Best led ?

Johnxnyg said:
Thank you! JMHO All good options... I dont have enough space to use any of these... But i have the 440w on the way!!! Anything thats worth doing is worth over doing =D
Click to expand...

Although I am in favor of a51...the CLW will grow some good herb no doubt. I have just never really seen any majorly successful things done under a CLW. Oneshot is doing really well with his ss800, but that's the first I've seen close to complete. Compared to many completed and reputation worthy grows with a51.

Also I thought you had the ss800 because that's the par numbers you were talking about.

Good luck man. Show us what it can do. Like puff said we really need a good CLW grow.
 
Area51 sgs-160 (155 watt in flower) VS CLW 200(162 watt)

area51 sgs-160.png

LED-Infographic-Complete.jpg
 
"Also Elly the readings from the a51 are not relevant bc we don't just grow our plants exactly in the middle, and just one plant. (Ok some do :P) so I need the variations between the nodes of readings to get a true deviation chat!"

Exactly, much better footprint with the area51.
If you want to make the test fair, put the CLW400 up against 2 Area51s. Spoiler alert...the cali looses.


The bottom line is: I grow plants, not charts. One of my first lamps was the CLW200 and I was impressed with it, but led technology has moved on and so have I. Good luck.

P.S. If you can find any good finished grows with the CLW400, post the link.
 
Johnxnyg said:
Yea it's unfortunate about the CLW grows. But I fear this has to do with their grower program. They offer a heavy discount, if you post a journal. From what I see, they mostly start there journal to get the discount, then slack off after a couple of weeks. They are very liberal who they give the discount so people don't take it seriously. I only have a 3x3 space so the 800w would be of no use for me.

And like I said, in my grow I'm sure they would all perform closely, with only smaller difference, and the area51 might do better. But the UVB on the CLW is a plus for me.

I think I have proven my point in that CLW is not a piece of crap. And both lamps are a good decision! Albeit the a51 might be better cost/production value, but I'll try one out when they get them back in stock!

also the par I stated for CLW was for the 400w. Which was 1990 at 12 (yes next time I'll keep them consistent at 18 inch) and the ss800w par is 2828 umol at 12. Pretty nice stuff !
Click to expand...

Bub, you are in the Belly of the Best for 'legit data,' if you want a sale's pitch, go over to ICMag, the fast balls over here come straight forward, and backed with some wind.

I think some ppl are being polite bringing the comparison back down to the 'flares...

considering I could stuff x3 SGS's @ 157w a pop and still be in a comparison range of a Storm............ footprint alone trumps that battle, now cut it down to 2 and just saved 500 bucks, AND monthly savings...? and your still covering more space than you would have with the latter.. not to even go into the multi-panel vs. single source debate with layover's intensity numbers..

Something you need to take into account is HOW they may be getting these numbers... (do I feel like a troll...?.... christ....)

few ppl around here have invested in PPFD meters for a basis...(these still have their own error range per given wavelength..) but again, gives us a good idea what we are really delivering.

You have not proven anything yet, though I think SEVERAL user's would wish for you to post a journal... you seem to be sitting pretty high on your re/seller's par ratings for proof... but then counter yourself saying you are going to get some 'real legit data'..?

For ref... what numbers did you crunch for those readings you charted out? I would bet the coverage of the SGS or even better... XGS (all white, no NECC. spectrla mixing..) is significantly more "even" than the 400, or 800. I may be digging myself a hole for all I know of the CLW's..


Ps. I bet a panel that their Veg 'flare gives better readings than the others... and I bet the flower spectrum is the winner.


Pss. Im your volunteer, get yourself an Apogee Quantum Flux Meter... chart your results, and ill give you my results. I think everyone is very curious about the other american made company...
 
Sorry for using all the unreliable sources for my arguments... I am gonna be leaving the site until i get a few grows under my belt and can at least keep up with you pro's!
 
The PAR numbers on Cali's website is "Adjusted PAR". What it is, is the actual PAR values almost doubled.

