one 600w hps or four 150w hps

thesmokering

thesmokering

Well-Known Member
Light penetration of 600w is much better, but area coverage of multiple 150w lights is better. I.e. sog or scrog would be better with multiple lights, but longer vegging and larger plants for larger yield per plant would benefit from 600w. Just depends on your grow style. Happy with 600w myself, its the most efficient hps as well.
 
thesmokering

thesmokering

Well-Known Member
420OldSchoolDJ420 said:
huh? I dont think thats correct.
Click to expand...
I think so, because hid lights are just a point source, not like using a bunch of cfls. Multiple lights can be spread out more to cover more plants, though smaller lights would not penetrate as much so small plants would be better, like in sog/scrog. If you did scrog then you could cover more screen with the lights and get the lights closer to the plant since there is less heat, so the lumens per watt difference will even out somewhat. 600 is most efficient, but it runs hotter and has to be further up.
 
4

420OldSchoolDJ420

New Member
Oh I see what your saying.. multiple "lower wattage" lights are good for a scrog since you get a wider coverage and less penetration.. got ya.. agreed
 
That 5hit

That 5hit

Well-Known Member
i was think of getting a 6oow
but then i see these home depot lights
and i sad if i could cooltub those atleast 4
i could spread the lights out evenly over a nice little sog
maybe a 12/12 from seed sog with
 
4

420OldSchoolDJ420

New Member
iunno man.. alot of "dim" lights dont make a "bright" light ..ya know? I say F it.. Get 2 400's.. But in all honesty, 600W is the best "bang for buck" as far as lumens per watt goes.. I jsut dont think anything lower than a 400W hps is really prudent. Unless you have a micro grow. Even then I would try to make a 400 work.. Im setting up a micro scrog in a cab thats appr. 2 feet wide,2 1/2 feet tall and 1 foot deep.. I am going to put a 400 in it.. lol.. But Im gonna use a 6 inch 400+ cfm inline fan for exhaust.. Ive actually already finished the cab and have 2 super lemon haze and 1 diesel vegging at about 3 weeks old under the screen under 4 42W daylight and 2 26W daylight cfls.. Still need to add the exhaust fan / filter and HPS.. The plants have just now started touching the screen.. I topped/fimmed them yesterday.. The screen is 1 foot from the bottom of the cab and 7 inches from the top of the soil ( FFHF )> I have all 3 plants in a 7 inch deep rectangular container that is appr. 16'' x 12'' long. Gonna see what kind of meds I can get from this set up. I want to add a bubbleponic system and get away from the soil though.. Maybe... maybe not.. Iunno.
 
Geozander

Geozander

Well-Known Member
Of all hps lights the 600w is the most efficient. Good point about multiple small lights for scrog or sog though. 600W hps is the way to go mate.
 
T

T.H.Cammo

Well-Known Member
DoeEyed said:
Four 150w will give you 56000 Lumens, a single 600w will give you 90000 lumens. I would still go with the 600w.:peace:
Click to expand...
For That 5hit - this is true all right, but it's not that simple! It has been pointed out that "Light Intensity" is importantant. But nobody takes into account the basic "Inverse Square Law (of Light)", whereby "Twice the distance equals one fourth the energy". A single light source (600w), centered above the growing area, has to cover at least half the distance to the edge. But four light sources (150w), equally spaced, only have to travel about one quarter the distance. So four light sources only have to travel about half the distance of a single source. What does this mean, in terms of "Lost Energy"?

Since the single 600w source has to travel "twice as far", it is only delivering a "theorhetical" 22,500 lumens; compared to the 56,000 lumens of the multiple smaller bulbs. That amounts to way more than twice the energy, which should more than make up for the initial lack of intensity.

Of course the actual amount of light energy delivered will vary according to actual distances traveled, but the single source will always have to travel about twice as far - reducing it's power by a factor of 4! Plus, of course, there is always the advantage of having mutiple light sources eliminating shadows (giving even better coverage!).

So I say, "Go for multiple small bulbs!".
 
That 5hit

That 5hit

Well-Known Member
T.H.Cammo said:
For That 5hit - this is true all right, but it's not that simple! It has been pointed out that "Light Intensity" is importantant. But nobody takes into account the basic "Inverse Square Law (of Light)", whereby "Twice the distance equals one fourth the energy". A single light source (600w), centered above the growing area, has to cover at least half the distance to the edge. But four light sources (150w), equally spaced, only have to travel about one quarter the distance. So four light sources only have to travel about half the distance of a single source. What does this mean, in terms of "Lost Energy"?

Since the single 600w source has to travel "twice as far", it is only delivering a "theorhetical" 22,500 lumens; compared to the 56,000 lumens of the multiple smaller bulbs. That amounts to way more than twice the energy, which should more than make up for the initial lack of intensity.

Of course the actual amount of light energy delivered will vary according to actual distances traveled, but the single source will always have to travel about twice as far - reducing it's power by a factor of 4! Plus, of course, there is always the advantage of having mutiple light sources eliminating shadows (giving even better coverage!).

So I say, "Go for multiple small bulbs!".
Click to expand...
this math makes sence
like having 4 250w rather then 1 1000w
the 1000w would have to be much further then the 4 250w and even if you cool tube it (the 1000w or the 600w) to bring it closer you would loose side distance, meaning less plants

this is a lot to think about
 
Geozander

Geozander

Well-Known Member
Single light source=single heat source meaning easier to manage. The 600 with a decent air cooled reflector is simplicity. 4 light sources means more plugs and wires. also means 4 lights to adjust as opposed to one.
 
sarndini

sarndini

Member
T.H.Cammo said:
For That 5hit - this is true all right, but it's not that simple! It has been pointed out that "Light Intensity" is importantant. But nobody takes into account the basic "Inverse Square Law (of Light)", whereby "Twice the distance equals one fourth the energy". A single light source (600w), centered above the growing area, has to cover at least half the distance to the edge. But four light sources (150w), equally spaced, only have to travel about one quarter the distance. So four light sources only have to travel about half the distance of a single source. What does this mean, in terms of "Lost Energy"?

Since the single 600w source has to travel "twice as far", it is only delivering a "theorhetical" 22,500 lumens; compared to the 56,000 lumens of the multiple smaller bulbs. That amounts to way more than twice the energy, which should more than make up for the initial lack of intensity.

Of course the actual amount of light energy delivered will vary according to actual distances traveled, but the single source will always have to travel about twice as far - reducing it's power by a factor of 4! Plus, of course, there is always the advantage of having mutiple light sources eliminating shadows (giving even better coverage!).

So I say, "Go for multiple small bulbs!".
Click to expand...

makes sense to me!
i got 3, 250w HPS lights with new bulbs off a mate for free. So bring on the multiple lights!bongsmilie
 
Geozander

Geozander

Well-Known Member
And the maths dont make sense! The 4 150s according to the maths quoted lose no lumens but the 600 loses 75 percent. Makes no sense to me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top