HPS over MH for Veggie

Manjinken

Well-Known Member
i've heard quite a few people mention that they have gotten better results using HPS bulbs during vegetation AND flowering as opposed to MH during vegetation, and HPS during flowering.

so i guess im just gonna save money and not buy the 400 watt MH, and just use the 400 watt HPS. Good idea? yes, no?
 

BigBudBalls

Well-Known Member
i've heard quite a few people mention that they have gotten better results using HPS bulbs during vegetation AND flowering as opposed to MH during vegetation, and HPS during flowering.

so i guess im just gonna save money and not buy the 400 watt MH, and just use the 400 watt HPS. Good idea? yes, no?
You plan on using the same light fixture for both veg and flower (with the HPS?) If so, toss around the idea of a conversion bulb. (lets you plug a MH bulb in a HPS ballast. Then its just the cost of the extra bulb. (conversion bulbs cost a little more.)
 

iBLaZe4tozErO

Well-Known Member
ur choice. U will never know until u try them both and see. People say stuff all the time but unless you experiment u will never know
 

Manjinken

Well-Known Member
You plan on using the same light fixture for both veg and flower (with the HPS?) If so, toss around the idea of a conversion bulb. (lets you plug a MH bulb in a HPS ballast. Then its just the cost of the extra bulb. (conversion bulbs cost a little more.)
well i dont care about the ballast i was most likely going to buy a ballast standard for both types of bulbs. money actually isnt even really much of a factor either. I just wanna go with what will work best, and so far ive heard a few people talk about getting bushier better plants using HPS over MH for vegetation(even though i know MH is supposed to be better for veg).

if anyone can support that argument do it here so i only have to buy one bulb.
 

Manjinken

Well-Known Member
can i please get some opinions? so i can buy a bulb. i'd like to know before the veg cycle starts on my next batch.
 

IheartKeif

Active Member
Young plants need different spectrum light (Blue) than plants in flower. HPS might work but your not giving the plant everything you could to produce buds that are rad.
 

Manjinken

Well-Known Member
well the buds only grow during flowering which would be the hps anyway. the lack of blue spec would just mean lack of veg growth. which would actually be useful having smaller plants.
 

Mr Green Man

Well-Known Member
Well, I haven't tryed it personly.

I was told that the red spcrum light can lead to a little stretching.
And also, that blue light during flowering leads to stronger bud, but less yeild.

Like I said I haven't tryed it.
I Veged under MH and flowered under HPS and had great results.
 

IheartKeif

Active Member
If you already know everything why are you asking? If you want nice healthy plants that produce well, follow whats tried and true.
 

BigBudBalls

Well-Known Member
If you already know everything why are you asking? If you want nice healthy plants that produce well, follow whats tried and true.
I think he going more for the experimentation aspect of it.
He's herd different things and looking for opinions on using a HPS over a MH for veg.

I vegged under HPS and it wasn't stretched.

Other thought is that MH bulb thats dual spectrum. I think its by Philips (I don't like Philips in general so I didn't pay much attention, but most raved about the bulb)
 

orginal sinner

New Member
i've heard quite a few people mention that they have gotten better results using HPS bulbs during vegetation AND flowering as opposed to MH during vegetation, and HPS during flowering.

so i guess im just gonna save money and not buy the 400 watt MH, and just use the 400 watt HPS. Good idea? yes, no?
verry good idea i veg with hps and get get bigger heartier plants. ive tried mh. and its reccomended because it burns cooler but as long as you have adequit temp control youll be fine with hps.
 

ChillyLizard

Active Member
I havn't vegged with MH but I have with both cfl's and HPS. The plants vegged with cfl's stayed compact with nice tight node spacing while the HPS vegged plants seemed to stretch a bit with more space between nodes.
The cfl's were, of course, right on top of the plants. The HPS was a 250 and no plant was more than 6"-7" away from the light.
 

Manjinken

Well-Known Member
I havn't vegged with MH but I have with both cfl's and HPS. The plants vegged with cfl's stayed compact with nice tight node spacing while the HPS vegged plants seemed to stretch a bit with more space between nodes.
The cfl's were, of course, right on top of the plants. The HPS was a 250 and no plant was more than 6"-7" away from the light.
what was the wattage and spectrum of the CFL?
 

Manjinken

Well-Known Member
hps is the best way to go control temp and height and youll have no stretching just big beautifull hearty plants.
yeah but if i can actually get decent results during veg with a CFL the 18 hour light cycles shouldnt kill my electric bill.


does anyone have any pics of CFL grows, so i can see results. My last grow was CFL and is still going and i wanna compare.
 

marijuanajoe1982

Well-Known Member
In those cases, the CFL's most likely added enough blue to the spectrum to help out with the vegging aspect. I know that with cool Floros and MH, my plants internodes average at less than an inch.

The only way you can have a ballast as you so describe, manjiken, is getting a digital ballast. You seem to think the ballast isn't that important, but it is VERY important as it determines what lights you can run. You better get a digital if you want one that is "fool-proof," and this might be a good idea for you. I don't know what happens if you put the wrong bulb in the wrong ballast, but if you are not careful when making these decisions, you could very well wind up doing so! Be careful, Manjiken!
 
Top