# How hot does a 250w cfl get



## Dr.Autoflower

Hey guys how hot does one of these get?Im getting ether 1 250w and 1 150w or 2 250w for my 2x2 tent. i had a 400w hps for its but i didnt want to deal with the noise cooling that thing and sold it today. 

peace


----------



## OGKushman

without ventilation?  very hot


----------



## Dr.Autoflower

of course its vented. with cool fresh air intake. would they be as hot as a 400w hps? or should i just get a 250watt hps air cooled? i need one with less heat so i dont need the fan on full blast since its right next to my living room, making it very annoying if its loud


----------



## StoneyBud

Hey Doc, I have a dual 125 where both bulbs are in the same fixture under the hood. When I've closed the door to the 6' x 10' room they're in, it gets pretty warm in there after 12 hours. I do that to keep the room warm when it's azz-bustin cold out, cause that room is on the very end of my house, furthest from any heated room.

Not as much as one of my 400 HPS tho'. Not even close to that. Maybe a fourth of that.


----------



## Dr.Autoflower

StoneyBud said:
			
		

> Hey Doc, I have a dual 125 where both bulbs are in the same fixture under the hood. When I've closed the door to the 6' x 10' room they're in, it gets pretty warm in there after 12 hours. I do that to keep the room warm when it's azz-bustin cold out, cause that room is on the very end of my house, furthest from any heated room.
> 
> Not as much as one of my 400 HPS tho'. Not even close to that. Maybe a fourth of that.


so im guessing that if 2 125 is = to a 1/4 of the heat the 400w then 2 250 should be lil over half or more. but would be double the watts of a air cooled 250watt hps. and would be cheaper, so should i go with a 250w hps?


----------



## StoneyBud

Dr.Autoflower said:
			
		

> so im guessing that if 2 125 is = to a 1/4 of the heat the 400w then 2 250 should be lil over half or more. but would be double the watts of a air cooled 250watt hps. and would be cheaper, so should i go with a 250w hps?


 
The "1/4" heat I meant was with a CFL, not an HPS. If you use a HPS, you'll have better growth, but more heat than a Flo. It depends on the type of growth you want and how you ventilate. The HPS will require more cooling.


----------



## Gixxerman420

StoneyBud said:
			
		

> The "1/4" heat I meant was with a CFL, not an HPS. If you use a HPS, you'll have better growth, but more heat than a Flo. It depends on the type of growth you want and how you ventilate. The HPS will require more cooling.


 

The extra cooling is well worth flowering under HPS... I've flowered under CFL, not bad but not award winning harvests either... I now use a 400 watt HPS in a 3x3x6 closet; I have to run a vent hose from the window into the tent for cool air because without it, the temperature easily hits 90% within a matter of a few hours... I use an air conditioner affixed to the feeding end of that same vent hose for summer crops (necessary with the lack of cold air). What I'm getting at is that I noticed a doubling in my yields once I made the switch and had my closet tweaked to the new fixture... Now everything is on the same timer and all I have to do is show up to water every couple of days! I look in EVERYDAY of course, but no need to mess with the ladies! Right now I'm picking back up my green thumbs after a year with no crops... Feels good to be back but the setup is in a new place, and I haven't even had a chance to use the flowering tent in the new location yet, I'd imagine some more tweaking is in my not-so-distant future... Not complaining though! Rambling now, sorry stoned... What I'm getting at is HPS.... WELL WORTH THE INVESTMENT!!!


----------



## Dr.Autoflower

StoneyBud said:
			
		

> The "1/4" heat I meant was with a CFL, not an HPS. If you use a HPS, you'll have better growth, but more heat than a Flo. It depends on the type of growth you want and how you ventilate. The HPS will require more cooling.



I guess i wasnt clear enuff

what would be more hot- 2 250cfl or 1 250watthps air cooled?


----------



## StoneyBud

Dr.Autoflower said:
			
		

> I guess i wasnt clear enuff
> 
> what would be more hot- 2 250cfl or 1 250watthps air cooled?


 
With the HPS being air cooled, I would guess they would be pretty close to being the same.

The Flo's would have almost no heat from the bulbs but would have heat from the ballasts. The air-cooled HPS would have some heat still from the bulb, plus IR from the bulb but no heat from it's ballast if the ballast were remotely positioned.

Some CFL ballasts put out more heat than others. What lumen output do the CFL's have vs. the lumen output of the HPS?

What spectrum are the CFL's?


----------



## Wetdog

500w of anything is going to get hot.

