Jozikins
Well-Known Member
I wish I could like this twice. The Digilux are the hot shit. I think I'll skimp on the Sun Master and get a Digilux this round.
20,000 Watt Medical Grow Op Construction
- Thread starter collective gardener
- Start date
Wolverine97
Well-Known Member
I've actually been looking into that, thanks cg.
hellraizer30
Rebel From The North
im thinking of switching to digi ballast, you guys see that much of a difference it output?
collective gardener
Well-Known Member
Hell,
No difference in output. They are quite. I like the dimmable feature for after spraying. You can run either MH or HPS bulbs in them, too.
kevin murphy
New Member
nice 1 for the info collective mate im gunna try it a week before lights out..
collective gardener
Well-Known Member
The Horti Daylight Blue is a nice light. Only one of my 6 Veg 1000's has that bulb. I put the plants under it just after topping for tighter node spacing. Another fantastic veg light is the Pulse Start by SunPulse. The other 5 of my veg lights burn Pulse Starts in a 6.4K color temp. These lights are way bright. Originally we were growing trees, so I wanted veg lights with big lumens for penetration. These were the lights. Now I put plants under the Daylight Blue for about 10 days after topping, then move them under the Pulse Starts for the rest of veg. My one magnetic ballast runs the Daylight Blue light. I saved that ballast from my last grow. I believe the digital ballast will destroy that Daylight Blue light in a few months. The only light bulbs we use are designed to work with digital ballasts (except the Daylight Blue).
kevin murphy
New Member
my daily updates are in my signature mate if u want to stop by sumtime to improve my grow that be great thanks for the advice cg..
TheLastWood
Well-Known Member
Don't let the false led claims make you think spectrum is not important. The cmh is not "hyped" up. There's plenty of proof all over the web.
Think about it, your talking about how the blue spectrum hps are the best, the cmh is basically a white(blue) light hps.
And they do have a new cmh that runs on a mh ballast but I use the hps ballast
The led claims to have the best spectrum but the cmh is the closest spectrum to the suns and puts out uvb.
The led doesn't have the engine of an hid pushing that spectrum, and I even have doubts about the leds spectrum.
Think about it, your talking about how the blue spectrum hps are the best, the cmh is basically a white(blue) light hps.
And they do have a new cmh that runs on a mh ballast but I use the hps ballast
The led claims to have the best spectrum but the cmh is the closest spectrum to the suns and puts out uvb.
The led doesn't have the engine of an hid pushing that spectrum, and I even have doubts about the leds spectrum.
collective gardener
Well-Known Member
I would be far more likely to try the CMH over any LED settup. At least I know the CMH is going to crank out some lumens. Also, I've actually seen some nice crops come from under the CMH's. All I've seen from LED is some mediocre looking buds, and dozens of pages explaining to me like I'm a 5 year old why the LED is the best possible light for my garden. They give us this detailed explanation of how inefficient HID is, and how perfect the LED spectrum is...and that when you have a perfect spectrum, actually brightness isn't as important. And then there's the line about how my plants can only use 10% of what my HPS lights put out. Well, that's all fine and dandy. But the bottom line is that I don't give a rat's ass about any of that. I don't really care as much about why a light works as the simple fact that it works. To date, I have never seen an LED grow that comes anywhere close to HID grows.
The CMH is interesting stuff. I think it would do best in concert with some good quality HPS lighting. I'm not hip on how to use the bulbs, though. Can they be fired with a Phantom Digital Ballast? If so, it would be easy enough for me to pick up a couple bulbs. I seem to remember seeing that I can't do that, though. In any case, I am very interested in seeing your guy's results with the CMH. Especially if you run a side by side with either a Horti Eye, or Digilux. On a side note, I'm still watching the developing inductive lighting. This seems to hold more promise as a low heat, long lasting alternative to HID.
