Actual vs Equivalent - I'll Disprove The Myth

Discussion in 'Growing Marijuana Indoors' started by etnad0, Apr 21, 2012.

  1. #1 etnad0, Apr 21, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 21, 2012
    This is my 3rd grow and I'm still baffled that people are running around feeding people the myth/lie that they need 100 ACTUAL watts when it comes to CFL.

    1) Watts = Energy consumption not light output.
    2) Equivalent = Equal to.

    So here is what I'm working with. I have 4x 300w EQUIVALENT (1200w). My ACTUAL watts are 260w. According to the myth I should have at least 100w for the first plant and 50w for each additional plant. With 260w I should only be able to grow about 4 plants to a decent bud yeild.

    I wasn't going to post this originally, but I'm on Day 14 of what was going to be a personal test, but figured I'd post the pics and let everyone follow along. The goal of my experiment is to:

    1) Disprove the ACTUAL watt myth.

    This is a mini grow and I'll be starting 12/12 tomorrow. They have been on 24/0 for the last 13 days. Today is the last day of 24/0

    Come along for the ride and lets see if the ACTUAL watts vs. EQUIVALENT watts myth can be disproved. There are 15 plants, but all males will be tossed and I expect to have 5-7 females total.

    All plants are under 3 inches tall and growing their 3rd set of 3 "finger" leaves. The only plant over 3 inches is the one in the front far right. Its at 3.5 inches.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Subbed, can't wait to see how this turns out. Right now I have to plants with 4 cfls, 26 actual watts each, but once I get the fixtures wired will run 3 105 actual watt bulbs.
     
  3. It's not a myth. :)


    Watts are not as important as lumens... this is why, when using those CFL with 'equivalent' ratings, it's recommended that you pay closer attention to the actual watts, rather than the 'equivalent' to get a more realistic idea of the lumen output.


    What we need to see, in order to read, or to write on a piece of paper, is NOT the same as the lumens required for growth.


    Our visibility, is the ONLY THING taken into consideration, when the term 'equivalent' is used... and even then, them term is still used only very loosely.


    This is why incandescent lights work well enough for our visibility, and why they are absolute shite for growing a plant. :)



    150w incandescent = 2,550 lumens or only 17 lumens per watt

    150w halogen = 3000 lumens or 20 lumens per watt

    150w of Fluorescents = 9,000 lumens or 60 lumens per watt

    150w of Compact Fluorescents = 10,500 lumens or 70 lumens per watt

    150w Metal Halide = 13,500 lumens or 90 lumens per watt

    150w High Pressure Sodium = 16,000 lumens or 107 lumens per watt


    The above CFL rating is based on actual watts, not equivalent. :)



    Hope this clears things up! :)

    You can certainly grow and keep a plant, or plants 'alive', with too-few watts. There's no need to prove this, it's known fact.

    But here's another well known fact: you're not going to yield much in the end by knowingly depriving them. :D
     
  4. You're going to disprove the 100 watts per plant rule of thumb by growing smaller plants? Seems like a loophole to me lol.

    By the "myth" logic, you could grow 4 AVERAGE sized plants with your 260 watts. You're going for 5-7 "mini" plants...see what I'm saying?

    There's nothing to disprove anyways, it's just a rule of thumb, not fact.

    Not trying to rain on your parade or anything haha, it just doesn't seem like a very controlled experiment. Looks like a sick little micro grow though, so I'll definitely be following.
     
  5. I agree with you about lumens. They write the lumens on the outside of the package. That's why I want to try the experiment and prove once and for all that you can grow a decent amount with only 260 actual watts.

    On my 2nd grow, I used this same set up and grew 4 plants over 2 feet tall before harvesting. I know the outcome, I just want to document it this time around.
     
  6. I'm going more for yield here. I just finished grown 4x 2ft. tall plants with the same set up. 2x were males and 2x were females. yielded 2.7 ounces dry, but I also polinated the females so I ended up with some seeds for this grow since I was out.

    I guess I more want to see what the end yield will be since I've never done a mini grow. I'll post my flowering nutes later.
     

  7. In order to do this, you would have to have a comparison or control group as well...as in another group of the same plants, the same age, growing with 1200 actual watts...this would give you something to compare your results to...

