# switching between hps and mh durring bloom.



## Trunk5 (Dec 23, 2009)

the question was brought up to me tonight by a fellow grower and im not sure of the answer. now i know durring bloom hps light is preferd for the process because it makes bigger buds but useing the blue spectrum of mh makes for better tricome growth. now heres the question while useing the hps for flower if you switch the bulb out say one or two days a week with the mh bulb will it help the tricome production and keep the yield of useing hps?


----------



## motoracer110 (Dec 23, 2009)

just stick with the HPS for flower that spectrum of lighting will get you dank thick buds, you do not want airy weed. tri's are affected mostly by the nutrients that you use. if you were to switch back and forth every week you would stress the plant and could stunt the bud production a lot. the name of the game is to keep thing as constant as you can. doing too much will actually hurt the plants. GL m8 you will benefit way more by just using HPS for flower.


----------



## bloomfields (Dec 23, 2009)

motoracer110 said:


> just stick with the HPS for flower that spectrum of lighting will get you dank thick buds, you do not want airy weed. tri's are affected mostly by the nutrients that you use. if you were to switch back and forth every week you would stress the plant and could stunt the bud production a lot. the name of the game is to keep thing as constant as you can. doing too much will actually hurt the plants. GL m8 you will benefit way more by just using HPS for flower.


im sorry but i dont agree , i have been growing 15years and i use 3x600w hps and 2x 1,400w &1,250w mh in my bloom room, the plants love both parts of the spectrum, and actually most mh bulbs give out more lumens per watt than hps bulbs , so makin them more effecient to run , also my friend uses only mh hid's in his grow and with great success, you will also find that adding a mh hid to your flower room stops strecthing between nodes as plants change from vegg to flower stage , dont wish to slag any1 elses opinion but that is mine, and i am talking from years past , not, what i have read ....peace all =)


----------



## Trunk5 (Dec 24, 2009)

only reason i ask is because we bolth have the same plants cut from the same mother, he has them under a 400mh i have mine under the 400 hps. the diffrence i see is my buds seem to be bigger in size but his has more tricome growth.


----------



## super2200 (Dec 24, 2009)

I am running both now in my flower room due to bulb blowing while back. After reading that the MH can actually make your buds finish a week or two earlier as well I decided to hold off on replacing the hps. I am running a 1000w MH and a 600w HPS. I am getting a new hps bulb after holidays and want to switchs to 1000w hps and 600w MH instead. I dont have enough grows under my belt to see any differences but know using both cant hurt instead of changing all together


----------



## speedyseedz (Dec 24, 2009)

super2200 said:


> I am running both now in my flower room due to bulb blowing while back. After reading that the MH can actually make your buds finish a week or two earlier as well I decided to hold off on replacing the hps. I am running a 1000w MH and a 600w HPS. I am getting a new hps bulb after holidays and want to switchs to 1000w hps and 600w MH instead. I dont have enough grows under my belt to see any differences but know using both cant hurt instead of changing all together



I use both in my flowering room to get the best of both worlds,

using both is definitely a positive


----------



## mame (Dec 24, 2009)

Just get one of those dual hoods and put a 600w mh and 600 hps..

I watched a grow vid where a guy used three of those growing 27 3-4' tall AK clones looked like a pretty sick setup!


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 24, 2009)

bloomfields said:


> actually most mh bulbs give out more lumens per watt than hps bulbs ,


I'm pretty sure that this is incorrect.


