3x3 Flood Table Advanced LED

[Quackerking]

So for another set up, I'm 90% decided on a 3x3 flood table with an Advanced LED.

I'm pretty sure I'll be good with 600W total.

1 300w = $795

2 300w = $1,590

1 600w = $1,395

With the coverages of these 2 lights being fairly different, is it worth the extra $200 to split up the lights?

 

[Quackerking]

After more research, it sounds like it is worth the $200 to get 2 300w instead of 1 600.

 

[Quackerking]

Would 2 400w be overkill? I originally planned on 1 1000w HPS...but I've been told that might be a bit much as well

 

[Buckshot]

It depends on how much you want on a regular basis. You can always start with one and move to a second. I do suggest two smaller units rather than one large as you can adjust for plants or create two rooms ... maybe one to seed for instance

 

[Bassman59]

The benefit of the 400w is a bit more 3rd off effect, and overall bigger area of coverage.
The intensity of the lights are about the same. The 400 allows you some room to grow. The 300 will serve your area fine. A toss up really.

I wouldnt go with a 600 for your area and flood table. But mostly because it is a bit more limiting in it'a uses later on if you change grow areas, styles, etc. For example, you decide to go 5x5. Now you're at this odd area where you'll need more light but a 3-400 wont do it. But if you had two 3-400's already, you could add one of those and set in triangular fashion and cover the 5x5 perfectly.

However, grow styles may come into play as well. **Not meaning to confuse the picture even more**

If you were growing using very short veg cycles, (say 2 weeks) then the smaller lights will be fine because you wont have height and need depth of penetration to get lots of light to lower buds on 3 - 5 foot tall plants. Whereas with big girls, you'll want more light and 2 x 600s could provide that in that 5x5 area. Especially given the better reflection off walls and more intense 3rd off effect.