    All you're doing is showing that you can grow plants with low light levels without killing them...they will not flower very well, and your yield will be terrible...but you should be able to blame that on the fact that you are growing tiny plants, thus, in your mind, proving your theory...

    More light = better yields...not a myth, proven over and over again fact...
     
  8. Now that's an experiment :D. Would be nice to see the differences in yield between two 2ft plants, and four 1ft plants (for example). Same strain, grown in the same space with the same lights etc.
     

  9. This right here, stole my post! Haha, but for real, unless there is a control group to show how 1200w (actual) turns out, you can't say that you are disproving/proving anything. Enjoy your grow regardless, but jussayin' :smoke:.
     
  10. #10 BadKittySmiles, Apr 21, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 21, 2012

    Hopefully once you re-read that sentence a few times (the 1,200watt portion) you'll begin to understand just how unrealistic it is to assume that the plants are actually receiving anywhere close to 1,200watts worth of energy! Even the 260watts are not as 'powerful' as they would be, coming from an HID. :)


    Here's what five weeks from germination with only 400 'actual' watts at first, to 1000 'actual' HPS watts, looks like... in other words, their first two weeks were spent under 400watts, and the following 3 weeks after being moved to the big room, they remained under 1,000w total right up until about the day of the photo when they were spread out.




    [​IMG]



    The day or so before the photo, they were much more tightly packed together, and had just been pulled apart and bumped up to 2,400w, for better coverage.... there are about 30 - 35 plants in there, with maybe 2/3 of the room visible. Up until then, 1,000w was the most they'd ever seen in their short 5 weeks of life. :)


    If you think that in 3 weeks or less, your ladies will look about like this, then you're well on your way to disproving the 'myth'... you are growing with an extra 200 'equivalent watts' more than these ladies had, after all! :p :D



    These ladies are about three weeks from germination, just tipped into 12/12 that week in a small breeding closet (that's a deceased male, covered in pollen, just to the left).. first they were given 400watts HPS, then 1,000w the week of bloom.

    [​IMG]





    In case it's not clear, I mean no harm and don't want to discourage you :)



    I'm just trying to help you understand, more realistically, what you're trying to accomplish. :smoke:




    If you expect to have 5 - 7 ladies under 260 actual watts, then there are plenty of people on here already growing 5 + female plants, with only 100 - 150 actual watts (in other words, fewer watts than your room)!

    And have you seen the micro grows in computer cases? Those are pretty neat, as well!



    Your set-up is not all that uncommon, it's about the average for a small-scale grow, so you shouldn't have any worries over whether or not they survive or produce.



    For many other growers, it's just a lot of time and effort to spend on such a small amount of herb.


    That's why so many people suggest using at least Xwatts, per X-number of plants.


    That suggestion is not meant as an "end-all, be-all", or the only-way-to-grow.



    It's more about tapping into the most efficient use of your space, and the most efficient use of your time.


    Anything less, can certainly produce a certain amount of healthy vegetative growth, but begins dramatically cutting into your yield.



    If you're going for yield, then for roughly the same effort (just a little extra watering), with a better light source*, you could easily grow an entire pound give or take, in that same space, and in less time than it takes plants to mature with so few, weak and un-concentrated lumens. :)




    (*Or at least a light source that converts to more lumens, for roughly the same watt-price....

    For instance 260 'actual' watts in CFL, creates only 18,200 lumens.

    But 250 watts in HPS, creates 26,750 lumens!

    Between a 100watt and a 150watt HPS light, those watts can cover more space, and provide over 30% more useable light, and it does so for less money/watt-usage on your electricity bill!! :hello:

    Heat should not be an issue, particularly if the ballasts can be kept outside the closet: In my early days, I've used both 400 & 600 watt HPS systems in small closets, without the use of anything but a cleverly-placed box fan to extract the heat and maintain optimal temps.)
     
  11. I'm not going for comparison here. I'm moreso tackling the fact that people keep saying that if you don't have actual watts you'll get a low yield. There is no question in my mind that HPS or Hallide or LED will yield good results.

    I want to test and see if the equivalents will yield good results without having 50-100 actual watts per plant.

