I've said this already to someone (maybe you?): if CRI was the only thing that mattered then we'd be growing tomatoes under a 40W incandescent bulb :) The amount of light is the most important thing. Lumens are the most widely used method of measuring light intensity, unfortunately not the best for plants. Even more unfortunately, just about every other method of measuring light intensity is so vaguely defined or so widely abused that it isn't of much use to you. So chasing lumens is a pretty good start, but note that some lamps with low lumen numbers actually produce just as much light, its just light that we don't see so well. The Gro-Lux lamps are a good example. But also look at some wide spectrum "daylight" lamps and you'll see slightly lower lumens, but these lamps are actually putting out just the same number of photons that can be used by plants. It is also worth calculating how many lumens per watt you are getting. An inefficient lamp may give you slightly more lumens but use a lot more electricity, and you'd be better off using a smaller highly efficient lamp for more hours or getting two of them. As an extreme example, a 40W fluorescent tube puts out about barely half as much light as a 400W halogen bulb but the halogen bulb uses ten times as much electricity. Using two 40W bulbs gets you the light and saves you big on your utility bill. Spectrum is also crucial, but the lucky thing for you is that almost any fluorescent tube (excepting weird stuff like black lights, lizard UV lamps, or actinic coral reef lamps) provides a more or less suitable spectrum with at most a few percentage points difference for use lighting geeks to argue about. Get cool whites (4100K temperature), daylights, (5000K-6500K), or a mix with warm whites (3000K) and you'll be fine. CRI is, frankly, close to irrelevant to a plant. The most efficient lighting sources available, in terms of getting plant growth for the least electricity, have such disjointed spectra that you can't meaningfully calculate a CRI. Gro-Lux fluorescents, which whether you think they're better than regular fluorescents or not certainly grow plants, have a CRI in single digits. So, plants clearly aren't that bothered about CRI. But, having said all that, there are some good reasons to choose a fluorescent lamp with a high CRI, assuming you are choosing amongst more or less "normal" fluorescents. CRI stands for colour rendition index and colours appear more realistic under a bulb with a CRI of 90 or more. The wider spectrum may also (or may not) provide more light in the best areas for photosynthesis, but the difference isn't huge. Much has been written and debated about which fluorescent spectra are best for plants, and by how much, but whatever the answer, CRI isn't the right way to measure it.

That's one of the big discussions on many threads here. The open burners are liked by those who appreciate being able to take things apart to thoroughly clean each piece, and spills and crumbs are allowed to fall through rather than sit on the surface right under the grate and burn on. The flame goes straight up, instead of out to the side, so some will argue that it's more efficient, and better on smaller pans,since the flame will come up underneath, rather than up the outsides. The BlueStar has very open (and star-shaped for efficiency) burners and Wolf offers both sealed and their version of the open burner, which is sometimes referred to as 'semi-sealed', or is it 'semi-open,' because there are tighter tolerances than on the BlueStar, so it's kind of in-between...Not everything can fall through and lands in a kind of a bowl right under the burner. With open burners, you can take components over to the sink for scrubbing and soaking. With sealed, you just scrub and wipe in place. I've read that they often stain or collect gunk right around the burner. Others love the sealed, don't want to take their cooktops apart, and say a bit of Barkeeper's Friend deals with anything that's baked on or trying to stain. This is just a quick synopsis of what I remember from the many discussions I've read. I have no experience myself with either one, but will soon. I wish I could try both for awhile to know which I really prefer, but that, of course, is not an option. You can go to the appliance forum page, go to the bottom and do a search for sealed or open burners and probably get links to many, many previous threads to read.

Posted by trevorlawson I think its fair to say that the CC will out cook a thermadore due to open burners. Fair to say based on what? Please describe what this means. The high end is 22K BTUs-pretty close to Capital. This is the rating for the heat output, nothing to do with open or closed. The low end is 375 BTUs. We don't know what Capital has for that. I am sure everyone knows what I sell. What I sell does not detract from the fact that open burners outperform sealed burners. The difference between open and sealed burners is significant nothing nominal about it. We tested a wolf range with caps on and caps off using same pan same water side by side at the same time, the burner with caps off boiled water over 23% fast..... that is significant Here is the video. Outperform would be a mischaracterization of this "test". I see performance as more multidimensional than putting the most heat in the center of a pan. If you had a wider pan, or changed the metal it was made of, or what you are cooking, your results would be different. This falls under the category of showmanship rather than anything scientific. How can you say this-"the burner with caps off boiled water over 23% fast."without any supporting data? You are right it is not how big the burners are but how the burner delivers heat to the CENTER of the pan, so the base of the pan gets evenly hot. Sealed burner send vast majority of the heat to the outside of the pan, open burners send the heat to the center of the pan. Please explain using the principals of heat transfer how delivering heat to the center of a pan is allowing the base of the pan to get evenly hot. If you have a ring of heat on the bottom of the pan, heat will travel in both directions from that ring to heat the pan. The center will receive heat from more directions and heat quicker, until it comes to equilibrium, than the outside so it is optimum to have a ring with the maximum heat more towards the outside of the pan than the inside. It is much harder to get heat to the part of the pan outside of the ring. A sealed ring burner flame pattern is only slightly wider than an open ring burner, a little more if you have it wide open. If you use a pan with reasonably good heat transfer like copper or aluminum, the burner shape doesn't really matter as much, but I wouldn't want the heat in the middle of the pan. The only way I would see heat in the middle of a pan as a benefit is if I were using a very small pan or a wok. I use everything from a 7 inch pan to make caramel with no stirring to a 14 inch aluminum pan on my sealed burners. For any pan less than 7 inches, I have a "small pan burner" I can make fried potatoes in that 14 inch pan with even color all the way across. I use cast iron if I need a lot of heat as in searing meat.

DIY?? I just saw that. Not even close. Just had a home full of Fleetwoods installed, 6 sliders up to 26'x9'. It took 4 glaziers about a week to install the sliders, 2 about another week to install the windows. More importantly, it takes 4 strong bodies to move a single panel using power suction grips. Weight will depend on the size and thickness of the glass of course. Frameless glass doors like you see in the photo or in a frameless shower must be installed with precision and anchored solidly. If it moves or sags, you chip or break the glass and start over. I was stunned when I received the installation portion of the quote, but fully understood after witnessing the effort.