2-250w CFL (500 actual watts) vs 1-250w HPS and air cooled at that?

The CFL's would produce more heat, I would bet, in that scenario.

Wet


----------



## Gixxerman420

Wetdog said:
			
		

> 500w of anything is going to get hot.
> 
> 2-250w CFL (500 actual watts) vs 1-250w HPS and air cooled at that?
> 
> The CFL's would produce more heat, I would bet, in that scenario.
> 
> Wet



I misunderstood earlier, I thought we were dealing with 400 watt HPS...  anyways, I have 8 100 watt CFL'S for vegging and it kicks a little heat, but nothing like my HPS of half the wattage! In the given scenario however, we actually have Hal of the wattage HPS as CFL, therefore, I really have to agree with stoneybud and say they'd be about equal... I'd be interested in knowing which the situation be! :joint:


----------



## Hick

I think this involves "physics". I'm NOT well versed in the subject, BUT... this is how "I" understand it..
  If you have two bulbs, consuming identical amounts of energy(watts), and one is producing 10,000 lumens, and the other is producing 5,000 Lumen. The one producing 5,000 will emit "more" heat. 
   Why?.. only half as much of the energy consumed, is being transformed into light, the other half "must" be transformed/emitted as heat.   Is there some factor that I am not considering?.. energy consumed/work performed=efficiency  ??
  The way that "I" see it, 400 watts of "in"-efficient lighting is going to be harder to cool, than 400 watts of "efficient" lighting. 
"IMO" you are going about the problem in reverse anyway. You need to calculate he amount of light needed/required to sufficiently light your space, and deal with that. Rather than try to control temperature by reducing your light.. "JMO"...  
400 watt hps=50,000 L
150 watt flo=12,000 L (x3=36,000 L and consuming "more" energy) 
If those extra 50 watts of energy are not being transformed into light, what is it being transformed into?


----------



## The Hemp Goddess

Lumen for lumen, CFLs will run hotter than a HPS.  A 250 CFL will emit about 15,000 lumens.  A 250W HPS will emit approx 28,000 lumens.  So, you would need almost 500W of CFLs to equal the light of 1 250W HPS.  Also remember, when you lower the wattage of the lights you are using, you can expect your yield to go down accordingly.  Less light is going to result in less yield.  

And remember that air exchange is for more than cooling.  Your plants need a continual supply of fresh air all the time the lights are on.  What kind of fan are you using?  There are ways to deal with fan noise.


----------



## The Hemp Goddess

Gixxerman420 said:
			
		

> I misunderstood earlier, I thought we were dealing with 400 watt HPS...  anyways, I have 8 100 watt CFL'S for vegging and it kicks a little heat, but nothing like my HPS of half the wattage! In the given scenario however, we actually have Hal of the wattage HPS as CFL, therefore, I really have to agree with stoneybud and say they'd be about equal... I'd be interested in knowing which the situation be! :joint:



The 100W you speak of must be equivalent wattage and is not significant when talking about growing--100W equivalents are actually 23W bulbs which emit about 1500 lumens.  So 8 of them is 184W and they put out about 12,000 lumens.  It would take over 33 23W CFLs to equal the lumens of a 400W HPS.  I can absolutely guarantee you that if you had 33 CFLs in your box, you would have substantial heat--far more than a 400W HPS puts out.


----------



## Locked

I don't think people actual realize the fact that cfl's run hotter, are less efficient and produce bud not on par with using and HPS...selling my HPS lights and replacing them with cfl's wld never be an option for me. You can build a box to quiet the fan if it really bothers you.


----------



## bi0phreak420

I love all the CFL haterz out there cause they have no clue. CFLs do not run hot i use them and i know plenty of other people that do to lights are lights if it grows ur weed then what differnce does it make


----------



## Locked

No hating just the truth....grow with as many cfl's as you want to...bottom line is if you sit down and do the math they do run hotter and are less efficient then an HPS...people tend to see 100w equivalent and think they are actually getting 100w output...that is not the case. If You stick enough cfl's together to reach the lumen output of a 600w hps you will find that *A* you are putting off more heat and *B* that you are using more energy to get the same lumen output.


----------



## The Hemp Goddess

bi0phreak420 said:
			
		

> I love all the CFL haterz out there cause they have no clue. CFLs do not run hot i use them and i know plenty of other people that do to lights are lights if it grows ur weed then what differnce does it make


 
Those of us that have grown for many many years have tried every light out there.  We *do* know what we are talking about.  No one says that CFLs will not grow good bud, they will, but you spend about twice as much money to do so. 

