Tech Comparison (MH vs T5HO)

400W Metal Halide

Bulb Life : 20,000hrs@10hrs/start
Initial Output : 36,000lm
Efficacy : 79lm/watt
Mean Output : 23,500lm@40% of lamp life
CRI : 65

4 X 54W T5HO

Bulb Life : 24,000hrs@10hrs/start
Initial Output : 20,000lm
Efficacy : 85lm/watt
Mean Output : 19,000lm@40% of lamp life
CRI : 82-85

6 X 54W T5HO

Bulb Life : 24,000hrs@10hrs/start
Initial Output : 30,000lm
Efficacy : 85lm/watt
Mean Output : 28,500lm@40% of lamp life
CRI : 82-85

What really struck me about the figures above was how quickly the MH degraded over time. I've heard many people on this site say that T5 systems lack intensity, but I think this comparison clearly shows otherwise. In fact, while it's true that there is a slight decrease in initial lumen production, a 6 bulb (324watt) T5HO fixture clearly begins outproducing a 400w MH bulb in a rather short amount of time. It's also interesting to note that the CRI clearly shows that the fluorescent bulbs produce more usable light for photosynthesis than their HID cousins. Just for their efficiency alone I'm making the switch from MH to a T5 system for vegetation. I'd be interested to know exactly how an HPS stacks up to the above.

Ill stick with my 1000w MH!!

and 1000w HPS for flowering

Every light has its purpose and over the years of growing i also found that the T5Ho really kick ass in veg giving much more tight nodes it is obviously slower for rapid growth rate comparing them to a 1000 mh obviously but keeping them under flourescents for much of its life then placing them into a power room. this also will cut your monthly costs down as well

Meaning 2 - 10 k for like 2 weeks then flipping to flower you get better results the buds show a major improvment tight nodes = bigger buds allowing lower branch buds to join up

Lighting have you tried using t5ho thru the stretch and the using hps?