Area 51 vs Apache Tech

[captainmorgan]

OK,this might not be my best idea ever but I would like to see some constructive comparisons of the two panels. This is not a dick measuring contest and let's keep personalities out of it. Here's a few things I'd like to see talked about and let's try to keep things civil.

Build quality
Parts quality
Design
Efficiency
Coverage
Power (umoles-PAR)
Cost per watt

 

[supchaka]

I see what you did there!

 

[gk skunky]

opcorn

Oh and my internet dick is HUGE by the way.... lmao

Interested to see what info some people have. I know gg put a meter on the at600. Anyone done the same with the at200 or any of the a51 lights?

I know I'm satisfied with my a51 xgs so far. That's about it though. Lol

 

[SupraSPL]

Regarding efficiency, we don't know the bin of the 3700K XTEs used in the A51 SGS190 or the SGS160. Neither do we know the bin of the Nichias used in the Apache. So as best as I can estimate, I put all at about 30% efficient. Chinese no name panels may be as low as 15% so that is a huge improvement. This is the main reason the lamps get such good reviews.

Another lamp worth mentioning is the Onyx Grow, which uses 3000K XML2 T4 bin. Because they are running somewhat hard, it also about 30% efficient but it has a better flowering spectrum than the SGS190 IMO.

 

[spazatak]

Regarding efficiency, we don't know the bin of the 3700K XTEs used in the A51 SGS190 or the SGS160. Neither do we know the bin of the Nichias used in the Apache. So as best as I can estimate, I put all at about 30% efficient. Chinese no name panels may be as low as 15% so that is a huge improvement. This is the main reason the lamps get such good reviews.

Another lamp worth mentioning is the Onyx Grow, which uses 3000K XML2 T4 bin. Because they are running somewhat hard, it also about 30% efficient but it has a better flowering spectrum than the SGS190 IMO.

they have some heat issue I believe and shut down... if you want the link I can find it...

also cool thread... would love to know if the price difference is worth it for the AT....

 

[gk skunky]

Regarding efficiency, we don't know the bin of the 3700K XTEs used in the A51 SGS190 or the SGS160. Neither do we know the bin of the Nichias used in the Apache. So as best as I can estimate, I put all at about 30% efficient. Chinese no name panels may be as low as 15% so that is a huge improvement. This is the main reason the lamps get such good reviews.

Another lamp worth mentioning is the Onyx Grow, which uses 3000K XML2 T4 bin. Because they are running somewhat hard, it also about 30% efficient but it has a better flowering spectrum than the SGS190 IMO.

Can't remember what it was exactly but he used to have part number and bin listed for 3750k XTEs. Let me see if I can find it later.

 

[Greengenes707]

This is funny...more he said she said.

There are only 2 people that I know that own both. Other than their personal preferences and judgment from the 2 people who actually own both(who both favor a certain one)... you will not find any actual answers with this thread. Plus because of the lack of things we have already talked about like bins.

As for the at200 par chart...I did one when it first came out...and scotch did an amazingly detailed one of the sgs and his at200 I believe. Things may be new to some users...but this shit has been going down every couple months since the sgs came out.

 

[gk skunky]

Alright found the folder I wrote it on. The 3750k XTEs in my xgs-190 are supposedly XTE XTEAWT-02-0000-00000BFF6.

Does that tell you Supra? Also, if there is anyway one of us xgs owners could confirm we could try if one of us has the means.

 

[spazatak]

Alright found the folder I wrote it on. The 3750k XTEs in my xgs-190 are supposedly XTE XTEAWT-02-0000-00000BFF6.

Does that tell you Supra? Also, if there is anyway one of us xgs owners could confirm we could try if one of us has the means.

They have that still on their site for the 2014 model... they dont have this kind of info on their newer unit..... would be interested to know what they are and why they have chosen not to put it up... considering how LED users like to know the tech being used

 

[gk skunky]

They have that still on their site for the 2014 model... they dont have this kind of info on their newer unit..... would be interested to know what they are and why they have chosen not to put it up... considering how LED users like to know the tech being used

Ahhh ok. LOL I just assumed it was omitted from the page since he said we don't know which XTEs are in the xgs. Eh oh well. Lol

 

[FranJan]

I always look at the Apache as a more scientific piece of equipment for the home grow/horti crowd than an A51. It's a slightly more serious piece of equipment, and those drivers LED combo and Apaches expertise are what keeps Apache slightly higher in my book. Having said that A51 is the single best bargain an LED grower can get IMHO and it's a panel meant to grow weed first and foremost, which is what we want. The company was started by people that are interested in growing weed and believe in their product's ability to grow the dank and that's a BIG plus in my book. But I still bought a Hans setup, so what do I know LOL.

There's a paragraph in one of the textbooks I've read and when it comes to light design you do your research, you do your math, and then you build the rig to see what variables you've missed in your design. Arguing over bins sometimes doesn't matter because what a LED company shows you on a spectrograph is gonna be different than the finished product a panel maker puts out. In certain situations CREE whites can produce more light than a Nichia white but in the case of AT vs A51, Apache has been in business longer, (right?) and have relationships with some very reputable companies/orginizations/universities, which has probably filtered down to their panel design. So you know what? Apache should be making a better panel than A51, who btw are no dumb-ass country bumpkins from West Virginia. They know what's up and are right on Apache Tech's ass. Which is great for us.