----------



## FuZZyBUDz (Dec 24, 2009)

yea thats completely wrong. they give out less, 

1000 w HPS 140,000 lummens
1000 w MH 110,000 lummens


----------



## bloomfields (Dec 24, 2009)

Huh?? said:


> I'm pretty sure that this is incorrect.


it is not incorrect my friend


----------



## bloomfields (Dec 24, 2009)

FuZZyBUDz said:


> yea thats completely wrong. they give out less,
> 
> 1000 w HPS 140,000 lummens
> 1000 w MH 110,000 lummens


i did use the word effecient , mh bulbs use less wattage, and we are talkin about using 2 together , with th mh being lower wattage , read up my friend


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 24, 2009)

bloomfields said:


> i did use the word effecient , mh bulbs use less wattage, and we are talkin about using 2 together , with th mh being lower wattage , read up my friend


?
A 1000W light is a 1000W light,no matter what type it is it uses 1000W.
If you are running a 400W MH and a 600W HPS of course the MH doesn't use as many watts but that doesn't make it more efficient.
HPS gets more lumens per watt than MH which makes it more efficient.
Hope this helps,peace


----------



## speedyseedz (Dec 25, 2009)

Huh?? said:


> ?
> A 1000W light is a 1000W light,no matter what type it is it uses 1000W.
> If you are running a 400W MH and a 600W HPS of course the MH doesn't use as many watts but that doesn't make it more efficient.
> HPS gets more lumens per watt than MH which makes it more efficient.
> Hope this helps,peace


yes but a hps puts all those watts into a bad colour spectrum with lots of light being wasted that the plant can not use, so although it is putting out more lumens per watt, not all of those lumens are actually usable.

When you look at a cmh bulb having a cri of 92 and a hps gives 20 its clear to see that a 600w hps isn't as near efficient as you first believed.


----------



## fatman7574 (Dec 25, 2009)

Just use 7500K halides and get the best of both lights. Halides swing to far to the left and HPS swing to far to the right. Have any of you HPS advocates looked at plant response curve charts to even see what spectri um of lights plants prefer. I thought not.

Halides provided better quality buds, better plant health and vigor as well as more resitance to insects. HPS grow often appear of to provide a higher yield but that is seldom the case. They simply aree longer stemmed with broader spaced internodes so infact they are the airy buds. If HPS growers and poor results with haildes it is simply because they bought cheap halides with the wrong K range. Nearly always HPS buds are lower potency and of lower quality and have many more insect problems as well as being more prone to nutrient deficiency problems, they have weaker stems and in general have low calcium problems. 

Even this simple site's charts show that HPS is only good at providing ample lighting output in about 1/3 of the range required by pot plants. A 7500K halide is an almost perfect fit in the chart versus HPS or the cheap halide used in the example. However even the cheap halide provides good light across the full range from 400 nm to 700 nm as required for best health and growth. A halide only provides exceptional lighting in a short range of 550 nm to 650 nm amking it a good "suuplemental' lighting source at most. A halide does not work as well at any stage except an approximate two week range of budding, so it therefore if used through out the grow provides a poor quality vegative plant for budding. Therefore it is worse for use during any stage but budding. Even then it should supplement the healthy lighting not replace it. *IMHO*

http://www.foothillhydroponics.com/brochure/colorhid.htm


----------



## mindphuk (Dec 25, 2009)

speedyseedz said:


> yes but a hps puts all those watts into a bad colour spectrum with lots of light being wasted that the plant can not use, so although it is putting out more lumens per watt, not all of those lumens are actually usable.
> 
> When you look at a cmh bulb having a cri of 92 and a hps gives 20 its clear to see that a 600w hps isn't as near efficient as you first believed.


CRI is meaningless for growing. Like lumens, it is a measurement of how people see light and so is weighted heavily in the green. LEDs have an even poorer CRI than HPS and they are even more efficient, giving only the spectrum the plant needs and not wasting energy in the 500-600nm range.
Chlorophyll b absorbs most light around 450nm in the HPS range and chlorophyll a absorbs about 650nm where MH is favorable.


----------



## fatman7574 (Dec 25, 2009)

mindphuk said:


> CRI is meaningless for growing. Like lumens, it is a measurement of how people see light and so is weighted heavily in the green. LEDs have an even poorer CRI than HPS and they are even more efficient, giving only the spectrum the plant needs and not wasting energy in the 500-600nm range.
> Chlorophyll b absorbs most light around 450nm in the HPS range and chlorophyll a absorbs about 650nm where MH is favorable.


