4/4/4/4/4/4 light cycle?

SpaceBuddha

Well-Known Member
Hi, I was reading about this (veg) light cycle but could only find little results from just a few growers thus far, though what they are reporting is mostly positive. Claims have been made towards from no loss of growth speed versus 18/6 or 24/0 to the plant actually being able to use the first 3 hours of light the best after a dark period, but I haven't seen convincing 'proof' for any of this so I'm asking the community here whether you guys heard of this cycle, tried it or are still using it?

Obviously if this cycle works ok the benefits are immense in regards of electric bills and keeping the grow room much, much more cool for those who suffer from heat issues or just prefer to have their house and equipment less hot.
 

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
I've never heard of that one. I keep it pretty basic though. I just keep it to 18/6 for veg and 12/12 in bloom. If I feel the need to veg something else while my tent is being used for bloom, then I'll do 24/0 open room under t5. I also have a 180watt jumbo ufo led light, but I'd never run that thing open room. It causes my eyes to have a green hue no matter what I look at after seeing that purple light. T5's seem a lot better then led, and I'm not too big on cfl. So again I keep my lighting pretty basic, MH, HPS. On a side note, I read something about plants giving off Co2 during the dark cycle, and people are saying that plants get like a burst of growth when the lights first come on because of the built up Co2. Maybe food for thought I don't know.
 
Last edited:

dadio161

Well-Known Member
I have never heard of this light cycle as an experiment. I would be greatly concerned about how the ballast would handle being turned off and on so often and the bulb also. I flower using a 12/12 light cycle. Using a 600W digital ballast , my electric bill only went about $20 a month .
 

bryleetch

Well-Known Member
I fail to see how a 4/4 cycle would save any electricity over 12/12
I was thinking the same thing at first but I think the belief about this 4/4 is that it would somehow keep the plant in veg and that's how it would use less electricity compared to 18/6 or 24/0.
I really don't know how the plant would respond to this and I don't think the plant would know either, might just stress it out but the only way to find out for sure is to try it.
 

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
I was thinking the same thing at first but I think the belief about this 4/4 is that it would somehow keep the plant in veg and that's how it would use less electricity compared to 18/6 or 24/0.
I really don't know how the plant would respond to this and I don't think the plant would know either, might just stress it out but the only way to find out for sure is to try it.
Might be a good experiment for an Auto strain.
 

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
haha, I know I said I never heard of it but the more we all got chatting I think I actually have heard some of this. On another forum even. It is actually creepin me out because it seems ominously familiar to be honest.
 

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
For some reason I have a faint memory, something about benefits possibly being you can use higher wattage, keeping a auto in veg, Co2 Building up in the dark period.
 

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
Compare vegging a regular plant with 600 watts, to 4/4 veg blooming a auto under a 1k, lol.
4off
4on 1k
4off
4on 1k
4off
4on 1k I made a mistake multiply each of those by 4 hours of run time as well.

3k in 24 hrs <----- scratch that and ^ refer to the above correction, Its 12k

----------------
or Blooming under 600 watts
12off
12on 600w

7.2k in 24 hours

Is this correct?
Plus the benefit of the whole Co2 building up in the dark period.
 
Last edited:

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
I don't think it worked.
I knew it didn't work, at least not like that, if at all.
But maybe that's one way people thought it would.
What about keeping it at 600 watts, or whatever lighting someone runs.
Would there still be a benefit with the whole Co2 idea, and auto's?
 
Last edited:

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
Compare vegging a regular plant with 600 watts, to 4/4 veg blooming a auto under a 1k, lol.
4off
4on 1k
4off
4on 1k
4off
4on 1k I made a mistake multiply each of those by 4 hours of run time as well.

3k in 24 hrs <----- scratch that and ^ refer to the above correction, Its 12k

----------------
or Blooming under 600 watts
12off
12on 600w

7.2k in 24 hours

Is this correct?
Plus the benefit of the whole Co2 building up in the dark period.
Then again, wouldn't it be that 12k vs 18k in a typical veg?
But that's still 12k if it were 12/12.
 
Last edited:

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
So obviously I suck at math. The only thing I see that might be able to be experimented with is that Co2 idea.
But is 4 hours enough time for dark period Co2 to build up enough to where the plant would perk up at lights on?
Pretty sure I read something about turning down the fans too during dark.
 

bryleetch

Well-Known Member
So obviously suck at math. The only thing I see that might be able to be experimented with is that Co2 idea.
But is 4 hours enough time for dark period Co2 to build up enough to where the plant would perk up at lights on?
Pretty sure I read something about turning down the fans too during dark.
The whole CO2 build up concept is interesting, do plants really take in that much CO2 that the levels are noticeably lower during lights off when no CO2 is getting absorbed? Seems to me that the fans would keep the levels pretty even during lights on but thats just a guess. so many questions so few answers.
 

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
I have never heard of this light cycle as an experiment. I would be greatly concerned about how the ballast would handle being turned off and on so often and the bulb also. I flower using a 12/12 light cycle. Using a 600W digital ballast , my electric bill only went about $20 a month .
Do you cool your hood? I've been running 600w and mine went up more than that, think I'm on the care program too, or was so now it really went up losing care.
Do you notice a difference from summer to winter? I hear the winter cost more for some reason, not sure how true that is. I've only been using HID since February this year.
 

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
The whole CO2 build up concept is interesting, do plants really take in that much CO2 that the levels are noticeably lower during lights off when no CO2 is getting absorbed? Seems to me that the fans would keep the levels pretty even during lights on but thats just a guess. so many questions so few answers.
Its not that the plants don't absorb during dark, they produce C02 during dark period, so at lights on they are supposed to be perky with a boost because they are surrounded in their own Co2. I'd assume it won't make a difference to someone running a Co2 source.
 

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
Hi, I was reading about this (veg) light cycle but could only find little results from just a few growers thus far, though what they are reporting is mostly positive. Claims have been made towards from no loss of growth speed versus 18/6 or 24/0 to the plant actually being able to use the first 3 hours of light the best after a dark period, but I haven't seen convincing 'proof' for any of this so I'm asking the community here whether you guys heard of this cycle, tried it or are still using it?

Obviously if this cycle works ok the benefits are immense in regards of electric bills and keeping the grow room much, much more cool for those who suffer from heat issues or just prefer to have their house and equipment less hot.
My above comment goes back to your original post, sorry for the confusion.
"the plant actually being able to use the first 3 hours of light the best after a dark period"
I'm just thinking that might be why is all. I'm thinking about that 3 hour window during the 4/4
 

TwistItUp

Well-Known Member
Sorry for all my bad math too. I didn't mean to make things more confusing and I feel like I somewhat botched your post a bit. I just got a bit excited and I'm really interested.
 
Top