Oh and I really would love to see both company's driver spec/design but I don't see that happening. Or can it???? And for the record Hans's "generic" driver (850mA) runs pretty cool. Much cooler than the Invetronics (450mA) driver does on the Illumitex rig I use in my veg cab. Just felt like sayin'.

 

[SupraSPL]

Thanks GK, last time we were discussing the XGS190 someone produced the part numbers but it was generic and did not tell us much (not sure which thread, maybe it did my memory does not serve). I don't think that part number was on the website at that time. Anyway,

So XTEAWT-02-0000-00000BFF6 tells us:
70 CRi minimum
**R3 bin
3750K - one of these tints: 5c1, 5c2, 5c3, 5c4, 5D1, 5D2, 5D3, 5D4, 6a1, 6a2, 6a3, 6a4, 6B1, 6B2, 6B3, 6B4

The XTE is available in 3000K R3 bin so the 3750K R3 is not the best option, but it is not bad at all. Assuming a drive current of 750mA and Tj of 85C, 30.5%. Assuming Tj 50C 32%.

Thank you Area 51 and RapidLED for providing the bins!

The Onyx Grow went with the 3000K XML2. Rather than raise the bar of efficiency (30%), they run it harder to make it cheaper/W. Anyone have a link to complaints of it shutting down?

Found it. Apparently the issue resolved itself. He has got 4 of them stuffed in a 4X4 (840W dissipation!) That should produce some serious nugs.

 

[captainmorgan]

The Onyx Grow went with the 3000K XML2. Rather than raise the bar of efficiency (30%), they run it harder to make it cheaper/W. Anyone have a link to complaints of it shutting down?

Found it. Apparently the issue resolved itself. He has got 4 of them stuffed in a 4X4 (840W dissipation!) That should produce some serious nugs.

Yea I talked with dbkick a week or so ago about this and he said that two of his panels shut off very quickly when he first started them but have worked fine since then. Rapid offered to send him new panels but he decided to just keep them. Sounds like a defective thermal overload sensor maybe if they have thermal protection.

 

[captainmorgan]

Scotch had mentioned the difference in cooling. AT draws air in from one end and blows it out the other end. A51 draws air in from the top center and blows it out all four sides. He mentioned that in a green house where you could get condensation drops that the AT would be better suited. I'm not sure that point matters to the vast majority of growers because how many would use the light in a green house. How effective they're cooled seems more important to the majority of people that buy them. A51's approach seems like it would have more even cooling,wouldn't AT drawing air from one end to the other make the panel cooler at the intake end and warmer at the exhaust? Need some input on this from someone with real knowledge on the subject.

 

[Greengenes707]

Scotch had mentioned the difference in cooling. AT draws air in from one end and blows it out the other end. A51 draws air in from the top center and blows it out all four sides. He mentioned that in a green house where you could get condensation drops that the AT would be better suited. I'm not sure that point matters to the vast majority of growers because how many would use the light in a green house. How effective they're cooled seems more important to the majority of people that buy them. A51's approach seems like it would have more even cooling,wouldn't AT drawing air from one end to the other make the panel cooler at the intake end and warmer at the exhaust? Need some input on this from someone with real knowledge on the subject.

UL seems to think it's the right way. You won't find a UL light with top fans. You can't just buy UL...you need to conform/meet certain standards...top fans won't meet them. Somethnig a51 probably didn't know when saying they were "going to be UL".

For AT, operating temps are all fine. On the at600 it may have some very slight difference over the distance, but all within prime operating conditions. The at200 is so small and the fans pump air out so fast it's no issue...plus the at200/120 have side slots to let air flow...less than UL's specified surface area openings, and still pulls air across the whole sink. And The two's heatsinks alone is something that we should probably be talking about. Those spec differences would interest me.


So a51 blows down...not pulls up?

 

[captainmorgan]

So a51 blows down...not pulls up?

I checked my XGS 190 and it draws air at the top and blows out the sides.

 

[hyroot]

^^^ my sgs 160 does the same. They fans spin so fast it almost feels like air is going out the top too. Air does definitely blow out the sides.

 

[spazatak]

I checked my XGS 190 and it draws air at the top and blows out the sides.

if the fans are blowing down would the air be going out the sides... ie the area of least resistance..?

 

[SupraSPL]

I have noticed what a huge difference that makes on CPU temps. If you blow air into the heatsink you get lower temps versus sucking air from the heatsink.

 

[Greengenes707]

I have been searching for the last hour for a link I had that shoed the differences in air flow really well for top fans. I can't find it. But from the top, blowing down makes sense. The link showed that when sucking out, it never fully evacuated the housing. Not enough resistance to force it all into the suction.
AT's suck out down the fin channels.
For the at600 they have fans blowing in on one end, and pulling out on the other.