What does it matter?  _Lumen for lumen,_ CFLs cost approx twice as much in electricity every single month.  And whether you believe it or not, CFLs do run hotter.  And CFLs, and reflectors, and splitters, and cords generally cost more than a HPS of like lumens to purchase initially.  And they generally produce significantly less bud.  These are the facts.

I don't quite understand why when the facts about CFLs are pointed out  that we are called haters (and jeez, I really hate that term).  I feel like I wouldn't be doing my job here if I did not let new growers know that CFLs are not cooler and are not cheaper to run.  Not a hater, just someone who wants the facts out there.  It is simply wrong to let someone think something is cheaper when it is not.


----------



## Locked

Thanks THG....I knew you wld be able to break it down better. And I also hate the word hater....I don't care if you want to grow by candle light....I won't hate on you or your candles....lol.   But I will point out to others that there are better alternatives.


----------



## bi0phreak420

Well my bottom line is that im using CFLs that's all I have to say about that


----------



## biggerbuds

my 250wattCFL gets about as hot as my 400watt cool tube to the touch,maybe a touch hotter.


----------



## The Hemp Goddess

bi0phreak420 said:
			
		

> Well my bottom line is that im using CFLs that's all I have to say about that



Well, that is fine if you want to spend twice as much to grow the same amount as those using HPS.  But new growers deserve to know the facts.


----------



## Locked

Not trying to knock any cfl growers...in fact I think some do an awesome job but like THG said..this place is where a lot of new growers come to find out info...they deserve to know the facts and then let them make the choice that is right for their situation...it is all good...we all share a love for the same plant. Nobody is hating bro.


----------



## Hick

bi0phreak420 said:
			
		

> Well my bottom line is that im using CFLs that's all I have to say about that


...and that is "fine"..No one is trying to "convert" you. 
"You can lead a horse to water.... "
but when you make statements that are NOT true and factual, you may lead others, newbies to believe it is true. THAT is why you are being disputed, because your analogy is wrong.


> 400 watt hps=50,000 L
> 150 watt flo=12,000 L (x3=36,000 L and consuming "more" energy)


  I broke it down in big lights in the above post. Now, for you, I'll break it down again with $$s.
23 watt cfls(100 watt eq) 1600 lumnen $3.06 hXXp://www.1000bulbs.com/product/1582/FC23-FEIISB27K.html
400 watt hps 50,000 lumen $100 (uncludes bulb, ballast, and hood) hXXp://www.google.com/products/catalog?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=400+watt+hps&oe=utf-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=5613548153741699833&sa=X&ei=LKNpTYm5O431gAecvZTLCg&ved=0CEsQ8wIwAg&output=nojs

SOOO.. in order to achieve equal lighting/lumens from the cfls that the single hps supplies. You would require 31 of those $3.06 bulbs. 31x3=$96 and you haven't yet bought fixtures, cords, splitters, ect.

*In addition*, 31 bulbs X 23 watts =*713 watts* of energy consumed.

I hope that helps you to understand the "facts".


----------



## bi0phreak420

This is the CFL i use and it works pretty good 125 watt ...2700k.....10,500 lumens


----------



## Sixx

The Hemp Goddess said:
			
		

> Well, that is fine if you want to spend twice as much to grow the same amount as those using HPS.  But new growers deserve to know the facts.


Maybe we dont need to grow the same amount as an HPS user.
Your comparison is not fair.... You are assuming we are gonna go buy 31 CFls to have 45K Lumens...When in actuality we are only using 8 or 10 CFLs.... You cant tell me 8 or 10 CFLs cost more to operate than a 400W HPS. True the 400W HPS is better, mainly due to the wattage and further reach. It has more lumens and wattage and penetration and and... We know. But from the studies I have done, the difference in end product is not as drastic as you make it sound. Im sure you know light diminishes over distance.... a 400W at 12 inches from the canopy dimishes over 50% of the lumens. Our CFLs at 1inch diminish 0% of the lumens. Not to mention Photosynthetic Active Radiation is the measure of light that a plant actually senses and uses, and it is the light the plant sees and can use that is more important then the actual output lumen of the grow lamp! Another benefit of using CFL&#8217;s is that they do not generate as much heat and can be kept almost on top of the plants producing the exact 100% photosynthetic active radiation light, with no loss of intensity. So if you position these  lamps close to the leaves you get the benefit of 100% PAR light in the correct 400nw to 700nw range, giving the plant the correct light colours and light quality. You do not get 100% PAR light with an HID.  The difference in yield is NOT night and day, it is much closer than most people think.


