Printable View
So I'm hunting around on Ebay and I come across a 150 Watt HPS Digital Ballast. I know digital is the "way" to go as it's more efficient, cooler temps and the bulbs produce more lumens.
Question is, for such a low power bulb, would it really make that much difference over your standard back yard mechanic ballast?
eBay: Digital 150 Watt HPS Electronic Ballast Grow Light 150W (item 330091251497 end time Jun-21-07 10:11:30 PDT)
for only a few more bucks you can get a digital 400w ballast from this place Grow Lights, Grow Bulbs and Hydroponics - Plantlighting Hydroponics & Grow Lights
heres what ur looking for, both hps and mh Galaxy 400W 120V-240V Electronic Ballast - Plantlighting Hydroponics
Good link and thanks, but I'm one of those "Cabbies" and don't have the luxury to use a 400 watter due to heat and Cab size.
I'd use a 250, but I would think (2) 150's could cover more ground.
Thanks again
Dizzy - How big is your cab? How are you venting it? Are you using a cool tube or cooled hood?
Let's see if I can remember off the top of my head. ;)
Roughly 4'W x 3'D x 28" to 30"H
http://boards.cannabis.com/attachmen...-light-008.jpg
Venting is a 120mm Fan to a scrubber. Fan is rated at 108CFM. 4" ducting all the way through. Recently added a cool tube to the 150 HPS which of course is inline with the fan and scrubber.
http://boards.cannabis.com/attachmen...-light-054.jpg
http://boards.cannabis.com/attachmen...-light-072.jpg
There is a 2" passive intake to the cab which is an ABS 90 and also a 1-1/2" Active intake.
Here's some photos of my lights and vent set-up. It's a little bigger than yours, but essentially the same thing. I'm sucking the air thru the cool tubes and out thru a scrubber.
I have two 400w in the cool tubes w/470cfm fan. The cool tubes are barely warm to the touch. Since you have a cooled fixture, heat shouldn't be such a big problem, although at some point you might want to consider a larger (more cfm) fan.
Would two 150's be better than one 400? Beats the hell out of me. Somewhere on this forum I remember a thread about the 150watt hps club or something like that. you might want to do some searching and see what you can find and ask the folks who are using 150's.
Hehe, I know your op. ;) I said it there and I'll say it here,
Very nice!
The cool tube is indeed only warm to the touch. I also have some CFLs in there that add a decent heat load to the equation. But all this is beside the point of my questions though. :)
I just want to know if a "Digital" ballast would really be that much better than the one I use now, which is from an old ass security light. I'm not worried about the fire hazard, that much, since I've got it remotely hooked up with an attached fan. I just wanted to know if a digital ballast, for a 150 watt HPS, would produce noticeable more lumen's, better quality light, cure world hunger, and increase my yield, you know, like they claim it will. :p
And I would think a 400 would out perform 2 150's, I was just comparing them to a 250 watter.
And, I am in the 150 club! hehe
I'd be a dual wielding 150er if the other set-up I salvaged was a Med base socket. I'll be giving it to my buddy once these plants get sexed, he's going to share the load if more than 3 of the 8 turn girlie.
Thanks!
digital ballast offer a couple of advantages, like less heat from the ballast, slightly more efficient operation.
but its still just a 150 and lumens would be similiar to a regular magnetic ballast and no it wouldnt produce anymore than a regular ballast.
with your limited cab height you are probably better off sticking to 150 watt lights.
That's what I figured too. Thanks!
Sounds fancy though. :p
I use 3 150 watters (magnetic ballasts)in one big reflector (modified roadsign) I can raise the seedlings with the one in the middle, then switch to the two side ones for veg, then put all 3 on during flower, works well, saves cash and grows big buds.
with all 3 on it only raises my temps 4 degrees over the room next to it.
And I'm not part of the 150watt club, or whatever... :stoned:
http://boards.cannabis.com/indoor-gr...-hps-club.html
Now you can be. :thumbsup:
There's a digital ballast maker (Lumatek) which is claiming up to 30% greater luminous output from a 600HPS, which, if true, would put a 600 within cooee of the output of a 1000HPS.
I had a big ol' dummyspit with some clods on another board about this; I called bollocks on the greater luminous output claim. I reckon bejay's right- the luminous output comes from dropping watts across the arc tube. If you want more luminous output, the ballast would have to allow more current through the tube- in excess of its ratings. Not a happy thing for tube life.
Digitals start up the tube a bit more softly, so you'll get more starts per tube life. However, if you replace your HPS tubes annually as most makers recommend due to output degradation, it's a moot point. An HPS tube has plenty of starts left in it after 12 mos in service, even on a plain ol magnetic. Now, if you're a city council running a bunch of streetlights, it'd be a good thing to get another year or two out of a tube. Streetlighting can tolerate much more output degradation than can horticultural HPS users.
Digitals are more efficient in regulating current as they have no iron-cored inductor with the inherent eddy-current heat wastage. The savings on a 600 HPS on a mag compared to a 600 on digital is about 55 watts, ~9% overall power reduction.
So, is it worth converting a 150 to a digital? Probably not.