Flowering light delima

Gary: your options are only limited by your imagination and the size of your wallet. I do it all with T-5's and I have no regrets. My friends have come around to vegging with T-5's because they burn so cool that you can hang them a couple of inches above the tops of their plants, but then they're old school and they flower with HID or HPS. Admisttedly they have prettier buds but mine are just as potent.

The down side of T-5's is that you'll only get vigorous growth directly under your fixture, so it has to be big enough to completely cover your grow. I have two four tube fixtures 4' long hung side by side in my 2' by 4' by 6 1/2' tent and that covers every square inch of my grow space. For me, T-5's are great and I love 'em. I hope this helps. Hank

 

Just as potent with a T5 as with a HPS? I seroiusly doubt that, unless your friends don't know what they're doing. Furthermore the yields under a T5 can't even compare per m/sq, let alone by comparable wattage. Moreover, I've found that when timing counts in a perpetual setup the plants suffer a mild shock and slower transition/flowering response in adjusting from T5 HOs to more intense HPS light. And for that reason I incorporate a few 150w HPS in my vegging chamber that I switch on the last 10 days or so before entering the 1000w HPS bloom unit so the plants can adapt more smoothly to the HPS spectrum and intensity.

 

Cuzin: you need to understand that I only grow for my own personal needs in a little 2' by 4' tent and my T-5's do a great job from seed propagation or cloning to harvest. I use them on a progressive light schedule that starts at 20/4 and is reduced by one hour a week. By the time they're down to 14 to 13 hours of light and 10 to 11 hours of darkness they start preflowering.It's very gradual and that's when I change from 5,000 K lamps to 2,700 reds and their diet to a flowering formula. The guy who taught me said it best imitated what happens in nature.

I continue dropping the light until they reach 10 on and 14 off and I keep it at that until harvest. This isn't a difficult schedule to replicate, others have done it and some liked it.

I think it's only fair to admit though that I use Technaflora's, "Recipe for Success," for nutes and I use them exclusively.

It keeps my sugar bowl full and my utility costs are much less than my friend's who use HID and HPS because I don't have to run A/C, even in the hottest parts of the summer, but they're coming around.

Are HID and HPS better? Hell yes! They're the industry standard and they got that way by years of trials. But again I'm just growing for me; 12 vegging to 6 flowering to a 1/2 lb on hand. My friends who are growing on a larger scale are now vegging under T'-5's for the same economical reason but then they flower under HID and HPS. Personally, I tasted their wares and mine aren't as pretty but they're just as potent and I think mine taste better. As far as potency is concerned, I'm not trying to get fucked up I just vaporize enough to take the edge off my pain. Hank

 

Hank makes a great point! What's good for him isn't necessarily what's best for others, but it works really well! What's so cool about growing is that we get to tinker and experiment.

HID (high intensity discharge) lights, like HPS (high-pressure sodium) are without a doubt the all around "best" way to flower, if you want the max yield and quality for your efforts. (Naturally, the sun is the best, but we're talking indoors) If heat and or space restrictions are a consideration though, T5s, LED, or CFL might be the best way to go.

You will end up trying different lighting options as you grow more. So I say you should start with what's available to you, and what's in your price range. I think CFL are a really easy way to get started. Inexpensive, locally available, no need for funny looking equipment, etc. However, the cost to buy all the lights, fixtures, etc.... You can buy an acceptable HPS/MH combo off eBay.

If you can swing it, I would recommend you trying to pick up an HPS/MH combo. You definitely won't regret it, and won't have to upgrade your lighting any time soon. You also won't waste money because after your first grow, you'll want one anyways. Just be sure you have plenty of ventilation to keep the temperatures in check, and you'll be fine.

 

Well let's see. My response was to your assertion that your T5 produced as potent buds as your friends HPS lights. This is really about your personal preference and most would not agree. And I'd also have to call ya' on the power consumption and heat factor relative to your 2 X 4 space. That T5 if it's HO is drawing over 400 watts w/8 tubes and producing more heat than most will admit. I could easily run 2 150w HPS with modified remote ballasts and get far more lumens and light penetration (plants veg just fine and faster under HPS), only 300 watts power consumption and no A/C needed even in summer b'cuz of the remote ballast config. The bottom line is the 2 150 HPS bulbs alone produce no more, and likely less heat than a 4ft T5. And knowing how to flush, dry and cure, I bet I could easily beat a T5 on potency, yield and taste. Strain for strain, per m/sq.

Edit: PS- Higher potency doesn't mean you have to get more f'd up. It just might mean you can smoke less to get the same effect so it's healthier for your lungs.

 

Debate- go!

 

Cuzin, it's a scientific fact (PAR graphs) that a 6500k bulb provides a plant with much more usable light than an HPS. Furthermore, HPS bulbs do not produce better buds. In fact, T5s produce a better/more potent end product.

 

But where you're missing the boat is in the lumen output dept.
Where's your supportive evidence that T5s produce a superior end product than HPS? Or, are so many growers simply all wrong when they use HPS?
Why then isn't everyone using only T5s? Why do 90%+ of all posts on any forum about the subject claim otherwise? Nothing can beat replicating the sun as closely as possible. And HIDs, HPS or MH do this far more effectively than a ceiling covered with banks of T5 lights. And finally it's been documented by Ed Rosenthal that lumens are far more important than kelvin color range as long as the light spectrum is reasonably balanced.