----------



## Roddy

bi0phreak420 said:
			
		

> This is the CFL i use and it works pretty good 125 watt ...2700k.....10,500 lumens
> View attachment 161052
> 
> 
> View attachment 161053



lol, mine is sitting waiting for a need. I briefly used it for vegging and have used it for side-lighting the big gals, but she's not big enough for my needs! May be good for someone with very limited space, and is a casual smoker. They do sell a bulb for budding as well.


----------



## Hick

Sixx said:
			
		

> Maybe we dont need to grow the same amount as an HPS user.
> Your comparison is not fair.... You are assuming we are gonna go buy 31 CFls to have 45K Lumens...When in actuality we are only using 8 or 10 CFLs.... You cant tell me 8 or 10 CFLs cost more to operate than a 400W HPS. True the 400W HPS is better, mainly due to the wattage and further reach. It has more lumens and wattage and penetration and and... We know. But from the studies I have done, the difference in end product is not as drastic as you make it sound. Im sure you know light diminishes over distance.... a 400W at 12 inches from the canopy dimishes over 50% of the lumens. Our CFLs at 1inch diminish 0% of the lumens. Not to mention Photosynthetic Active Radiation is the measure of light that a plant actually senses and uses, and it is the light the plant sees and can use that is more important then the actual output lumen of the grow lamp! Another benefit of using CFL&#8217;s is that they do not generate as much heat and can be kept almost on top of the plants producing the exact 100% photosynthetic active radiation light, with no loss of intensity. So if you position these  lamps close to the leaves you get the benefit of 100% PAR light in the correct 400nw to 700nw range, giving the plant the correct light colours and light quality. You do not get 100% PAR light with an HID.  The difference in yield is NOT night and day, it is much closer than most people think.


the numbers just don't lie.... 

JEEZ.... okay, we'll try it "your" way...:doh:

*10* cfls  @ 1600 L. ea.= 16,000 consuming 230 watts of energy.
*1...* 250 watt hps *28,500* LUMENS.._almost twice the BANG for the buck_... :confused2: 
a single *150 watt* hps is about equal to your *230 watts* of cfls. 
16,000 L. 
cfl's are in no way, shape or form, "superior" too hps. It is proven time and time again.
  I am NOT dissing cfl growers, or their results, nor 'convert' anyone. I have seen some pretty fine results from some of you. 
But facts are facts. cfls are more expensive to operate, produce more heat, *"watt per watt, lumen per lumen* than hps.



> I think this involves "physics". I'm NOT well versed in the subject, BUT... this is how "I" understand it..
> If you have two bulbs, consuming identical amounts of energy(watts), and one is producing 10,000 lumens, and the other is producing 5,000 Lumen. The one producing 5,000 will emit "more" heat.
> Why?.. only half as much of the energy consumed, is being transformed into light, the other half "must" be transformed/emitted as heat. Is there some factor that I am not considering?.. energy consumed/work performed=efficiency ??
> The way that "I" see it, 400 watts of "in"-efficient lighting is going to be harder to cool, than 400 watts of "efficient" lighting.
> "IMO" you are going about the problem in reverse anyway. You need to calculate he amount of light needed/required to sufficiently light your space, and deal with that. Rather than try to control temperature by reducing your light.. "JMO"...
> 400 watt hps=50,000 L
> 150 watt flo=12,000 L (x3=36,000 L and consuming "more" energy)
> If those extra 50 watts of energy are not being transformed into light, what is it being transformed into?



and if this thinking, theory is flawed (which it COULD be) I would be interested in hearing how. 
Like I said, I am not well versed/educated in 'physics' :confused2:..


----------



## slowmo77

as a former CFL grower i've gotta say a few things here.

 my first grow space was 2x2x4 and i had something like 14 cfl's 8 23watt and 6 were 42 watts. with that many lights i had heat issues but could get the lights very close to the plants.. i had nearly 100 bucks in lights and grew decent buds with them.

 then i found these 150w HPS vapor tight lights.  wow, they were like 20bucks each. they came with a sealed glass case around the bulb. those two lights replaced those cfls and i can place them right ontop of my plants as long as the plant don't touch the glass they're fine. i didn't have half the heat to deal with or the cords from all the light.

 so it has been my experiance that lumen for lumen you can't beat an hps with a cfl. you can try but in the end as far as cost and power the hps will come out on top. im not saying you can't grow nice stuff with cfls because i grew some nice bud. these are just my thoughts


----------



## Hick

thanks slomo'.. you, the chef, and sixx were the cfl growers that came to mind.
 Again, I'm not dissing anyone or their method of growing. If "you're happy", if it's "working for you"... GO WITH IT.
  I just want to clarify, and keep the record straight, as far as the efficiency, costs, ect. 

