PL-L? Worth it on a small scale?

[Moots]

I am running about 103 watts, in CFL's at the moment. I am not looking to really expand on that, but if I can get more efficient light without going up to the HIDs, I'd like to do so.

I've done a bit of research on PL-Ls. The questions I have are:

On a small scale (100W) is the difference enough to matter between CFL and PLL?

Are the costs of running PLL the same as CFLS, I can't imagine so as it needs a ballast, and will the ballast take up a whole circuit like the HIDs, or is it a smaller amperage?

Is it worth it. Whatever set up of PLL I could consider, I would be paying near or a little over 100 Canadian no matter what. Thats a big jump from the less than 35 I had to pay to get and install lights, and a PC fan. I just don't want to spend an extra 100 bucks, to see minimal difference.

Thanks.

 

[geopolitical]

All in all I wouldn't spend extra if your setup is satisfactory as is. The difference will be fairly marginal, the ballasts aren't any more "needy" than the equivalent wattage of anything else, with 100w you have zero worries. Heat is easier to handle with them, and in my opinion you can install them into a slimmer package with a more even light footprint.

 

[qbert]

On a small scale (100W) is the difference enough to matter between CFL and PLL?

Nope. Don't bother. Not worth the time to switch it, much less the cost of the PL-L setup.

Besides, that's only two 55w bulbs. Depending on your setup, that may not provide very good coverage. But five 23w cfl's or two or three ~40w cfl's would give better coverage.

 

[big ballin 88]

If you can manage to pull of a nice SCROG its worth it. The difference in cost is marginal when said and done, but it depends on your cab size and your use for it. The size of your cab is the biggest dictation on worth. If its a 2'x2' than yea do it, but if its 1'x1' or less no. Regular CFL's are warmer for the equivalent wattage range and throw a lot of light in the wrong space. Where as you can get a pretty decent reflector with PL-L's and they work as good as a 150w CMH.

 

[Guest 88950]

i bought 1 Fulham Workhorse 8 ballast (220 watts) and 4 each of the 2g11 base's & 55 watt pl-l's from 1000bulbs.com for under $75 U.S.

its a diy set up not a plug n go like whats sold @ htg.

i hang my pl-l's vetrical for extra light around the edges and so far the heat is not a problem. the leaf tips will burn if they get within 1/8" from the bulb and you get good lumen penetration for up to 6" so the bulbs stay tight to my girls.

 

[rives]

Well, I had an answer almost finished last night when IC apparently went down and shortly thereafter my power went off. I think that PL-L's are far superior to CFL's. They distribute the light over a far greater area, the plant sees direct light from 1/2 of the lamps radiant surface rather than 1/4, there are some damn good reflectors available for them, you can get the ballast heat away from the plants, in my experience they are far more reliable, etc, etc. The following pictures show a couple of sour bubble girls that I moved from under my Lumigrow ES330 on 2/9 (the screen went in on my scrog at that point and there was no room for them). The "after" picture was taken yesterday, 3/24, so the picture is of 6 weeks of vegging under (2) 55 watt PL-L's. Incidentally, I think they would be far larger because I've been keeping the temp's low and feeding them very, very sparingly in order to keep them from outgrowing their home until I am ready for them.

 

[Eskimo77]

I would use the CFL´s as long as the last and when they break.. you can replace them to PL-L.
imho