LED vs HPS?

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
Idk. Are your t5 fixtures using 400w to make a pound? Efficiency to me is why I like leds. Also the guy doing the growing with my lights was always a hid grower but is certain the quality and quality is higher now with the CLWs and cobs than his 2600w of hid he had......so I can't say I've seen any non agenda based evidence that a "fuller" spectrum makes for better weed...... got any studies showing weed better with uva/uvb that is greater than a 2% increase in get high values for weed
I don't have the study linked on this phone but the university of Utah has proven that the fuller spectrum of cmh 315 and the uv it includes does make gains in plant growth and vigor which is why yield can be higher with fuller spectrum.

And there is a grower with a gas chromatograph on YouTube that showed a 4% thc increase over HPS and cobs with a 315 cmh.

Sorry I don't have the links but the u of Utah info is available on the cycloptics website.
 

BM9AGS

Well-Known Member
I don't have the study linked on this phone but the university of Utah has proven that the fuller spectrum of cmh 315 and the uv it includes does make gains in plant growth and vigor which is why yield can be higher with fuller spectrum.

And there is a grower with a gas chromatograph on YouTube that showed a 4% thc increase over HPS and cobs with a 315 cmh.

Sorry I don't have the links but the u of Utah info is available on the cycloptics website.
Yeah I've read it. So 4% of 26 is 1.02%

And that's only with Cmh. Why not hps? Hps has uva/b.

To me 1% increase in thc is not something I give a fuck about. I'll take the % increase in yeild of cobs because of efficiency.
 

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
Yeah I've read it. So 4% of 26 is 1.02%

And that's only with Cmh. Why not hps? Hps has uva/b.

To me 1% increase in thc is not something I give a fuck about. I'll take the % increase in yeild of cobs because of efficiency.
No. The cob and HPS weed was 18% and the cmh weed was 22%

They commented the aroma of the cob weed was best. They did not do a terpene profile. A grower here has a theory about the cob quality still being better to him and his patients.

No infa-red that may be stressing the plants. But then they put uv back in for the gains and stress the plants so it's all bro science except the university data.

I am not arguing who is right. Environment and grower skill makes most of the difference.

But my buds are better in every way since I got a balanced spectrum in the room. And the Phillips bulb I chose has almost no uv. But an excellent flowering spectrum. And so would the led's.
 

mauricem00

Well-Known Member
Idk. Are your t5 fixtures using 400w to make a pound? Efficiency to me is why I like leds. Also the guy doing the growing with my lights was always a hid grower but is certain the quality and quality is higher now with the CLWs and cobs than his 2600w of hid he had......so I can't say I've seen any non agenda based evidence that a "fuller" spectrum makes for better weed...... got any studies showing weed better with uva/uvb that is greater than a 2% increase in get high values for weed
interesting to hear an led grower talk about non agenda based evidence. but you clearly have not looked too hard since there are plenty of studies out there. I never heard anyone claim more than 1gpw before the led crowd came along and you had to be an expert grower to get that but then there are so many false and misleading claims about LEDs it's hard to believe anything you here. the CLW uses old technology and is no mare effiecient that the viparspectra or other inexpensive grow lights. the only difference is the inclusion of T8 UV bulbs in the CLW. sunlight is full spectrum light and plants grown in natural sunlight have better taste and potency than plants grown indoors. the 2% increase you claim would not be noticeable but many people notice a difference with full spectrum (cmh,fluorescent or enhanced spectrum HPS) lights. the LED makers have always claimed that plants don't need what LEDs can't produce efficiently.even the aquarium crowd only uses LEDs for visual effects and fluorescent or MH for plant growth. the major LED makes ( cree, samsung. bridgelux) have given up on developing horticultural LEDs. with no new development LEDs may become another passing fad.even as structural lighting many people as well as the US air force and navy are finding that they don't live up to the claims of LED makers. 60% of the LED light bulbs in my home have failed withing 6 month so i'm going back to CFLs to light my home
 

mauricem00

Well-Known Member
I don't have the study linked on this phone but the university of Utah has proven that the fuller spectrum of cmh 315 and the uv it includes does make gains in plant growth and vigor which is why yield can be higher with fuller spectrum.