I use cfls in certain applications. They're convenient, and serve the purpose. But they still cost me more to run/maintain than equal light in hps.(I'm actually planning a change to t5HO's) At no time have I said "don't use cfls", or "cfl's are useless".


----------



## Sixx

Originally posted by Hick:

*10* cfls  @ 1600 L. ea.= 16,000 consuming 230 watts of energy.
*1...* 250 watt hps *28,500* LUMENS.._almost twice the BANG for the buck_... :confused2: 
a single *150 watt* hps is about equal to your *230 watts* of cfls. 
16,000 L. 
cfl's are in no way, shape or form, "superior" too hps. It is proven time and time again.
  I am NOT dissing cfl growers, or their results, nor 'convert' anyone. I have seen some pretty fine results from some of you. 
But facts are facts. cfls are more expensive to operate, produce more heat, *"watt per watt, lumen per lumen* than hps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Never did I say CFLs were superior to HPS.... My oppinion is CFL's are not as inferior as some people make them out to be. The 250W HPS putting out 26K Lumens dimishes to about 15600 Lumens at 9inches from the canopy.. The superior difference is the bigger wattage and more powerful penetration. And again...you all keep stating  cfls are more expensive to operate, produce more heat, *"watt per watt, lumen per lumen* than hps. Very true... But Thats an apples to oranges comparison IMO. CFL growers do not go out and  buy enough CFLs to achieve the same lumens as HPS.

Anyway...Im not trying to be that argumentative guy and get a big ole debate going or create any negativity here.
All Im saying is if you want to grow and cannot afford an HPS, and a bigger fan to exhaust the increased heat, or maybe you just want to try it out before you go spend your hard earned cash, you CAN grow some phunky bud with CFLs without spending but only a fraction of the cash.
View attachment 161068


----------



## bi0phreak420

slowmo77 said:
			
		

> as a former CFL grower i've gotta say a few things here.
> 
> my first grow space was 2x2x4 and i had something like 14 cfl's 8 23watt and 6 were 42 watts. with that many lights i had heat issues but could get the lights very close to the plants.. i had nearly 100 bucks in lights and grew decent buds with them.
> 
> then i found these 150w HPS vapor tight lights.  wow, they were like 20bucks each. they came with a sealed glass case around the bulb. those two lights replaced those cfls and i can place them right ontop of my plants as long as the plant don't touch the glass they're fine. i didn't have half the heat to deal with or the cords from all the light.
> 
> so it has been my experiance that lumen for lumen you can't beat an hps with a cfl. you can try but in the end as far as cost and power the hps will come out on top. im not saying you can't grow nice stuff with cfls because i grew some nice bud. these are just my thoughts



IM NOT USING 14 cfls im using 1...1 cfl  LOOK AT THE PIC ABOVE


----------



## slowmo77

bi0phreak420 said:
			
		

> IM NOT USING 14 cfls im using 1...1 cfl LOOK AT THE PIC ABOVE


 
i assume that all caps means your gettin an attitude so i'll respond accordingly. 

At what point did this become all about you and what your using. 
As i recall Dr. Autoflower started this thread. I don't see anyone arguing with you by name. I was simply stating my experiance with Cfl's and Hps lights. if you'll pull your head out of your arse and read what i wrote you'll see that. 

you'll never hear (read) me saying that you can't or shouldn't use cfl's or any low budget growing supplies for that matter. when i started i used a hand held floro shop light over a tote full of MG moisture control soil and added lights when i had the money and the need and made it work.

how much cash did you drop on that big cfl? how many lumens is it? how many watts? how close can you get your hand before it gets hot?

i run dual 150w HPS vapor tights now. im sure some members are still here that bought the same lights..
heres the run down on them.
 150 watts, 15,900 lumens each. you can get within an 2 inches of the glass before it gets hot and i payed around 20$ each for them. can you beat the price? the lumens? the cost? the heat? thats what i thought!!!!