Once I seal the grow with a new 30,000 BTU A/C, I'm going to get a tent going in some warehouse space outside the main grow for trying new shit. The first thing to be tried will probably be inductive lighting. I'll even make it easy on the lights and grow 4 plants/ sq ft...finishing the plants at around 16" tall. I have very little hope that we're anywhere close to a low heat light that has the penetration to grow 36" tall plants.
collective gardener
Well-Known Member
To be clear, I have not said that blue spectrum HPS are the best. Blue spectrum enhanced bulbs are my favorites. Those bulbs are still very red, which is what is needed in bloom. It's just that the older style and modern cheap HPS bulbs lack(ed) any blue. 20 years ago we would add some MH to the bloom room to improve results. These blue enhanced bulbs negated the need to do that...to a point. I still feel that 2 hps and 1 mh will probably give better results than the best HPS bulb. But mixing different bulbs to provide even coverage requires a light mover...and they're a pain. The blue in bloom greatly improves the leaf growth and node spacing at the stretch. The leaves are much better looking and more plentiful, reducing the impact of removing leaves shading the lower plant. Having more healthy leaves in bloom allows us to remove many unwanted leaves, while retaining enough to generate the energy needed.
As always. I want to be clear that all this shit is just my opinion. I know plenty of growers that do things very different, yet get as good or better results than myself. I respect and admire everything you folks do out there. I enjoy our discussions, and am truly interested in hearing what you guys are trying and how it's working for you. It's just too bad we can't all sit around a pitcher of Pale Ale and a Volcano, giving eachother shit about our fucked up growing styles. There's nothing funner than prodding the Granola Head organic growers with my tales of chemical spraying and salty nutes. Yet, I usually prefer their smoke for personal stash. I f we all grew the same and agreed with everyone's growing style, this website would be offline tomorrow. It's the different styles and opinions that keep it all interesting. I truly dig all of you and am always pulling for you to crank out your best harvest ever.
C.Indica
Well-Known Member
I'm almost sure you like to brutalize your plants quickly and get monster results.
But if you have the time for precision and delicate pruning,
https://www.rollitup.org/advanced-marijuana-cultivation/459219-prune-top-little-no-stress.html
But if you have the time for precision and delicate pruning,
https://www.rollitup.org/advanced-marijuana-cultivation/459219-prune-top-little-no-stress.html
kevin murphy
New Member
if you have any bud pics post em in the new thread i made growers
ultimate collection of buds...
lollypopping....
new lollipop thread
ultimate collection of buds...
lollypopping....
new lollipop thread
TheLastWood
Well-Known Member
Gardener you can't use the cmh on a digi ballast and they only currently go up to 400w.
They are not the best choice for you lol.
but for me, they are perfect. I use the same bulb for veg and flower,
If you can afford 2 ballasts then I think 2 x 400 watt is better than a 1000w. I think 2 points of light elimnates shading very well.
What do u think cg?
They are not the best choice for you lol.
but for me, they are perfect. I use the same bulb for veg and flower,
If you can afford 2 ballasts then I think 2 x 400 watt is better than a 1000w. I think 2 points of light elimnates shading very well.
What do u think cg?
collective gardener
Well-Known Member
I like the idea of 2 - 600's to replace 1 - 1000. If the CMH only come in 400's...well...that's that. The light spread is definately more even, but it is 20% less light. I think if it's a choice of 1 - 1000 or 2 - 400's, the 400's could make sense. BUT, given a choice of 4 - 1000's or 8 - 400's, I'd take the 1000's hands down. A single light is just not very efficient. You really benefit from multiple lights...using the spill from neighbor lights to even out the lumens striking the canopy. We run 2 rows of 5 - 1000 watt lights per row. Then I have a third row with just 2 lights. The rest of the space is for door opening, A/C's, fans, etc...So, my point is, it's important to have multiple lights. If your condition, or light choice limit you to 400's...no prob. If conditions allow, and you subscribe to the "better growing through superior firepower" technique (as I do), run the 1000's.
