t5-ho for flowering...?

T5's are way better choice if you can't use the regular lighting. Infact I'm looking into changing my lighting to T5's.

Benifits. Low heat, less wattage and you don't have to vent to cool the lights. Oh, and they are cheaper to purchase.

This is what I have learned: 400w HPS puts out 90 lumens per watt. A 1000w puts out 140 lumens per watt. A T5 28w puts out 104 lumens per watt. I'd say this is a big difference in heat and cost.

Something to consider.

 

D0p35m0k3r: Charon001 has made some good points. I've been using T-5's this year and I'm sold on them. Do you know another lamp you can have 1" above your plants that won't fry them?

They're cheap to run and I'm using them from seed propagation all the way to harvest. I have a 2' rack of four tubes with the blue 'grow' lamps over my starter and cloning tray and a 4' rack of four tubes to continue vegging over my bubble tubs. Then I swap the grow tubes to the red flowering variety.

I will warn you though that you won't get the tight, dense buds you do with the HID lighting, but you won't have the electricity bill that goes with it. Those soft fluffy buds you'll get with the T-5's will get you just as fucked up if that's your intention.

If you're growing in a tent with a highly reflective surface I think you'll be pleasantly surprised with the results, I know I am. Hank

 

Note that most of those budget 150W HPS draw close to 300W when you add in their cheap ballasts. You cannot just go by the bulb rating.

 

I said my piece.

 

i grew my easy ryders with a 2ft 6 bulb t5 from htg and another 100 watts of cfls for side lighting. got a good yield but they were the fluffy buds, they may not look as nice but they deffinately get you fucked up.

 

it sounds like you want to check out the efficientcies of a 600 hps as it will be a better producer and only cost a slight bit more. mh's would cost more and run even hotter. ive found little use for a mh on a small grow. from t-5's the girls go to the hps for a week of 24/7 then when the stretch is on i bump it to 12/12. i have 2 400 mh's that i never use. i just keep them around for emergencies like a fried hps ballast. in that case mh is better than nothing or less worse than getting shocked into a hermie from inconsistant lighting. how many plants under this supposed lighting? that is ultimately what determines what you need to do as opposed to what you want to do or afford. the t-5's would need to be butt-hair close to get good density and id get another source to help it along. a couple of good spiral cfls to give an improved spectrum. the t-5's dont have the summer sun, only the spring-like and late fall colours. a good 42w cfl will add enough to help with density if you are careful to place it well or be willing to move it around the plant as needs dictate. my homie grows tight with 26w cfls and they have a good enough flowering spectrum and with enough you can get the desired lumens well dispersed into your plant canopy, fewer will keep the heat down. i think 2-3 42ws would suffice for flowering and use the t-5's up to final veg as thats what the available light spectrum was designed for. certainly use them in addition to the 42w's as the blue light is usable but just not as available in nature. you can even get them in a 55w for under 12 bucks ea. 55s are said to equivacate to 200w incandescent. so as long as the light colour is good and the lights are kept close you will or can achieve solid nugz! my friend's grow is 100% cfl and his buds are as good as mine and i dose mine with both hps and cfls. id nearly cut them out till i noticed the buds nearest the cfls are actually bigger and fatter than the others and maintain great density. is true however that buds with poor exposure will get loose or what we call larfy buds. you'll get better smoke than any street-bag of non cured and poorly finished smoke. the actual cost minus labour is generally less than a buck a gram. this includes power, soils and nutes. if you do specialty nutes it can cost more and if you waste light it can be costly too. my meds grow under 1 600 hps but i know a fella running 3 1000 watt lights over six plants. my meds i consider as good or better than 75% of his production. he gets more buds than i do (merely larger plants) but a 200-300$ power bill to run excessive lighting. (total overkill) just some thinking points for you. now go fire a blunt and get this grow started out right!

good luck, -D-

 

Hey guys: Let's put this one to bed as it's just not that controversial. In real enclosed spaces a lot of people like the curly CFL's but they too get hot and you usually have to have a lot of them.

I've used florescent tubes, T-8's, for about 25 years and they worked fine. Recently I fell in love with T-5's. I didn't add Mylar covered reflectors to this last grow but I may well do it with the next one. They worked great on my Aerogardens.

T-5's use less energy, run cooler, and you have a variety of lamp frequencies to choose from that I didn't have with the T-8's.

There's no one fix all for everyone. You're going to have to put up your money, buy your ticket and take the ride. You might not end up loving it but so far I haven't found anyone that hated them, especially when the electric bill comes. Just make sure that your fixture is a tad longer and wider than your grow because they're the weakest at the perimeter. Hank