    I agree that more light = better yield... however WATTS does not = light output it = energy consumption. Lumens = how much light the bulb is putting out.
     
  12. I don't take any of this personally. Its not a comparison test. People keep talking about low yield, but I think I can disprove the watt myth by getting a high yield with mini plants and only 260 actual watts.

    In fact, I'm predicting at least 20g per plant dry. LOL. Big goal but we'll see what happens. I was happy with my last grow and those were 2 ft. tall. I'm 100% sure I'll get something, but how much is the question.

    My first grow had 4 plants and a lot less light and still yielded an ounce dry, which is crap, but it was my first grow and I only had 600w equivalent and they were 18 inches at harvest. I learned a lot with my last grow which is why I decided to attempt it.
     

  13. But...the whole subject of this thread is...


    Therefore, you are the one bringing up using watts to describe lighting from CFLs...

    Lumens or PAR are used to measure light, but there is an approximate average lumen per watt for CFL bulbs...it just works out to be that the lumens required to properly flower a plant are achieved when using about 100W actual CFL light...

    Would you rather people say you need about 400W equivalent to achieve the required lumens?


    Good, don't mean to present a personal affront...;)


    So...about 7 plants...at 20g/plant = 140g from 260W actual...or about 0.53g/W...to me anyways, that's not really a high yield...

    My 3rd ever grow, I was still growing with CFLs at the time, I got about 230g from 2 plants with around 350W actual...or about 0.64-0.65g/W

    Can't remember the actual numbers...it was a while ago...

    That was my last CFL grow...I switched to HID lighting for everything after that...
     
  14. #14 arciem, Apr 22, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 22, 2012
    I think what everyone is getting at here is that there is nothing to prove or disprove. Everyone agrees you can grow weed with very shitty light and get SOME results. It is a weed after all lol. ...The terms "decent yield" or "big yield" are subjective. Most people would agree that if you put the same time and effort, with more lumens, you would yield quite a bit more. There's really no myth there. I have personally grown 1 auto under 150 actual CFL watts and got close to 30g which is miniscule compared to what I got with a 150hps.

    I'm not trying to discourage you at all. I'm all for experimentation. I try to do something new each grow. Best of luck! :smoke:
     
  15. :confused_2: OK, I'm in... :bongin:

    Looks like it will be a nice grow
     
  16. Anyone with common sense will go and read the label and see the rating of how it USES 60w and is equivilent to a 300w incandescent bulb. But sadly, commen sense aint to common anymore. A family member of mine was stuck on the stupid equivilent rating when i tried to help with him growing, but he was one of the types who, like i said above, lack common sense. Lots of arguements over someones stupidy.

    But yeah, use your brain, and you wont be confused............. nuff said.
     


  17. 2.7 oz dry from two 2' tall plants from 260w cfl is just not enough for me man. Hell, I would smoke all of that before the next harvest....Add to that all the messing around with all those different bulbs (can't really just use 1 bulb since you have to get light all over the plants and cfl doesn't penetrate that well)...

    I pull 8-10 oz dry (depending on strain) from two 4' tall plants from a 400w hps every harvest.

    3 weeks of 18/6 from seed, 8-10 weeks of 12/12 (depending on strain).
     
  18. Have you got another grow to supplement you while you experiment? If not id say wait until your in a better position to try shit like this.
     
  19. Most of us understand that lumens = light output... so why do people keep saying "you need actual watts"? Lumens very from bulb type to bulb type... but as stated before we'll see how big the final yield is under only 260 actual watts of CFL.
     
  20. #20 etnad0, Apr 22, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 22, 2012
    Wrong... people say "you need ACTUAL watts" so I'm using the terminology they use all the time. Nobody ever says "You need XXX amount of Lumens to grow a plant".

    Someone already posted the chart of lumens per watt by bulb type so saying ACTUAL watts really doesn't have much meaning if you don't specify a lumen amount. With one bulb type I can get 60 lumens per watt and with another 70 lumens per watt, and so on.


    That would make much more sense than a blanket statement on watts because people also say it about LED, HID, etc. With that said, we'll see what happens when its over and weighed.


    I'm not sure what to expect from a mini grow since I've never done it. 20g is more of an arbitrary number than a goal, but a minimum of 20g would be nice.
     

Share This Page