----------



## nova564t

I thought I might put in my 2 cents, I grow and will continue to grow with CFLs because I have them and can't afford to spend any money on my room. Even though I grow very good bud with CFLs if I had the money and a little more room I would switch to HPS for bloom, but for now I'll just stick with what I got and stay high just the same!!:farm: :joint4:


----------



## slowmo77

thats what everyone should do.. work with what they can afford and share what they learn. if you ever get bored look in the photo section for some of my cfl buds.. i had one as long as my arm from elbow to figure tips and almost as big around..


----------



## The Hemp Goddess

Boy, I sure miss those 150W vapor tights.  It was hard to pass up that $20 price tag for a 150W HPS.


----------



## bi0phreak420

YOU WANT FACTS.......the facts are that weed is exactly what we call it a weed it will grow without hps and cfls and nutes and all the other dumb **** that we do to it................


----------



## bi0phreak420

nova564t said:
			
		

> I thought I might put in my 2 cents, I grow and will continue to grow with CFLs because I have them and can't afford to spend any money on my room. Even though I grow very good bud with CFLs if I had the money and a little more room I would switch to HPS for bloom, but for now I'll just stick with what I got and stay high just the same!!:farm: :joint4:



Well put nova.....thats my man right there...lol


----------



## slowmo77

bi0phreak420 said:
			
		

> YOU WANT FACTS.......the facts are that weed is exactly what we call it a weed it will grow without hps and cfls and nutes and all the other dumb **** that we do to it................


 
man your ignorance really shows now!! take a some of your WEED seeds and put them in a pot. sit it in the corner with just light coming thru the window to survive on.. run it till harvest and tell me it will produce something worth smoking without all the dumb **** we do. start a journal so we can all follow along with your great idea..


----------



## slowmo77

by the way you still didn't answer my questions there smarty britches


----------



## Roddy

Where's the popcorn emoticon?  

You keep saying the light diminishes after 9"....doesn't that count for the CFL's too? So, after your plant reaches 8" the bottom is now lacking light?


----------



## bi0phreak420

slowmo77 said:
			
		

> i assume that all caps means your gettin an attitude so i'll respond accordingly.
> 
> At what point did this become all about you and what your using.
> As i recall Dr. Autoflower started this thread. I don't see anyone arguing with you by name. I was simply stating my experiance with Cfl's and Hps lights. if you'll pull your head out of your arse and read what i wrote you'll see that.
> 
> you'll never hear (read) me saying that you can't or shouldn't use cfl's or any low budget growing supplies for that matter. when i started i used a hand held floro shop light over a tote full of MG moisture control soil and added lights when i had the money and the need and made it work.
> 
> how much cash did you drop on that big cfl? how many lumens is it? how many watts? how close can you get your hand before it gets hot?
> i run dual 150w HPS vapor tights now. im sure some members are still here that bought the same lights..
> heres the run down on them.
> 150 watts, 15,900 lumens each. you can get within an 2 inches of the glass before it gets hot and i payed around 20$ each for them. can you beat the price? the lumens? the cost? the heat? thats what i thought!!!!




I paid 20 bucks for that bulb its 125 watts and it puts out 10,500 lumens...LOL


----------



## bi0phreak420

Oh Yeah Slowmo I Keep My Bulb About 2 Inches From The Tops Of My Plants...lol


----------



## slowmo77

so same heat, less light same price you do math


----------



## StoneyBud

I really don't think that the Doc meant to start an argument over CFLs or other types of lights being "better" for growing, but to help him decide what was most appropriate for him in his specific conditions and affordability.

I use my dual 125 Flo over my host plants in dirt for the sole purpose of growing clones and trying to keep the growth rate *down* so I can reduce the amount of trimming I do between taking clone cuts. It may not be the most effective way to do it, but it's the way I like to do it.

Perhaps the Doc is looking for a way that *he* will be most satisfied, but where it may not be the absolute best way of being done.

Just my 1.5 cents. (Taxes got my other .5)


----------



## bi0phreak420

I'm over it


----------



## slowmo77

dang stoney, taxes only got .5 i tried to give my 2 cents and i owed a dime.


----------



## StoneyBud

slowmo77 said:
			
		

> dang stoney, taxes only got .5 i tried to give my 2 cents and i owed a dime.


 
You just made me laugh longer than it took you to type that! Hahahaahahahahahaahahaha  :rofl: 

Ain't it the truth? 
Every year....Mo taxes, Mo taxes, Mo taxes...... :hairpull: :cry: :rant:  
All I can do is::48: :bong: :bong2:


----------



## Sixx

Roddy said:
			
		

> Where's the popcorn emoticon?
> 
> You keep saying the light diminishes after 9"....doesn't that count for the CFL's too? So, after your plant reaches 8" the bottom is now lacking light?



