok, please do not do this.
Fun fact about lower growth: if you keep it healthy and give it sufficient light, your top growth grows as it would if you pruned the bottom, AND you get a substantial yield from your bottom growth, not just a bunch of popcorn nugs. Pruning the bottom makes you lose out on 30% of your possible yield... bummer!
You're right in thinking that the plant will grow towards the light source, and you should plan for this. Are you going to circle your plants around the 1k hps and put two 400s above the plants? Given the way that a vertical setup works, this is somewhat confusing.
You're going to have plants starting at different heights, so your plants that start close to the 400 watters are are going to get more energy from the lights on top, which will positively affect the higher up plants' side and lower growth. Giving them the biggest yields. I think the reason why the hydro store guy said to have the 1k hps on top is that it offers more light penetration. However, putting the 1k hps on top might make your higher up plants grow away from your vertical set up which means their side and lower growth will get their energy from the vertical set up.
You really only need one 1k hid to give sufficient light to a vertical grow imo. One guy on here got 44 oz with 1 600 watt hid using a vertical setup... that's fucking unheard of growth! Do some research about vertical grows, it seems to be the way that most people are going nowadays for indoor.

Even with less plants and making them smaller it is going to be a bitch fitting 2 400's vertically in a 4x4 area and have their light efficiently distributed. If you leave the 4x4 then you are loosing canopy power and to a degree wasting your 1kW.

Let me know if you want anything else sketched up.

Woah guys! Thanks for all the replies, I learned a lot. I'm not 100% sure where the 4x4 area came from, my space is 5x6.

nice work dude.... looks cool. is that accurate?

4x4 is the ideal canopy coverage of a 1kW light. By the time you raise the light high enough to cover a 5x5 are the light intensity and penetrating power will be significantly lower. 1000w covering a 4x4 area is roughly 6250 lumen per sq ft whereas a 1000w covering a 5x5 area is 4000 lumen per sq ft.

Regardless a 25sq ft horizontal canopy receiving 4000 lumen per sq ft doesn't compare to a 63 sq ft vertical canopy receiving 11,000 lumen per sq ft.

Point well taken gastanker. I dig your helpfulness. I checked out your grow and its looking great man, keep up the good work.