3000K Orange Flouros?

3000K T5 fluorescent bulbs produce a Red/Orange spectrum for budding and flowering (similar to HPS).

How do these bulbs stack up against HPS in terms of flower growth?

This is what I know so far...

*The T5's save on energy per lumen.
*The T5's run much, much cooler.
*The T5's cover more area (4' long.)

What is the downside?
Why use HPS?

Ok... I just did some more reading. It seems that HPS bulbs DO put out more lumens per watt than fluoros. So you wouldnt save money there. It seems that fluoros are a win/win over metal halide bulbs though.

southpawprof said:

Ok... I just did some more reading. It seems that HPS bulbs DO put out more lumens per watt than fluoros. So you wouldnt save money there. It seems that fluoros are a win/win over metal halide bulbs though.

Click to expand...

wrong there buddy FL is not a win over a mh bulb its way less , just like a certain mh puts out almost as much as hps but better blue so your wrong and you would need about 30 FL-1 mh bulb man and about double for hps

HPS's are the most lumans per watt. Then you get your CFL's, MH's, CF's. The 3000k t5's should do the trick for flowering. It's all about the lumans. Watt's cost the same so it doesn't matter if it is a 400w HID or 400w's CFL. They both eat say 400 units each. There is more useable light for the plant with cfl's. Hid's are very bright but they produce a lot of heat, and the light produced is not all used by the plant. CFL's work, but it takes a good bunch of them, where one hid equals the same bunch of cfl's. Both have +'s and -'s. It's just personal preference.

nellyatcha said:

wrong there buddy FL is not a win over a mh bulb its way less , just like a certain mh puts out almost as much as hps but better blue so your wrong and you would need about 30 FL-1 mh bulb man and about double for hps

Click to expand...

3000K t5's are more energy efficient per lumen than MH. The T5's are 5000 lumens per 54 Watts. Metal halide is approximately 5000 lumens per 67 watts.

So, if you have (6) four foot long 54W t5's... it would equal the lumens of a 400W metal halide, but be more energy efficient, much cooler, and cover more area.

It seems that they are a win/win over metal halide.

southpawprof said:

3000K t5's are more energy efficient per lumen than MH. The T5's are 5000 lumens per 54 Watts. Metal halide is approximately 5000 lumens per 67 watts.

So, if you have (6) four foot long 54W t5's... it would equal the lumens of a 400W metal halide, but be more energy efficient, much cooler, and cover more area.

It seems that they are a win/win over metal halide.

Click to expand...

Florescent is more efficient that HID this news is 20 years old - but with floros you get efficient and even light that doesn't penetrate very well.

Compare light penetration @ 18 inches.

If you're more worried about your carbon footprint, than growing tight dank nugs, you can place CFL's all around the plant, but HPS is the best flowering light (period)

MH loses lumen efficiency over time, so I prefer Floro for Veg and HPS for flower.

well heat is a thing true but everything is by pref but mh has more lumens then tubes