I have no idea wht yiu are g bring Lumens into the conversation oftther than my bringing up th a 7500The charts K halide bulb. I was off on that anyway as it is the Iwaki 6500K that provides the better lighting. While yed s it does waste some light by providing more than need proportionally in the 500 to 550 range, overall it provides lighting fitting the response cure better than the other halides or the HPS. The response curve chart reflects the needs rfor amonyts of lightneeded in the different wave lengths by plants. The response curve chart reference a plants positive response in those wavelengths. It references how plants responds to lights in specific ranges required for growth. The halide shown even shows the halide dips in the small area where the response curve dips. Saying light output is a waste in that rae is ludicrous as it is a small dip in that area is ludicrous as it is not a drop to zero. Most LED systems are almost totally lacking in out put in that area. ie deficient. I have no idea what you are even trying to say in your last sentence as HPS puts out very little light in the 450 nm range so saying it absorbs most is a bit off as it should absorb more and be begging for more. HPS is *deficient* between 400 and 550 nm period. I have no idea why your talking lumens or CRI. The charts clearly show that halide in general covers the needs of plants over the full response curve better than the HPS. HPS provides a bit more light in the 550 to 650 nm range than the ahlide but is deficient in comaparison to the halide from 400 to 550 nm.

While yes if LED's were developed that supplied enough intensity the would be good plant lights that is not yet the case. Unless they are used for short grows like fast SOG grows from clones they really do not have much value. Even then it takes very expensive high output LED's to even provide enough lighting for SOG's, yet alone something like 18" plants. Forget about 24" or more.

I'll stick with mixed halide and HPS or primarily halide with HPS supplementation.


----------



## speedyseedz (Dec 25, 2009)

mindphuk said:


> CRI is meaningless for growing. Like lumens, it is a measurement of how people see light and so is weighted heavily in the green. LEDs have an even poorer CRI than HPS and they are even more efficient, giving only the spectrum the plant needs and not wasting energy in the 500-600nm range.
> Chlorophyll b absorbs most light around 450nm in the HPS range and chlorophyll a absorbs about 650nm where MH is favorable.


wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grow_light

A *grow light* is an electric lamp designed to promote plant growth by emitting an electromagnetic spectrum appropriate for photosynthesis. The emitted light spectrum is similar to that from the sun, allowing indoor growth with outdoor conditions. Natural daylight has a high color temperature (approx. 6000 K) and appears bluish. *Through the use of the color rendering index, it is possible to compare how much the lamp matches the natural color of regular sunlight.*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_rendering_index

The *color rendering index* (*CRI*) (sometimes called _color rendition index_), is a quantitative measure of the ability of a light source to reproduce the colors of various objects faithfully in comparison with an ideal or natural light source. Light sources with a high CRI are desirable in color-critical applications such as photography and cinematography.


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 25, 2009)

fatman7574 said:


> Just use 7500K halides and get the best of both lights. Halides swing to far to the left and HPS swing to far to the right. Have any of you HPS advocates looked at plant response curve charts to even see what spectri um of lights plants prefer. I thought not.
> 
> Halides provided better quality buds, better plant health and vigor as well as more resitance to insects. HPS grow often appear of to provide a higher yield but that is seldom the case. They simply aree longer stemmed with broader spaced internodes so infact they are the airy buds. If HPS growers and poor results with haildes it is simply because they bought cheap halides with the wrong K range. Nearly always HPS buds are lower potency and of lower quality and have many more insect problems as well as being more prone to nutrient deficiency problems, they have weaker stems and in general have low calcium problems.
> 
> ...


I find this interesting as I have NEVER heard of MH being superior to HPS during flowering.
If this were true then I'm sure it would be well known by now.
Even in that link that you posted right above one of the charts it says that HPS promotes heavy flowering.
No disrespect,just never heard of this.


