Mh vs CFL in veg'.

This has been doing my head in for a couple of days now. So I thought I'd put it to the vote.

CFL's are supposed to be a cheap effective way to grow bud. Cheap in electric usage I presume is the main argument. I bought a 200w Grow King full spectrum daylight. This light cost me almost as much as my hps and mh lights. At first I used it on my freshly rooted clones, but it wasn't big enough, I'd have needed to buy at least another two of them to get the right coverage over the plants. But why? Why not just buy a 400w mh and veg' beneath it. The light can be much further away, and they grow quicker and stronger. In the end I decided to use the cfl to bring my clones through, didn't rate it much in this area either, as I now clone beneath mh too.

I know there are people that actually prefer to veg beneath cfl's. I can't imagine why. One of those grow kings for one plant. One mh light and I can veg nine.

well in my short expierence, vegging under CFLs is a waste of time. you might save $ and it will take you longer to grow your plants. you would get bigger plants if you vegged for 2 weeks under a 400w mh than to veg for 1 month under some CFLs IMO

I agree it has been my experience that cfl's aren't worth the time or money when it comes to growing. You get such better results with "real" lights. It boils down to the more light the better the yield. The more we can reproduce the sun the better our crops respond.

oh lord, here we go again.

I didnt say cfl was better than mh, ever!

but a couple cfl's is easy to get your hands on, a mh isnt.

for some may have had better results with a mh, i had just fine results with my cfl's in veg.

Okay everybody jump on the bandwagon. You heard Russ he likes mh better then cfl's ... lol ... sorry I just had to.

russ0r said:

I didnt say cfl was better than mh, ever!

but a couple cfl's is easy to get your hands on, a mh isnt.

for some may have had better results with a mh, i had just fine results with my cfl's in veg.

Click to expand...

true..

HID lighting is always better .. when used properly... but a good CFL grow can out grow an average HID grower...

HID lighting requires careful temperature control in order to get the lights close enough to the plants to make them worth the $$$ and effort..

once the temperature is under control, there is no comparisson... HID lights kick ass..

iloveyou

Maybe in the U.S., but I get mine from a lighting warehouse that mainly caters for businesses. They have a built in ballast and cost me 60 English pounds each. The grow king cost me 40 pounds, and I don't use it anymore... I'd need 3 grow kings to veg 9 plants... at a cost of 120 pounds, they don't veg' as good as mh... mh at 400w costs me 60 pounds and I get superb coverage over 9 plants with quick results that I am happy (often amazed) with.

If you look around there are better places to buy your lights. Hydroponics stores, at least in my country, it would cost me 130 pounds to buy a 400w and ballast... over double. MH lights are used in the industry for lighting products in retail stores... HPS for outside lighting... If you shop around HID's are easy to come by. In my country it costs me 76p per 24 hours to run 1 400w MH lamp. If I have a turn over of 10 weeks (usually a little less, as I like to flower for as long as pos'), I need to add a 12 hour shift for the hps which equals 1.14 pounds per day, multiply this by seven, gives 7.98 per week. So, let's say 8.00 per week for 10 weeks (being kind, and also because it is easier) gives me an electric bill of 80.00 per harvest. 9 plants... in my country I get 130 an ounce minimum.

i got a seperate 400w mh complete system for 69.99, i have looked at cfls every time before buying a light but always end up getting a hid, to be fair to russ0r though he has said on quite a few occasions that he would to love to veg under a mh but not everyone can justify a mh for their veg space if you got the space to grow 20 plants then you are definately going to need a mh, if your growing a couple for personal use in a small closet, heat and other issues play a part and the cfls are better. It all depends on your circumstances to which is the best. The most effective for the benefit of the plants is HID however but as garden knowm said heat is an important factor.

Heat is also an important factor in flowering... quite an easy factor to overcome in either stage. I also stated in an earlier post that it depends on circumstance...

The argument was about my implication that cfl's are shit and not 'real' lights. I realised that this caused offence so edited my statement to include... in my world. And, I'll swear on whatever you like, cfl's are shit... I honestly mean it. I didn't say it to cause offence... I simply told the truth.

i am using them on clones now that should be in the veg room,but at present i am trying to grow slow,until i can use the other area but they are hanging out for that m.h i can tell.

Maybe the CFL's you get have a shitty spectrum

Grow King, full spectrum daylight. Look them up.

Im lucky to have both aswell...and the 250watt mh that i have dose the job great and when heat becomes a problem(like the summer here)then i use the cfls..but i save alot of money because i can veg inside and when it comes time to flower out in the garden they go(expect the summer)...

i can tell you first hand mh doubles yeild. first i started 400 mh now 40 inches by 5 foot has 2 400 mh they clone in 5-9 80 watt 4foot coot white days 5 days in soil 80 watt then under hid 2 weeks from cutting

check out gallery at 4 weeks from cutting these are tight and make plants that produce lots of big nuggets, the normal 1 month plant will make 28-35 larger nuggets. plus the top cola

I can't rightfully vote as of yet I have not tried mh. But as a first time grower, I think everyone should do their first grow under cheap cfls. There is alot to experiment on and I believe in starting simple, than increasing the quality of equipment with the knowledge gained from that first "experiment" grow.
I now have a 400w mh/hps ballast and now I know enough to use it. (I hope!) And I will be using it on my next grow. I am looking forward to being able to compare the quality and yield between the two.

I want to experiment with using mh and hps together throughout the entire grow as I have heard that this give the best results.

I am super stoked about the next mini crop using mh for veg and hps for flowering!

This is an interesting thread.
I have never used CFLs for anything other than supplemental side lighting.
I use the standard florescent tubes to start seeds and to root clones.
I like to put the seedlings under MH at about one week after popping out of soil. The CFLs I have used seem to get quite a bit hotter than the old tubes.
After reading this thread I think I should stick to MH.

i know know what I&#8217;ll be veging under&#8212;MH. Could I use this bulb to grow with, recommended? > https://www.1000bulbs.com/product/5010/MH-01506.html <

I'd vote for T5's!