Ummm yeah.. Light is light.... It all dimishes over distance. Im not sure the point you are trying to make here.


----------



## Roddy

Sixx said:
			
		

> Ummm yeah.. Light is light.... It all dimishes over distance. Im not sure the point you are trying to make here.



The point I am making is, I want bigger plants than the light can produce and am pointing out this fact to anyone who is reading and may be trying to decide what's best for them. If the light can only feed a part of the plant, either more light will be needed (thus more money all around) or you'll not produce as big or good a crop as you could otherwise.


----------



## Roddy

bi0phreak420 said:
			
		

> Ewww i must have pissed them off my reputation meter is red..lol thats funny



I appreciate those who stand their ground even if not the most popular of stances, as long as we can all treat each other nicely and respect each other at the end! Your rep hasn't been hurt in my eyes, my friend!


----------



## nova564t

bi0phreak420 said:
			
		

> Ewww i must have pissed them off my reputation meter is red..lol thats funny


 
Bio, I understand that your grow methods work (I grow with CFLs also) but you need to understand that the people and mods are obligated to provide members, especially newbees the BEST way to grow. When you get short with your replies you provoke members. As a newbee you should take a little more time to understand what members are posting before you respond. This is a great source for info and would like to see you stick around.:48:


----------



## The Hemp Goddess

Sixx said:
			
		

> Ummm yeah.. Light is light.... It all dimishes over distance. Im not sure the point you are trying to make here.



No, not all light is equal.  While all lights do diminish over distance, the loss of lumens is not uniform for all light sources.  Some lose lumens over a very short distance, like several inches.  Some disburse light over a far greater distance, like 3-5 feet.


----------



## Gixxerman420

Sixx said:
			
		

> Maybe we dont need to grow the same amount as an HPS user.
> Your comparison is not fair.... You are assuming we are gonna go buy 31 CFls to have 45K Lumens...When in actuality we are only using 8 or 10 CFLs.... You cant tell me 8 or 10 CFLs cost more to operate than a 400W HPS. True the 400W HPS is better, mainly due to the wattage and further reach. It has more lumens and wattage and penetration and and... We know. But from the studies I have done, the difference in end product is not as drastic as you make it sound. Im sure you know light diminishes over distance.... a 400W at 12 inches from the canopy dimishes over 50% of the lumens. Our CFLs at 1inch diminish 0% of the lumens. Not to mention Photosynthetic Active Radiation is the measure of light that a plant actually senses and uses, and it is the light the plant sees and can use that is more important then the actual output lumen of the grow lamp! Another benefit of using CFLs is that they do not generate as much heat and can be kept almost on top of the plants producing the exact 100% photosynthetic active radiation light, with no loss of intensity. So if you position these  lamps close to the leaves you get the benefit of 100% PAR light in the correct 400nw to 700nw range, giving the plant the correct light colours and light quality. You do not get 100% PAR light with an HID.  The difference in yield is NOT night and day, it is much closer than most people think.


8-10 wouldn't run as hot as a 400 watt HPS true, we're only saying that comparable lumen levels are more expensive to achieve with cfl... You also would not have the yield with 8-10 CFL's as you get with 400 watt HPS... Not arguing your needs for a large yield, or the fact that growing with CFL's is viable.... Just that HPS is more efficient lumen for lumen!


----------



## Hick

bi0phreak420 said:
			
		

> YOU WANT FACTS.......the facts are that weed is exactly what we call it a weed .............



there is just SO much _wrong_ about that statement.... 
by definition, mj was "never" a weed, nor was "hemp" 
wiktionary: Any plant growing in cultivated ground to the injury of the crop or  desired vegetation, or to the disfigurement of the place; an unsightly,  useless, or injurious plant;  A species of plant considered harmful to  the environment or regarded as a nuisance
pricton edu:any plant that crowds out cultivated plants
websters:a plant that is not valued where it is growing and is usually of vigorous growth; _especially_ *:* one that tends to overgrow or choke out more desirable plants
wikapedia:A weed in a general sense is a plant that is considered by the user of  the term to be a nuisance, and normally applied to unwanted plants in  human-made settings such as gardens, lawns or agricultural areas, but  also in parks, woods and other natural areas
freedic:A plant considered undesirable, unattractive, or troublesome, especially one growing where it is not wanted, as in a garden.
dictioarydotcom:
a valueless plant growing wild, especially one that grows on cultivated ground to the exclusion or injury of the desired crop.
2.any undesirable or troublesome plant, especially one that grows profusely where it is not wanted:


----------



## StoneyBud

I may be wrong in this, but I think it's the appliance "the light bulb" that determines the throw of the light, not the spectrum. The power of the bulb, the thickness and refractivity of the glass and the intensity of the source, not the spectrum.