----------



## mindphuk (Dec 25, 2009)

speedyseedz said:


> wikipedia
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grow_light
> 
> A *grow light* is an electric lamp designed to promote plant growth by emitting an electromagnetic spectrum appropriate for photosynthesis. The emitted light spectrum is similar to that from the sun, allowing indoor growth with outdoor conditions. Natural daylight has a high color temperature (approx. 6000 K) and appears bluish. *Through the use of the color rendering index, it is possible to compare how much the lamp matches the natural color of regular sunlight.*
> ...


What's your point? As the link says, it is a measurement o the ability to reproduce the color of the sun. Just like lumens, this measurement is meaningless for growing since plants do not care what objects look like to our eyes. Photography and cinematography have very little to do with growing. 

Fatman, you can claim deficiency yet so many people grow successfully with HPS. MH will provide the blue necessary for chlorophyll b, which is why the combination works best. MH puts out too much in the 5-600nm, wasting a lot of power that is just going to be reflected by the green plants. And yes, I switched the two peaks, you are correct that the HPS puts out a lot of energy in the 650nm and very little in the 450nm. 
You seem to be eyeballing the curve and claiming MH the winner. Sorry, it doesn't work like that. There are meaningful measurements such as PAR and PPFD.

BTW, if you want to question why I brought up CRI, look at the post that I was responding to. I wasn't responding to you now was I?


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 25, 2009)

bloomfields said:


> actually most mh bulbs give out more lumens per watt than hps bulbs





bloomfields said:


> yes but a hps puts all those watts into a bad colour spectrum with lots of light being wasted that the plant can not use, so although it is putting out more lumens per watt, not all of those lumens are actually usabl


Sorry,I couldn't resist.


----------



## OrganixMechanic (Dec 25, 2009)

Huh?? said:


> I find this interesting as I have NEVER heard of MH being superior to HPS during flowering.
> If this were true then I'm sure it would be well known by now.
> Even in that link that you posted right above one of the charts it says that HPS promotes heavy flowering.
> No disrespect,just never heard of this.


I agree.

Regardless of what anyone says here, no offence. I get best results using both MH and HPS during.......VEG and Bloom.
Was a sceptic........but would not go back.

I first tried this because of a book I have.

Hydroponics- by Jeffery Winterbourne

Expensive book- some $100 US approx i paid for it.............best investment I have made.


----------



## Trunk5 (Dec 25, 2009)

i know it is best to run both at the same time. i was just wondering if you put the mh bulb in once a week in the middle of the week would the one day of blue light help the tricome production durring flower? i dont want you guys yelling at each other over what light is better and so on. my next investment is the hortilux super hps as it has a little more accent in the blue spec then most hps lights.


----------



## MRsteverson (Dec 25, 2009)

i have a 400 watt metal halide hortilux BLue mh bulb.. it says its designed to handle full growth cycle with added reds to the mh... the bulb was 100 bucks... anyone familiar with this?? i know for a fact my friend used this exact bulb ballast to grow dank nugs comparable if not superceeding the growth of the 400 w hps... i am assuming my lumatek electronic ballast helps as well... any thoughts???????


----------



## MRsteverson (Dec 25, 2009)

Trunk5 said:


> i know it is best to run both at the same time. i was just wondering if you put the mh bulb in once a week in the middle of the week would the one day of blue light help the tricome production durring flower? i dont want you guys yelling at each other over what light is better and so on. my next investment is the hortilux super hps as it has a little more accent in the blue spec then most hps lights.


a easier way is to get like 10 27 watt cfl 2700k daylight bulbs... that will give u 270 watt of cfl ontop of your current wattage... boils down to about 18,000 lumens.. and keeping those ten cfls close will make for beastly trichome production... i tested hps vrs cfl and found that cfl produces more crystals.. added with hps u get crystals and weight.. not that cfls dont produce weight, just less efficient at high wattage


----------



## MRsteverson (Dec 26, 2009)

fatman7574 said:


