6, 600w or 4, 1000w?

Sure Shot

Well-Known Member
Which is the better way to go? 6, 600w or 4, 1000w.
I have 2 8'x4' trays, what do you think?
All opinions welcome!
 

randk21

Well-Known Member
I'd say the 4 1000's if going for budding. Just keep an eye on heat spots, make sure u got good ventilation, couple of oscilating fans.
 

SayWord

Well-Known Member
yeah, id vote for the 600's just so u could have more points of light as well as keep the heat down. are u planning on aircooling or what?
 

randk21

Well-Known Member
a 600w for 30 plants!? really? I dunno either. I myself am gonna go with a 600w but thats just based on what i can afford. I've head a 1000 watt can do a 8 x 8 room but I myself want max results...
 

SayWord

Well-Known Member
im packin about 48+ clones under my 600w. right now i have about 39 clones and three large plants late in flowering. i have 20 more clones almost done rooting too. one week veg time and keepin them in 36oz cups.
 

Sure Shot

Well-Known Member
These would be air-cooled.
Currently I am using 4 1000w.
But I'm thinking 6 600w might be best.
Here is my room right now.
[youtube]XQ6G1VvMbE4[/youtube]
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
4000w vs. 3600w, 90% of the power and one and half times the coverage? No question, go with the 600s! You will be able to cover much better toward the sides of the room. What reflectors are you considering?
 

Xan2

Well-Known Member
I would go with 4x 1000w because they produce more light and will cost you less than buying 6x 600w.
 

randk21

Well-Known Member
awesome video thats what I'm wanting to get goin! So you are using 4 1000hps now for that?? Hows the energy bill??
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
I would go with 4x 1000w because they produce more light and will cost you less than buying 6x 600w.
As I just pointed out in the post above, they are only 10% more power. Do you honestly think they will produce more light than the more efficient 600s?
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
As for costs, if he goes electronic ballasts he can save almost $100/ballast, even more if he gets dual 600 watters. Plus two extra reflectors.

Compare that up front cost with a 400 watt overall savings. 400w x 12 hours x 60 day flower is about $30 for 10-11¢ per kwh. It doesn't take many harvests to start paying back, if he spent more to begin with.
 

Sure Shot

Well-Known Member
4000w vs. 3600w, 90% of the power and one and half times the coverage? No question, go with the 600s! You will be able to cover much better toward the sides of the room. What reflectors are you considering?
I'm going to air-cool them.
Haven't went to the store yet.
Still a few days away from buying them.
Gonna run two sets of three 600w in series.
 

LionsRoor

Well-Known Member
IMHO - 600's are the most efficient - but you already got 4 x 1000's - and your shit looks choice - you are set, Bra! Now the question and goal would be to replace the 4 x 1000's with 4 x 600's - then you would actually be making a diff in your energy consumption and your grow efficiency. 600's are as bright at 2 feet from your plants as 1000's are at 3 feet... using this principle, there has been a move towards smaller wattages... There is a great article on light and heat in the current issue of Maximum Yield - it is a great read and is related to your question on lighting. Again - your action looks great - nice vid!
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
I'm going to air-cool them.
Haven't went to the store yet.
Still a few days away from buying them.
Gonna run two sets of three 600w in series.
Get Super Sun 2 or Radiant reflectors and lumatek or galaxy dual 600 electronic ballasts, you will be gold!


(the hinged glass on the radiants are so nice, easy to clean and change bulbs etc.)
 

LionsRoor

Well-Known Member
Get Super Sun 2 or Radiant reflectors and lumatek or galaxy dual 600 electronic ballasts, you will be gold!


(the hinged glass on the radiants are so nice, easy to clean and change bulbs etc.)
What is the advantage of dual ballasts? They literally cost twice as much - so the upfront cost is the same... is it the power consumption? They have an on/off switch for each - so it does not seem like they are sharing anything that would make them more efficient than having 2 single ballasts (easier to replace singles in case of failure, right?). Am I missing something?
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
What is the advantage of dual ballasts? They literally cost twice as much - so the upfront cost is the same... is it the power consumption? They have an on/off switch for each - so it does not seem like they are sharing anything that would make them more efficient than having 2 single ballasts (easier to replace singles in case of failure, right?). Am I missing something?
No, they are about 10% cheaper than twice as much
 

HappySack

Well-Known Member
Go with what you got! Add a couple of 600's in the middle for good coverage. Lot of ways to do it. You already paid for the 1kw's.
 
Top