"PAR light output measured in adjusted* μmoles/m2/s at center".

Grower's House tested the 800w http://growershouse.com/blog/califo...800w-led-grow-light-par-and-footprint-review/

The numbers they get from the 800w is close to what Cali's adjusted PAR for their 400w is.

SolarStormTestInfographicReviewFootprint.jpg


Johnxnyg said:
Ok well to start off I believe I have proved that the CLW to be not a "piece of crap" and that is the only thing I have claimed to have proven so far.

if you have read all of my posts you will see I have stumbled upon great variation on what the ss800 and the ss400 par readings are from site to site. For example which is why it makes me wonder why you thought I said if those numbers were proven or not. After my calculations I actually said I tend not to buy into the charts as they seem to be exaggerated or skewed in each of the studies.


http://www.californialightworks.com/info/CLW_Brochure.pdf

going by that the solar storm
400w is 1074umol at 18 inches running at 360w

The sgs 160 at 18" is 777
running at much less wattage.

so for efficieny I believe the a51 to be better. (Going by their own website)
for effectivity I would have to say ss400 is better (going by their own website)
(so take that's what it's worth until I buy myself the a51 as well get the par meter)

Am I just missing something that I should want less umols over my plants or not?

like I said I don't trust any of these sources, and I am willing to pony up the dough for the good of the community. You would think I'd have a little bit more support with just trying to get the real information out onto this forum.
Click to expand...
 
Ok you guys win... I truly do wish you the best of luck. Have fun with the a51's! Everyone has made it apparently clear i know not the fuck of what I am saying, and since I HATE spreading false information I will be removing myself from these boards until i get few more grows under my belt and can hang with you guys!

Wish you all the best! Hope area 51 gets them in stock sooN!
 
ellydee said:
"Also Elly the readings from the a51 are not relevant bc we don't just grow our plants exactly in the middle, and just one plant. (Ok some do :P) so I need the variations between the nodes of readings to get a true deviation chat!"

Exactly, much better footprint with the area51.
If you want to make the test fair, put the CLW400 up against 2 Area51s. Spoiler alert...the cali looses.



The bottom line is: I grow plants, not charts. One of my first lamps was the CLW200 and I was impressed with it, but led technology has moved on and so have I. Good luck.

P.S. If you can find any good finished grows with the CLW400, post the link.
Click to expand...


http://www.ledgrowlightforum.com/harley-s-new-grow-ss400-t358-220.html

and a bunch more on that site.... Just a BUNCH BUNCH more not completed cause the kids get the discount and stop posting. And that will be it for my RIU carreer.... Short and sweet, just not the right type of board for me =D Good luck with your grows
 
why not post a journal of the clw? contribute to the community, all those kids didn't finish but maybe you could for the rest of us... only person I've seen, recently, with a clw is Sgt. John in the PCC...

do a journal dude, and I know we will all be subbed up to HELP...
 
Yea unfortunately I do not have the luxury of time to keep a journal and post it on a website and what not... (Other wise i would signed up for the GrowerFeedbackProgam and saved myself a few hundred more dollars) =P I messaged you with my e mail and will be more then happy to share my growing with you! =D

Unfortunately this thread has caused some stress on me, on which i do not know why its just a forum to post ideas. But it has and alas no extra stress is needed at this time in my life, im sure you guys understand =D
 
There is no doubt that the CLW will produce some nice bud (I think I have some pics of some nice buds done under the flare,) and I didn't start off by just calling it a POS.

blowincherrypie said:
Keep researching player..
Click to expand...

I mean, I did purchase a CLW, and until just very recently was still using it, so I am speaking from experience here. I simply wish someone would have steered me clear from them before I bought the thing. If you're ever able to get a different panel and experience the difference, I'm sure you'll understand what I'm trying to say here.

I apologize if I came off harsh or anything, but them boys at Apache, A51 and even that Hans panel that has been putting out some nice finished journals, are just in a whole other league.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top