hps &mh beats floros

[theelectrician]

why? because there easier if yur not worried over the money,i could and probably should use floros they work in modest areas very well but your always ajustin an movin um , crap on that:smokin: what do yall think? :stoned: ps i luv ma hps &mh 400s use 6 150 watt cfl for the corners and middle

theelectrician Reviewed by theelectrician on 02-16-2008. hps &mh beats floros why? because there easier if yur not worried over the money,i could and probably should use floros they work in modest areas very well but your always ajustin an movin um , crap on that:smokin: what do yall think? :stoned: ps i luv ma hps &mh 400s use 6 150 watt cfl for the corners and middle Rating: 5

[Paht_Hed]

Absolutely not. Fluoros have a much better spectrum than that of HPS or MH even when the two are combined. The only reason people get that super dank you see is b/c HPS puts out a higher number of lumens/watt. Also HPS and MH both run extremely hot when compared to T5 Fluorescent. I ca purchase 40k lumens of T5 for $209 at my local grow shop. Thats 80k lumens in one of the best spectrums available on the market today for a mere 864 watts. Yeah, not as efficient as HPS but when you consider that I can also run those T5s 3 inches from my plants then yeah, they are. Also no heat signature for those who don't grow legally.

[theelectrician]

like what ur sayin man,i usta use an 8 tube remote ballast 2by4 for vegative growth then iwas forced by neccesaty to use my 400mh my bababies never looked better in every way and when i repotted them the roots r awsome however that bein said and all im bacck to ma floros for vegative growth economy

[Paht_Hed]

I flowered using CFLs check out the grow log link in my sig, the buds I grew are some of the most crystally fire ass lookin weed I have seen. Keep in my I grew 2 plants using a mere 30k lumens. That's 15,000 lumens a plant. I am about to do a SCRoG with 40k fixtures per 2 plants. Buds should get crunk.