The real gr/watt

Pantar · Feb 5, 2015

Hello,
I see many ppl bragging about how many grs/watt they get and this and that, comparing their different grow methods just by how much gr/watt they get, but does this make any sense if you dont take into account the time spent? gr/watt/days
Growing monster plants on a vert is going to take you longer than a SOG on horizontal aeroponics, if you get 1gr per watt in 12 weeks its still worse than 0,7gr per watt in 6 weeks.
Is it pointless to compare grow systems just by gr/watt or am i missing something?

az2000 · Feb 5, 2015

Pantar said:
Growing monster plants on a vert is going to take you longer than a SOG on horizontal aeroponics, if you get 1gr per watt in 12 weeks its still worse than 0,7gr per watt in 6 weeks.
Is it pointless to compare grow systems just by gr/watt or am i missing something?

You have a good point. g/w says something about energy efficiency. There is also space efficiency: g/sq ft. For tall plants, maybe it should be g/cu. ft.

As you mention, time efficiency might be useful. But, time probably correlates to sq ft and cu ft.

Yodaweed · Feb 5, 2015

I never been a huge fan of gpw I'm more of a fan of just getting huge buds and big yields that's all that matters to me. I'm a perpetual grower so GPW is hard to determine anyway.

Geronimo420 · Feb 5, 2015

Pantar said:
Hello,
I see many ppl bragging about how many grs/watt they get and this and that, comparing their different grow methods just by how much gr/watt they get, but does this make any sense if you dont take into account the time spent? gr/watt/days
Growing monster plants on a vert is going to take you longer than a SOG on horizontal aeroponics, if you get 1gr per watt in 12 weeks its still worse than 0,7gr per watt in 6 weeks.
Is it pointless to compare grow systems just by gr/watt or am i missing something?

az2000 said:
You have a good point. g/w says something about energy efficiency. There is also space efficiency: g/sq ft. For tall plants, maybe it should be g/cu. ft.

As you mention, time efficiency might be useful. But, time probably correlates to sq ft and cu ft.

another variable to consider would be quality and duration of the high 1g per watt in 14 week for good buds can actually be better than 1g per watt in 6 week for schwag

churchhaze · Feb 5, 2015

g/W is just one point of data that's commonly collected. g/W*h would make more sense since it's a unit of mass per energy rather than mass per power, but usually g/W is enough to tell the story. Above 0.7W/sqft usually means a big success regardless of the total energy in light used over time.

Either way, it's just one metric used to measure success. Take it with a grain of salt.

The real gr/watt

Pantar

Member

az2000

Well-Known Member

Yodaweed

Well-Known Member

Geronimo420

Well-Known Member

churchhaze

Well-Known Member

Similar threads