CMH from those in the know

[>_<]

Like a lot of posters I've been reading the CMH thread and ordered one for my grow. The trouble is, that thread is full of people arguing about theory and hearsay with very few posts by people who have actually grown with a cmh themselves, and almost no pics of buds grown under CMH.

I want to hear how CMH compares with mh/hps for vegging/flowering from those who have actually grown with both kinds of lamp themselves, or at least seen buds grown under both. There seems to be a general consensus that CMH > MH for veg, but people disagree a lot about flowering-some say CMH produces low yields of leafy bud with little resin, some say it yields almost as well as HPS and produces clearly superior quality buds.

I currently have a 250w MH veg cab and a 400w HPS flower cab I've ordered a 400w CMH for. Quite a few posts have mentioned that some growers use CMH for the first 2-3 weeks of veg while the plant is still more vegging than flowering, then switch to HPS to lay on the buds before switching back to CMH for the last 2 weeks for aroma/potency. If what I've heard about the properties of CMH vs HPS are true, this sounds like a very good idea, especially for those of us with a 250w/400w cab. Has anyone actually tried this? Unless I hear first hand info that convinces me CMH for all of flowering is a good idea I will probably use that schedule on my currently flowering plants.

And again, please only make claims as to how good/bad CMH's are if you've actually seen results for yourself. I don't want another 150 pages of debate about wavelengths and lumens. Experimental results speak far louder in growing than anything else, so if you're one of the few people experienced with CMH, please post!

Bonus points for pics.

 

[greenisgold]

You will find a few posts from me in that thread. Veg: I think the best veg bulb on the market (talking 400 watt bulbs only) is the eye blue. I have vegged under the eye, a standard mh and the cmh and the eye is better, but at the cost it's not worth it. I did one full grow under cmh and went back to dual spectrum with hps being the main bulb in flower. I grew out some super girls which came out very nice using all cmh, but they never filled out like I'm use to seeing. Right not I'm growing super girls again with a mixed spectrum and the buds are bigger and look better imho. I could care less what is said in that thread as I know by experience that using all cmh might produce a greener, lusher plant, but growing in a dual spectrum using hps and supplimenting with cmh in flower is the way to go.
PS. There is a grow diary of my cmh grow showing the super girls and sensi star, do a search.

 

[knifehitz]

The downside of CMH is they don't crank out as many lumens, even though they are very evenly spread out over the visible spectrum (hence the pure white light). HPS simply produces more photons. I think that using the CMH for the first few weeks and then switching to the HPS to finish is probably the best use of the bulb and will certainly best a 100% HPS crop. However, I would not switch the bulb back to CMH, because I have noticed the added blue light encourages plants to continue to throw on new pistils/growth, which don't have time to mature.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Seismic]

I think cmh has pretty good results so far, although I will wait until I have done several complete grows to make a final decision.

Here is some Hashberry and Blue Mystic which I got in flower right now at 43 days:

Hashberry:

Blue Mystic:

 

[ricard0]

Not trying to link competitors here, but i've got a CMH running ATM. Check it out here ---> http://forum.grasscity.com/indoor-grow-journals/342565-nl-5-old-habits-new-toys.html