Air Cooled Hood vs Cool Tube in Mylar Grow Tent

I'm in the process of setting up a second tent so I can have a veg/mother chamber and a separate flowering area.

In the first tent I have an air cooled hood. It works well but it eats up a lot of the vertical space. Now I've read a couple of air cooled hood vs cool tube threads and the consensus seems to be that the air cooled hood is better overall as the built in reflector pushes the light down, whereas a lot of light is often wasted in a cool tube set-up, or so the argument goes.

However, if the grow space is a tent that has super reflective mylar in every direction, doesn't the cool tube win out simply by the fact that it saves more grow space. Isn't the reflector in the air-cooled hood redundant in this situation.

Your thoughts? I'm definitely leaning cool tube for my flowering tent.

Cool tubes are easier to cool and yes they have a smaller light footprint IMO. I prefer normal air cooled hoods when heat is not a issue and obviously space.

The reflectivity of mylar is approx. 95% however, light intensity is lost as the light bounces off the wall and so this reflected light is only useable when plants are within approx. 12" of the wall.

air cooled wins by far. how do you get more grow space from a cool tube anyways? both have to hang at the same height so theres no difference there. air cooled hood directs all the light downward to the plants rather than all or 3 out of 4 directions. air cooled gives a larger footprint as well. yes mylar reflects light but light energy is lost every time it has to reflect before being used so if your light is reflecting off the side, then up, then back down to the plants your going to loose TONS of light energy there. air cooled hoods direct the light in the direction it needs to the first time around. i would NEVER use a cool tube if a air cooled hood was a option.