Ballast
- Thread starter oceanic6
- Start date
homegrownboy
Well-Known Member
Bothe have pros and cons...but it seems the movement is on digital, better effeciency.
homegrownboy
Well-Known Member
Not if you go CMH, which are beastly for growing with.
freddiemoney
Well-Known Member
Digital is more efficient, as already said, but don't buy the cheapest one you can find. I had a 400W fry itself just after warranty ran out. I opened it up, but it was just a circuit board that was completely coated in silicone. No chance of fixing it. With a magnetic it's just a bunch of components inside a case. You can replace them individually if they blow.
homegrownboy
Well-Known Member
Excellent point Freddie +rep
They are very good for both veg and flowering, and they only run on magnetic ballast's.
Magnificient
Well-Known Member
Magnetic with no doubt...if you're talking about 400 watt. You can get cmh bulbs for a magnetic ballast up to 400 watts which will out perform any hid bulb. What's more, these magnetic ballasts are plentiful for 30 dollars each. The people on craigslist selling them will ask for more, but 30 dollars each and you can take all you want. There is a digital ballast that will work with cmh, but for the cost you can get several magnetic ballasts.
You can see an example of a high bay fixture here: https://www.rollitup.org/newbie-central/356820-first-grow-update.html
There are a few minor downsides to using these fixtures, but the money saved and the ability to use cmh bulbs easily makes up for their downsides. Its weight, not being remote, and the funnel hood are downsides for growing purposes, even though mine performed wonderfully in a 3x3 stall and my plants thrived.
I took one apart and found that removing 4 screws, cutting three wires, and soldering in an extension is all it would take to make this unit remote. I didn't do that, but it's very doable.
I hope this info helps.
You can see an example of a high bay fixture here: https://www.rollitup.org/newbie-central/356820-first-grow-update.html
There are a few minor downsides to using these fixtures, but the money saved and the ability to use cmh bulbs easily makes up for their downsides. Its weight, not being remote, and the funnel hood are downsides for growing purposes, even though mine performed wonderfully in a 3x3 stall and my plants thrived.
I took one apart and found that removing 4 screws, cutting three wires, and soldering in an extension is all it would take to make this unit remote. I didn't do that, but it's very doable.
I hope this info helps.
Spanishfly
Well-Known Member
Magnetic for me - just a huge inductance that lasts for ever - no semiconductor components to go pop.
I started out trying to decide if I wanted a 600w digital vs magnetic. Ive been thinking on it for a week, and I thought I had decided digital. Then, being me, I ran through a list of pros and cons, and did a review of what is known for both of them. I realized I had written a lot, and so I thought I would share it with the forum.
Digitals COULD save you 5-10% energy, add 5% light, and reduce heat and noise. Im not sure if that is true, but we will accept it at face value for this post.
Im comparing 400 watters because most beginners use 400w first, and they are most likely to need someone to talk to them about how lights work. Things that are true for 400w's are more than likely true for other wattages one would assume.
If you DIY, a 400w ballast will be about 50 bucks. A prebuilt 400w magnetic light is about 120 bucks, and a 400w digital is 220, thats with reflectors ect.
100 dollar premium for digital.
These aren't arent, they are made for a single purpose, lighting up our rooms. Do we care if its the newest technology? I don't. So I am looking at it in a subjective way. Is the +'s of the digital worth 100 dollars, lets see.
Cost/Efficiency
Efficiency to me is how much light I get for 1$. Without going into the math part of it too deeply. A KWH(1000 watts of energy) costs about 10 cents from the power company. 400w magnetics use about 480w of energy to operate, so about 6000 watts a day, that 60 cents. 60(cents) x 30(days) = 18.00.
So, it costs about 20 bucks to run a 400w magnetic hps for the month. 5 percent of 20 dollars is 1 dollar. You will take about 100 months, lets say 8 years, to recoup your 100 dollars. I doubt the digital ballast would last that long, or that if you are still growing in 8 years you wont have moved up. Even if you add in the 5% increase in light, you are still going to use the ballast for 5 years or so before you break even. Even though it flies against what most of you would agree with, the very clear winner here is Magnetic.
Winner: Magnetic
Reliability
I don't think anyone argues that digital is more reliable than magnetic. It is simply a given. Kind of like a rock is harder than a piece of foam, noone who isn't retarded is going to argue that. Time has proven Magnetic reliability.
Winner: Magnetic
Heat
If you have a horrible time keeping your temps right, and you keep your ballast in your grow, then a digital could help you some. How much? Well, not as much as you might think, maybe 5% of total heat output. Sure the ballast is cooler, but the light is putting out 5% more, and thus will be hotter. 5% less energy is being used though, so you will have a net 5% less heat. If you have your ballasts remotely installed there is no benefit to the digital heatwise. The bulb is still hot, and possibly hotter using the digital due to more light being produced at the bulb. I have never noticed my 400w magnetic being a heat issue, but I have proper ventilation. That being said.
Winner: Digital
Noise
Any of you who have used a magnetic ballast, know the sound of it. However, just how loud is it? 2 feet from my 400w hps ballast with the door closed, I cannot hear it at all. Uninsulated walls, listening for it, and I cannot hear my grow at all. In fact, my air pump, exhaust fan, and my circulation fan are all louder than my magnetic ballast. Will you ever have your magnetic ballast running without your fans on? I really think the noise is a non issue, but the digitals win this.