> I have no idea wht yiu are g bring Lumens into the conversation oftther than my bringing up th a 7500The charts K halide bulb. I was off on that anyway as it is the Iwaki 6500K that provides the better lighting. While yed s it does waste some light by providing more than need proportionally in the 500 to 550 range, overall it provides lighting fitting the response cure better than the other halides or the HPS. The response curve chart reflects the needs rfor amonyts of lightneeded in the different wave lengths by plants. The response curve chart reference a plants positive response in those wavelengths. It references how plants responds to lights in specific ranges required for growth. The halide shown even shows the halide dips in the small area where the response curve dips. Saying light output is a waste in that rae is ludicrous as it is a small dip in that area is ludicrous as it is not a drop to zero. Most LED systems are almost totally lacking in out put in that area. ie deficient. I have no idea what you are even trying to say in your last sentence as HPS puts out very little light in the 450 nm range so saying it absorbs most is a bit off as it should absorb more and be begging for more. HPS is *deficient* between 400 and 550 nm period. I have no idea why your talking lumens or CRI. The charts clearly show that halide in general covers the needs of plants over the full response curve better than the HPS. HPS provides a bit more light in the 550 to 650 nm range than the ahlide but is deficient in comaparison to the halide from 400 to 550 nm.
> 
> While yes if LED's were developed that supplied enough intensity the would be good plant lights that is not yet the case. Unless they are used for short grows like fast SOG grows from clones they really do not have much value. Even then it takes very expensive high output LED's to even provide enough lighting for SOG's, yet alone something like 18" plants. Forget about 24" or more.
> 
> I'll stick with mixed halide and HPS or primarily halide with HPS supplementation.


u seem to know alot about halides... do u know anything about the hortilux super blue metal halide??? i got two of them from a friend... is this a good bulb?


----------



## purple voodoo#5 (Dec 26, 2009)

MRsteverson said:


> i have a 400 watt metal halide hortilux BLue mh bulb.. it says its designed to handle full growth cycle with added reds to the mh... the bulb was 100 bucks... anyone familiar with this?? i know for a fact my friend used this exact bulb ballast to grow dank nugs comparable if not superceeding the growth of the 400 w hps... i am assuming my lumatek electronic ballast helps as well... any thoughts???????


 yes i used to use that same bulb and it was good but when i switched to the hortilux super hps my buds and yeild got way better. dank ass super hard dense buds are grown under hps. mh buds are more fluffy. that is what i have seen, smoked and experienced.


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 26, 2009)

Trunk5 said:


> i know it is best to run both at the same time. i was just wondering if you put the mh bulb in once a week in the middle of the week would the one day of blue light help the tricome production durring flower? i dont want you guys yelling at each other over what light is better and so on. my next investment is the hortilux super hps as it has a little more accent in the blue spec then most hps lights.


 That bulb cost $200+ at the hydro store by me,at least the 1000w one does.
But I'm sure it's awesome.


----------



## oregon024 (Dec 26, 2009)

Who gives a shit what the box says.This makes me want to try this


----------



## fatman7574 (Dec 26, 2009)

Check out the Iwasaki 6500 output curve http://www.personal.psu.edu/sbj4/aquarium/articles/MetalHalideLamps2.htm and picture it combined ewith the standard HPS output and plug that into the response curve chart from the Foothills link. http://www.foothillhydroponics.com/brochure/colorhid.htm Pretty hard to beat. A adjsuted Hortilux HPD and no singkle HPS comapares with a Iwasaki combined with a standard HPS. And no other halide compares with the 6500K Iwasaki.