Lumens are no more than an International standard of the measure of the total amount of photons that strike a globe at exactly one foot. That quantity represents the intensity of the source and physical characteristics of the objects it passes through on it's way to the point of measurement.

Photons are the actual physical light itself.

I knew a "Lighting" Engineer one time. His reference books on nothing but the engineering aspects of lighting had a combined number of pages of about 50 thousand in maybe 75 books on just lighting.

There is so very much about the subject that its really intimidating.

When you say "Not all light is equal", I would further refine the statement into "Not all light bulbs are equal and the amount and type of light they produce is not always equal"

All things being equal, I believe that *If each light source was equal in its intensity, the distance each part of that light would travel would also be equal*.

For example, LEDs have different amounts of power. A 300 watt LED will have a further throw than a 28 watt LED like I use. 

HIDs with more power also have a further throw.

It's not the *type* of light that creates the ability to reach further distances, but the power of the source light. Less power, less throw.

The intensity of the light when it reaches the point at which it's absorbed or reflected is also based on its intensity at its source. The equation for light intensity during travel has about 2 million variables. The ones concerned with the bulbs we use for growing and the distances we use them at radically decreases the complications to those equations and brings it to basically:

1. The initial intensity of the light.

2. The distance traveled.

Light type has very little to do with it at distances of less than a billion miles.

A 28 watt LED will travel about 18 inches before it loses its ability to be useful to a plant for full growth.

If that same LED were 1000 watts, it would have equal throw with a 1000 watt MH or HPS.

Not the same spectrum, but the same throw.


----------



## Irish

this was a very good read, with physical evidence from real time growers that is put in layman terms that is easy for most to understand. thank you...


----------



## smokingjoe

Dang looks like I missed a really great pissing match here.  As you were.


----------



## ShOrTbUs

so for the guy who created this thread...if heat & noise is the biggest issue for you. more important then yeild, cost, and energy consumption. heres my what i would do...

i forget the exact wattage it changes at, but if im remembering this correctly, up to and including a 26W cfl will run at exactly 90degrees. no matter how long you run them.

12 26W cfls will give you enough light for 4sq/f, no fan for cooling needed. but remember you still need to exchange your air, need that CO2


----------



## dekgib

Irish said:
			
		

> this was a very good read, with physical evidence from real time growers that is put in layman terms that is easy for most to understand. thank you...




I was just thinking the same thing here:icon_smile:


----------



## burningbush93

Sorry!!! iknow this is a old thread but i have been trying to figure out if i could use a 150 watt hps without ventilation(i have no where to vent). my grow is 33''L 15''W and 5 ft tall and i curently use 200 watts of cfls and i could add more if i wanted to without any heat issues. so does this mean i could use a 150 watt hps without ventilation? i would have a fan blowing on the bulb to dispurs the heat. i would really apriciate your help. i keep finding all kinds of diffrent opinions so please help me if you can!!! THANKS


----------



## ShOrTbUs

yes, if your running 200watts of cfl's with no heat issues, then you will not have heat issues with the 150watt hps. what im more concerned with is, if you are not venting your current set up with the cfl's. how are you exchanging the air within the room? you will benefit greatly by having some form of air exchange within your room.


----------



## Devile

I can not use CFL and HPS, it is very hot in my place, when I used Mars led light, I can control temperature very well. Leds can produce less heat.


----------



## Alexphillips

if you are not using any ventilation system due to the sound of fans then do not use grow tent. if you want to use grow tent then make sure you have a good ventilation system installed in your tent. without proper air flow , very hot  which is not good for plants at all.


----------



## Bruce111

Alexphillips said:


> if you are not using any ventilation system due to the sound of fans then do not use grow tent. if you want to use grow tent then make sure you have a good ventilation system installed in your tent. without proper air flow , very hot  which is not good for plants at all.


Totally correct.


----------



## SmokeRich211

Devile said:


> I can not use CFL and HPS, it is very hot in my place, when I used Mars led light, I can control temperature very well. Leds can produce less heat.


That's right, it has a lot to do with the summer heat, the first thing is to choose a good light


----------