Winner: Digital
Digital issues I didn't mention:
Some might have RF issues. IE: Maybe your TV/Radio or your Neighbors wont work. Its like broadcasting a radio signal that could cause a security concern.
Magnetic issues I didn't mention:
Heavy
Possible flickering. Ive never noticed this honestly, and I have looked for it.
Conclusion:
I believe I have changed my own mind about buying a digital. There is no difference in yields or quality of the crop, if your light works properly. The most important things to me are reliability and cost(both purchase and operating costs) I think I have shown that the efficiency(in dollars) of the digital ballast is mostly word play, and until the costs come down and the reliability comes up that they are not the right choice to make for most people. That hundred dollars from the initial purchase could easily be applied towards CO2, a nice inline fan, the electric bill, getting better meters/nutrients, or any number of grow items that may actually make a difference in how good your grow is. You wouldn't give the electric company 100 dollars cash today to lower your bill 2 dollars a month for the next 4-5 years, why would you give it to a digital ballast company? So, for the foreseeable future, in my opinion, Magnetic ballasts are the sweet spot in ballasts.
Overall winner:
Magnetic
Digitals COULD save you 5-10% energy, add 5% light, and reduce heat and noise. Im not sure if that is true, but we will accept it at face value for this post.
Im comparing 400 watters because most beginners use 400w first, and they are most likely to need someone to talk to them about how lights work. Things that are true for 400w's are more than likely true for other wattages one would assume.
If you DIY, a 400w ballast will be about 50 bucks. A prebuilt 400w magnetic light is about 120 bucks, and a 400w digital is 220, thats with reflectors ect.
100 dollar premium for digital.
These aren't arent, they are made for a single purpose, lighting up our rooms. Do we care if its the newest technology? I don't. So I am looking at it in a subjective way. Is the +'s of the digital worth 100 dollars, lets see.
Cost/Efficiency
Efficiency to me is how much light I get for 1$. Without going into the math part of it too deeply. A KWH(1000 watts of energy) costs about 10 cents from the power company. 400w magnetics use about 480w of energy to operate, so about 6000 watts a day, that 60 cents. 60(cents) x 30(days) = 18.00.
So, it costs about 20 bucks to run a 400w magnetic hps for the month. 5 percent of 20 dollars is 1 dollar. You will take about 100 months, lets say 8 years, to recoup your 100 dollars. I doubt the digital ballast would last that long, or that if you are still growing in 8 years you wont have moved up. Even if you add in the 5% increase in light, you are still going to use the ballast for 5 years or so before you break even. Even though it flies against what most of you would agree with, the very clear winner here is Magnetic.
Winner: Magnetic
Reliability
I don't think anyone argues that digital is more reliable than magnetic. It is simply a given. Kind of like a rock is harder than a piece of foam, noone who isn't retarded is going to argue that. Time has proven Magnetic reliability.
Winner: Magnetic
Heat
If you have a horrible time keeping your temps right, and you keep your ballast in your grow, then a digital could help you some. How much? Well, not as much as you might think, maybe 5% of total heat output. Sure the ballast is cooler, but the light is putting out 5% more, and thus will be hotter. 5% less energy is being used though, so you will have a net 5% less heat. If you have your ballasts remotely installed there is no benefit to the digital heatwise. The bulb is still hot, and possibly hotter using the digital due to more light being produced at the bulb. I have never noticed my 400w magnetic being a heat issue, but I have proper ventilation. That being said.
Winner: Digital
Noise
Any of you who have used a magnetic ballast, know the sound of it. However, just how loud is it? 2 feet from my 400w hps ballast with the door closed, I cannot hear it at all. Uninsulated walls, listening for it, and I cannot hear my grow at all. In fact, my air pump, exhaust fan, and my circulation fan are all louder than my magnetic ballast. Will you ever have your magnetic ballast running without your fans on? I really think the noise is a non issue, but the digitals win this.
Winner: Digital
Digital issues I didn't mention:
Some might have RF issues. IE: Maybe your TV/Radio or your Neighbors wont work. Its like broadcasting a radio signal that could cause a security concern.
Magnetic issues I didn't mention:
Heavy
Possible flickering. Ive never noticed this honestly, and I have looked for it.
Conclusion:
I believe I have changed my own mind about buying a digital. There is no difference in yields or quality of the crop, if your light works properly. The most important things to me are reliability and cost(both purchase and operating costs) I think I have shown that the efficiency(in dollars) of the digital ballast is mostly word play, and until the costs come down and the reliability comes up that they are not the right choice to make for most people. That hundred dollars from the initial purchase could easily be applied towards CO2, a nice inline fan, the electric bill, getting better meters/nutrients, or any number of grow items that may actually make a difference in how good your grow is. You wouldn't give the electric company 100 dollars cash today to lower your bill 2 dollars a month for the next 4-5 years, why would you give it to a digital ballast company? So, for the foreseeable future, in my opinion, Magnetic ballasts are the sweet spot in ballasts.
Overall winner:
Magnetic