There are many Hlide spin offs of the Iwasaki bulb. There are some neraly identical in spectral ouput as the Iwasaki for $25 for the 250 wattt or 40 watt bulb. I don't know if they make a 1000 watt as I do not use 1000 watt bulbs. My Apogee Quantum Meter gives nearly identical readings for the cheap bulb versus the high dollar Iwasaki ($70 and up). http://cgi.ebay.com/250W-250-watt-6500K-Metal-Halide-GROW-Hydroponics-Bulb_W0QQitemZ290382904374QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item439c2b7c36 http://cgi.ebay.com/400W-400-watt-6500K-Metal-Halide-GROW-Hydroponics-Bulb_W0QQitemZ350203924206QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item5189c7ceee The Hortilux adjkusted HPS is still very lacking in the 400 to 550 nm range. It is better than the common HPS, just not a lot better. Better enough to show obviousimprovements in yield and plant vigor over the stab ndard bulb. Given a choice though I would use a combination of a 6500K hailde and a standard HPS. My seconf choice would be a 6500K light. My seconf choice the adjsued hortilux HPS, followed by just the 6500K halide. My last choice would be a standard HPS. I really doubt that the Hortilux metal halide is any better than the Iwasaki 6500K or its knock off 6500K's. It might be worses as it might be in the 10000K range and therefore to high in the actinic blue out put range. A good alterantive choice is y to just use the chepa lage standard HPS light and use supplemental side lighting in the blue actinic 420 to 460 nm range using compact flourescent actinic blue bulbs. http://www.marinedepot.com/96W_420nm_460nm_Actinic_Power_Compact_Square_Pin_Blue_Life_USA_SPS_96_Watt_Square_Pin_Power_Compact_Light_Bulbs-PowerCompact-PC1961-FILTBUPCSQNW-PC1998-vi.html


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 26, 2009)

I use Hortilux Eye and Agrosun HPS bulbs,they work great.


----------



## fatman7574 (Dec 26, 2009)

Huh?? said:


> I use Hortilux Eye and Agrosun HPS bulbs,they work great.


There are better and there are worse bulbs and choices.


----------



## bigwheel (Dec 26, 2009)

I've had fairly good luck using a 400 HPS coupled with a few daylight spectrum curly tail CFL's placed at strategic locations. This be for the flowering phase. Believe it does better than the HPS alone. For veg I use all CFL's which seems to work just fine.


----------



## fatman7574 (Dec 26, 2009)

Most CFC daylight are rated as 6500 to 6700K. So that makes perfect sense. A liitle harder to remove the heat fron CFC twist bulbs as you have both the heat from the bulb and the ballasts in the grow area. Considering how cheap they are though the added efforts is usually worth it over long tube compact flourescents. I have seen many air cooled tubes made for cfc's. Two bulbs to the tube. Plus with just HEI lighting the source of the heat is just a smaller area so it is easy to remove with cooling tubes etc. as one HEI bulb can be equal to up to 35 small twist CFC's. All lighting types and bulb types have disadvantages and advantages.


----------



## Bigol'Bong (Dec 26, 2009)

i believe that u can buy a mulb w3ith both red and blue spectrum, i think they are called Conversion bulbs


----------



## Uncle Ben (Dec 27, 2009)

motoracer110 said:


> just stick with the HPS for flower that spectrum of lighting will get you dank thick buds, you do not want airy weed. tri's are affected mostly by the nutrients that you use. if you were to switch back and forth every week you would stress the plant and could stunt the bud production a lot. the name of the game is to keep thing as constant as you can. doing too much will actually hurt the plants. GL m8 you will benefit way more by just using HPS for flower.


Do you grow?

I have used HPS from start to finish and had excellent results. You do NOT need to switch out anything. Buy the most efficient HID and stick with it.

I don't know what paradigm is more full of shit, the pH fixation or the HID color spectrum. Both MH and HPS contain both red and blue spectrums sufficient for excellent plant health. Use either or both, doesn't matter to the plant....they can't read.

UB


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 27, 2009)

speedyseedz said:


> When you look at a cmh bulb having a cri of 92 and a hps gives 20 its clear to see that a 600w hps isn't as near efficient as you first believed.


And an incandescent has a CRI of about 100,that means they're five times more efficient than a HPS?
After reading this thread I've decided to just switch to incandescent lights for veg and flower.


