Here's some info if you want to wade through it....
Light Intensity in an aquarium - Page 8 - Aquarium Plants - Barr Report
Basically what it boils down to is that nothing is exact because there are so many variables - but if you were to take fairly identical setups and change only the bulbs, the .8/1/1.2 multipliers would be within the ballpark of the difference you would see, due to restrike factors.
WPG is a very loose term, but it was originally intended to correlate to something along the lines of T8's with decent reflectors. Go to something like a T5 or a screw in
cf, and start changing reflectors, all those things have to be taken into consideration when thinking about how much light you're really going to get in practice, and that was my point. Small differences don't matter much to the plants, if someone wanted to save a few bucks and go with the screw-in
cf's, that's great. I actually have one tank lit by
cf's myself. But based on my understanding of the tests that have been done on them, I don't think it would be accurate to say that they would be getting more light that way, in fact I would be surprised if they didn't perhaps get less, also due to other factors such as (most likely) poorer reflectors, and a greater distance from the bulb to the tank. I wasn't trying to get picky, just illustrating why the
wpg rule is only a very general one.
Personally, I've had poor success with the
cf's mounted vertically. I think it's because it creates more of a spotlight, so you end up with very high light in the middle (which always created algae for me), tapering off to very low light where the light isn't shining (and poor plant growth). To avoid this, the light can be raised, but this greatly decreases the amount of light you are actually getting, so then you need to increase wattage accordingly. I just found it to be a bit of a pain on anything bigger than a 5g.