CFL vs. HPS ****Title Fight****

HPS vs. CFL

  • HPS

    Votes: 113 65.7%

  • CFL

    Votes: 59 34.3%
  • Total voters
    172
SmokerE

SmokerE

Well-Known Member
To compare it right and make it even, you need to get those larger CFL's. A couple of them 200 watt envirolites or something.
 
babygro

babygro

Well-Known Member
SmokerE said:
To compare it right and make it even, you need to get those larger CFL's. A couple of them 200 watt envirolites or something.
Click to expand...
Why? What does it matter what CFL's or fluoro's are used?

The comparator should be Yield in terms of Oz's (or grams) per square foot, per watt of lighting used and per cost of producing 1 Oz of bud in terms of electricity used.

As you can see the last two make it hard for the HID to be competitive, because once you start factoring in price per oz or per watt or sq foot the lower electricity and wattages of the fluoro's starts to redress the balance.
 
nongreenthumb

nongreenthumb

Well-Known Member
babygro said:
Why? What does it matter what CFL's or fluoro's are used?

The comparator should be Yield in terms of Oz's (or grams) per square foot, per watt of lighting used and per cost of producing 1 Oz of bud in terms of electricity used.

As you can see the last two make it hard for the HID to be competitive, because once you start factoring in price per oz or per watt or sq foot the lower electricity and wattages of the fluoro's starts to redress the balance.
Click to expand...
When factoring small grows maybe, but say for instance you are growing 40 plants you are going to need a whole shed load of cfls as opposed to 2 hid systems. I'd bet that in order to get similar results you would have to use more watts of cfl lighting than you would hid.

Say for instance your growing 40 plants and using two 600w hps, how many watts of cfl lighting would it take to achieve equally satisfactory results?

It is an equally false assumption that people who use hid only use it because that is what they think they are supposed to use because someone told them.

I currently veg for 12 hours under a 250w 6400k cfl and then for the other 12 hours of the day they sit underneath a 400w mh in the flowering room. Then when they flower they sit underneath whats currently 2 600w hps. In veg at the moment I have 15 plants. In flower I have 30 plants. After tonight there will probably be 20 clones thrown into the equation.

How many watts of cfl power would i need if i were to do cfl alone.

I do agree with you though that in a small space with a limited number of plants, that you could be equally better off to go with cfl than you would hid if temps were not the issue, but small space growers are pushed away from hid with the heat issues unless they can counteract it.
 
SmokerE

SmokerE

Well-Known Member
I think it does make a difference what kind are used. If you want to give CFL a fair shot, cost would be a determining factor. I'm not familiar with cost on CFL but for each light you get you need a decent reflector. I've seen those hardware reflectors, but if I was going for yield I would buy a "real" reflector with a good grow light with proper spectrum. I said envirolite because that is the only one I'm familiar with. There may be others, that I'm unsure of.
 
mogie

mogie

Well-Known Member
I just ran your cfl's over with my big wheel. They were in my way. HPS coming thru.
 
babygro

babygro

Well-Known Member
nongreenthumb said:
I do agree with you though that in a small space with a limited number of plants, that you could be equally better off to go with cfl than you would hid if temps were not the issue, but small space growers are pushed away from hid with the heat issues unless they can counteract it.
Click to expand...
NGT I agree with everything you say here, but people have to select the most appropriate system to their circumstances. For someone growing out 40 or more plants - HID is really the only way to go - it's the most cost effective solution.

For those growing in closets etc the decision becomes a much more difficult one and is not as straight forward at all, at least not as straight forward as many people on here would have you beleive.

I also don't hide the fact that I get very annoyed when I see people say things like CFL's HIDS? HPS is the ONLY way to go! The fuck it is.

This is one of the reasons why I'm very keen on doing this and I'm supremely confident of kicking the ass of the vast majority of people using HIDs in terms of yield per sq foot and yield per watt and cost per watt of electricity.

What do I base this on? Mostly from what I've seen of peoples yields and HID wattages - they're not maximising their yields - in fact, they're not even nearly maximising their yields.

People with 600w HPS/MH's systems should be pulling in a minimum of 0.5 gram (dry) per watt of lighting used, and ideally 1 gram per watt - how many on here are achieving that, or even getting anywhere near it?

Most people will use a 600w HPS in an area of about 4 x 4 foot. That's 16 square feet or 37.5 watts per Square foot. To get 1 gram per watt of lighting used, you're gonna have to pull in 600 grams or just under 22 ozs of dried bud. That's 1.33 oz's per square foot. You'll only be able to flower about 6-8 full size plants in that space - that's 2.75 - 3.66 Oz's per plant.

For me to match that I'd have to pull in 1.33 oz's per sq foot as my flowering area is only 3.75 sq foot, so that's just under 5 ozs total. That's 140 grams, so I couldn't use any more than 140 watts of fluorescents in that space for a total harvest of 140 grams.

140 watts are effectively 6 x 2 foot 24w (144w) linear fluorescents. That's easily achievable in a SOG grow using clones and linear fluorescents. 8 plants in a SOG, means I have to produce 17.5g per plant or about 0.62 oz's per plant.

It's easily achievable if you put your mind to it.
 
stickyhits

stickyhits

Well-Known Member
you can use an hps for a stealth grow no ones ever heard of air cooling and the light can be within inches on the canopy
 
mogie

mogie

Well-Known Member
Very good point stickyhits. The new hoods are almost complete air tight. Cfls give off as much or more heat it is just dispersed over a wider area.
 
D

darkchildsks

Active Member
I know there are a lot of people with strong opinions on the matter, but I'm with babygro on this one, I really think we need to settle it once and for all, cfl vs hid watt for watt, and see who gets more grams/watt/m2. It's the only way this will ever be settled.
 
beenthere donethat

beenthere donethat

Well-Known Member
Personal needs and preferences aside, this chart spells it out when it comes to the *efficiency* of each light and what it takes to produce the same amount of light across the board from each source.

Addendum: SORRY for the sizing. This was the only one of these charts I could find on the Net in a very long search.

Since its a bitch to read...basically, the chart says this:

The lumen output is the same for each of the 5 scenarios below

Each lighting set up represents a total output of 50,000 lumens

1- 400 watt hps HID

10- 4 ft long t-5 HO flourescents

4.5 - 150 watt EcoPlus CFL lamps

42- 4 ft long - 42 watt t12 flourescents

84- 60 watt incandescents (you cannot grow with these they are only here to show the comparison and efficieny of the hps)

In short:

400 watts of HID draws 432 watts

10- 4 ft t-5 HO'd draw 540 watts min

4.5 - 150 watt CFL's draw 675 watts

42- 4ft t-12's @ 42 wattts each draw 1764 watts

64- 60 watt incandescents draw 3840 watts


P.S. I **did NOT** make this chart babygro. This is standard issue year after year in the wholesalers catalogs and retail info catalogs from Hydrofarm, Sunlight Supply and other "gardening" light manufacturers in the US. Got issue with it? Take it up with them and bring yer laboratory backed reseach.... LOL.

good luck

bt dt
 

Attachments

stickyhits

stickyhits

Well-Known Member
grams per watt isnt that big a stat when everyone is growing different strains which is a big factor in it self for yeild its more about potency and taste ive never smoked cfl flowered bud but im not sure it would be as good or anywhere near as dense that pic is like half an inch big cant even see it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top