That being said, my partner op (who out grows me on every front) grows with 600's every 3x3 square. He also uses Magnum XXXL reflectors. It's basically total light over the whole canopy. I think he's running 32 - 600's. This is probably the best settup as far as total even light coverage balanced with intensity...it's just expensive as fuck. He started with 1000's, but a couple 20lb sales allowed him to re-design the room. I've ran a light meter under his lights and the intensity is even within 10% anywhere on the massive 300+ sq ft tray. The edges of the reflectors are almost touching eachother. I'm not sure I'd be as impressed with such an op loaded with 400's every 2.5 feet square. The 600's just seem to be a very nice size for mutiple light grows. I should also mention that the same guy has a small grow in his garage where he lives. There, he blooms with 4 - 1000 watt lights. His statement to me was that under 9 lights, use 1000's...9 lights and more, use 600's. I know the theory of what he's talking about. I'm not quite sure where he gets the 9 light cuttoff. Knowing him, though, there's a reason. I've begged him to let me take some pics of his op for RIU, but he refuses. It's the best grow op I've ever seen live or in pics.
drgreentm
Well-Known Member
wow that is crazy CG, i am running 6 400's (1 per 3x3) this is the way i figured the 400's would be most efficient. now if i was to run the same setup with 600's and magnum reflectors, geez i couldn't imagine. i was thinking of going 2 1000's in magnum reflectors but hmmm now you got me thinking lol, i was basically aiming for your friends home base setup (4 1000's over 24 plants) but that would be twice the amount in 600's if i went that route.
TheLastWood
Well-Known Member
yeah its not a good setup for you but for me, its either 1 1000w or 2 400s and I know the cmh outperforms an hps watt per watt. Someday they will probably make 1000 watt cmh and I will be a happy camper.
I think a 1000 w cmh would give off too much uvb. That would be dangerous to work around. They do make cmh bulbs with a uv filter tho. I imagine they will make 600 w or at least bigger than 400 (430 would be nice) but you will probably need to get a special ballast that they make just for cmh.
I also use a bit less power which is a big concern.
I think a 1000 w cmh would give off too much uvb. That would be dangerous to work around. They do make cmh bulbs with a uv filter tho. I imagine they will make 600 w or at least bigger than 400 (430 would be nice) but you will probably need to get a special ballast that they make just for cmh.
I also use a bit less power which is a big concern.
collective gardener
Well-Known Member
You would see a difference...a big one...running 600's in the same area of your 400's. You're putting down 45 watts/sq ft. 600's would give you around 68 watts/sq ft. A 1000 for every 4 x 4 space will give you 62 watts/sq ft. I like it up around 60 watts per sq ft. The big question would be if it's worth the time and $$$ to upgrade a nice functioning operation. There's no doubt it would pay for itself pretty fast. I really like 4 - 1000's over an 8 x 8 tray. The light is even enough that the only plant movement really needed is to turn the outside plants 180 degrees every few days. Now, the ultimate settup in a similar area would be 9 - 600's in a 9 x 9 space. Your per sq ft wattage goes from 62 (4 - 1000's in 8x
to 68, and your lit area goes from 64 sq ft to 81 sq ft. Just the sq footage increase should represent a pound per cycle increase. If I were to build my grow again (which I will in a year or 2), I'd use 24 600's to light up a 9' x 24' area. I'd use either Raptor or Magnum reflectors. The reason I have 1000's is that we were trying to keep out plant count down growing trees. Well, now we have enough patients to grow several hundred plants on a SOG style canopy.
Whether you go 4 - 1000's in an 8x8, or 9 600's in a 9x9, you'll see serious yield increases over you current settup. Depending on the strain, you'll see a 5 pack+ from the 8x8 1000's. That's with relatively low yielding OG's. I'd say 7ish from the 9x9 600's. These are rough estimates, of course. Yields vary SO MUCH room to room, grower to grower, and strain to strain. But the point is...you'll get back the $$$ you put in real quick. LOL
collective gardener
Well-Known Member
You guys gotta see this. Don't give this guy too much shit. He's tried hard, but didn't think it through: https://www.rollitup.org/grow-room-design-setup/459188-6000-watt-hydro-crawl-space.html
hellraizer30
Rebel From The North
man I feel for that guy I thought my shit was tight lol DAM!!