----------



## EFF U OBAMA, REID, PELOSI (Dec 27, 2009)

Huh?? said:


> I use Hortilux Eye and Agrosun HPS bulbs,they work great.


I use a 1000 agrosun red sodium on a six foot mover...and ive been messing with a Xtra-SUN MONDO reflector. with hortilux eye 400w blue halide..this reflector is killer for supp lighting..its huge.. the spectrum of the horti is full balenced and most like the natural sunlight....i tilt the mondo reflect at a 45 with the horti blue and drop it low shining it slightly over the top my smaller adolescents and through the lower canopy of the bigger girls on a three part perpetual situation all in the flower room....pound plus every two weeks..love the hortilux..wanta try the super hps horti when i change the agrosun in a few weeks ...good ass lamps, and the mix of lamps makes em nice and sticky fat and stinky...im stoked


----------



## fatman7574 (Dec 28, 2009)

Huh?? said:


> And an incandescent has a CRI of about 100,that means they're five times more efficient than a HPS?
> After reading this thread I've decided to just switch to incandescent lights for veg and flower.


Puppy out of the house.


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 28, 2009)

fatman7574 said:


> Puppy out of the house.


What does this mean?


----------



## fatman7574 (Dec 28, 2009)

Wow, that it explains the Huh name?


----------



## Uncle Ben (Dec 28, 2009)

It never ceases to amaze me how easy it is for resellers to manipulate this community.


----------



## fatman7574 (Dec 28, 2009)

EFF U OBAMA said:


> I use a 1000 agrosun red sodium on a six foot mover...and ive been messing with a Xtra-SUN MONDO reflector. with hortilux eye 400w blue halide..this reflector is killer for supp lighting..its huge.. the spectrum of the horti is full balenced and most like the natural sunlight....i tilt the mondo reflect at a 45 with the horti blue and drop it low shining it slightly over the top my smaller adolescents and through the lower canopy of the bigger girls on a three part perpetual situation all in the flower room....pound plus every two weeks..love the hortilux..wanta try the super hps horti when i change the agrosun in a few weeks ...good ass lamps, and the mix of lamps makes em nice and sticky fat and stinky...im stoked


Isn't there a song called trash talkin'?


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 28, 2009)

fatman7574 said:


> Wow, that it explains the Huh name?


Is english your first language?Was that a question or a statement?
Because I don't understand your "figure of speach" you want to pop off at the mouth?
Or are you still mad that I called you out on that contradicting link a couple pages back?

Anyway,these are sweet if need more blue under your reflector....
http://www.bestgrowlights.com/product/SSI904630


----------



## fatman7574 (Dec 28, 2009)

Go away child, you have not got the education, experience or knowledge to call me out on anything.


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 28, 2009)

fatman7574 said:


> Go away child, you have not got the education, experience or knowledge to call me out on
> anything.


Dude,come on are you serious?Do you have that bad of memory?
You started this shit like an hour ago.I asked you a simple question but you are to great to answer me.So instead you try to insult me.


----------



## mindphuk (Dec 28, 2009)

Huh?? said:


> Dude,come on are you serious?Do you have that bad of memory?
> You started this shit like an hour ago.I asked you a simple question but you are to great to answer me.So instead you try to insult me.


Just put him on ignore. He obviously thinks he knows so much and is unable to learn any more from anyone here. The fact that he has to resort to ad hominem attacks speaks volumes about him.


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 28, 2009)

mindphuk said:


> Just put him on ignore. He obviously thinks he knows so much and is unable to learn any more from anyone here. The fact that he has to resort to ad hominem attacks speaks volumes about him.


How do you put someone on ignore?


----------



## Huh?? (Dec 28, 2009)

mindphuk said:


> Just put him on ignore. He obviously thinks he knows so much and is unable to learn any more from anyone here. The fact that he has to resort to ad hominem attacks speaks volumes about him.


+rep again if I could.
Thanks man


----------

