Apache's were not designed with the hobbyist in mind...it is a commercial light. I don't make the lights...all I can do is show you guys what works. I'm yet to see another pre-made light do what the at600 can do...on paper or in reality.
So as I understand it you have not tried any of the other LED systems out there? I'm curious if you've looked into BML? It would appear they deliver greater efficiency (more PAR per watt) and perhaps good value (more PAR per dollar) but I'm not sure if they deliver enough intensity (PAR μmol/m2/s). Curious to know your thoughts...
Thanks for the videos and the thread. Great work.
I aam assuming you saw a "study" from university of utah...stating that the spyder has the highest µmol/w...
If so the apache they used was an at120 given to them in 2011, designed pre 2010. They did not test the at600 or at200 which are the current model.
If you are not referencing that "study", than I don't know where/how you got that conclusion.
I have only used a stealth602, at120's, at200, and at600 and an indagro induction system. As well as using the cree cxa 3K cobs right now.
I also go to many hydro shows all year, and get to do some "consulting" for some other companies that will be coming out soon. I have seen and tested in person with my meters... illumitex(DS), BML(600 and 1000), indagro, advanced, cidly, evergrow, blackdog, mars2, sunlight systems, flextronics, LTC, lumigro(650), kessil, solis tek, plus several new comers that I don't know the name and aren't worth looking up right now.
Apache is using better chips than any company on the market. Nichia's. And they use more of them in their unit than any company. Meaning that not only do they have the best engine...but the run them at the best current to maximize output, longevity, and efficiency. Combined with their superior lens to bml.
BML has a heat problem, and that is the 600...the 1000 is way worse on the heart(literally 2X as much...that's not a guess). It is going to cause not only environment effects(hot room), but possible technical issues like longevity, and output issues like lower µmols/w because of the operating temp.
I should note Apache uses the best everything...drivers, heatsinks, chips, fans(a little loud, but will never break). You name it in there and it's pretty much the best available.
Long story short...compare the PAR footprints of any led to the apache at600
Greengenes- great thread n grow...very informative...
my only problem is why run the Hps in a 4x4 ?
You could have ran it in a 6x6 =36 sqft. instead of the 4x4-16sqft space ...that extra 20sqft would have yielded another 6-10 zips ...I'm very impressed with your Apache but in a true comparison the 1k watt hps would have kinda left that apache in the dust.
You are talking like the apache couldn't have used more room too...
We here in my area run 1000w in 5x5 if running multiple lights...4x4 if running just 1. That is because at those coverage zones the whole canopy is receiving the required intensity for the best growth. The fact is that apache has measure the lights all the way out to 6x6 and the PAR foot print matches all the way out. there are 50* lenses for max coverage and running them low to the canopy.
I have said this before...what ever YOU do with a 1000w, is what YOU can do with an AT600. What I do is what I do. Be your self and keep doing you.
As for my testing...they ended up being a 5x5 for the 1000w and a 4x5 for the apache. The led couldn't expand as much because it was in the corner confined on 3 sides...while the 1000w only was constricted on 2 sides, allowing it to expand more. And still the yields were equal.