And there is a grower with a gas chromatograph on YouTube that showed a 4% thc increase over HPS and cobs with a 315 cmh.

Sorry I don't have the links but the u of Utah info is available on the cycloptics website.
could not find that study. by 4% do they mean 4% of the 18% average THC content or an increase to 22%? the first would not be noticeable but the second would be and most people do notice the improvement
 

BM9AGS

Well-Known Member
interesting to hear an led grower talk about non agenda based evidence. but you clearly have not looked too hard since there are plenty of studies out there. I never heard anyone claim more than 1gpw before the led crowd came along and you had to be an expert grower to get that but then there are so many false and misleading claims about LEDs it's hard to believe anything you here. the CLW uses old technology and is no mare effiecient that the viparspectra or other inexpensive grow lights. the only difference is the inclusion of T8 UV bulbs in the CLW. sunlight is full spectrum light and plants grown in natural sunlight have better taste and potency than plants grown indoors. the 2% increase you claim would not be noticeable but many people notice a difference with full spectrum (cmh,fluorescent or enhanced spectrum HPS) lights. the LED makers have always claimed that plants don't need what LEDs can't produce efficiently.even the aquarium crowd only uses LEDs for visual effects and fluorescent or MH for plant growth. the major LED makes ( cree, samsung. bridgelux) have given up on developing horticultural LEDs. with no new development LEDs may become another passing fad.even as structural lighting many people as well as the US air force and navy are finding that they don't live up to the claims of LED makers. 60% of the LED light bulbs in my home have failed withing 6 month so i'm going back to CFLs to light my home
You're referencing the 2015 models of CLW. The SS 550 use the most recient ssl80 leds and regardless of any efficiency numbers all 3 400w lights pulled about a pound each so they do just fine for 1$ a watt.

I've ran all leds in my homes.....but I've bought the high dollar ones at HD and lowes and since spending the money to go all led in my homes back in 2012 I've not had 1 failure and my electricity bill when I'm not growing is quite nice. So maybe you cheaped out on the leds you bought or god doesn't love you as much as me. :)
 

BM9AGS

Well-Known Member
No. The cob and HPS weed was 18% and the cmh weed was 22%

They commented the aroma of the cob weed was best. They did not do a terpene profile. A grower here has a theory about the cob quality still being better to him and his patients.

No infa-red that may be stressing the plants. But then they put uv back in for the gains and stress the plants so it's all bro science except the university data.

I am not arguing who is right. Environment and grower skill makes most of the difference.

But my buds are better in every way since I got a balanced spectrum in the room. And the Phillips bulb I chose has almost no uv. But an excellent flowering spectrum. And so would the led's.
Yeah. A lot of bro science. I'm just going off the results we have from my friend adopting my leds over hps. I prob won't grow again for years......so it will be interesting to see what is legit when I'm growing again. Until then I'll post my friends grows with the leds. He's expecting 6+lbs in the next grow or two. Last one under cobs was above 5 which is more than his 2600w SE hids were pulling for the veg time and he's happy. Other than needing a space heater now..... ohh he complains that the CLW SS550 cords are too short and fall out easily.
 

mauricem00

Well-Known Member
You're referencing the 2015 models of CLW. The SS 550 use the most recient ssl80 leds and regardless of any efficiency numbers all 3 400w lights pulled about a pound each so they do just fine for 1$ a watt.

I've ran all leds in my homes.....but I've bought the high dollar ones at HD and lowes and since spending the money to go all led in my homes back in 2012 I've not had 1 failure and my electricity bill when I'm not growing is quite nice. So maybe you cheaped out on the leds you bought or god doesn't love you as much as me. :)
more like $2 per watt plus tax and shipping https://californialightworks.com/product/solar-system-550/ a lot of money for a light that can't beat CMH lights
 

Johnny Lawrence

Well-Known Member
. 60% of the LED light bulbs in my home have failed withing 6 month so i'm going back to CFLs to light my home
Are you installing them with a hammer?

I changed out just about every bulb in my home with LED bulbs about 3 years ago and not a single one has failed. Quick count in my head - that's close to 2 dozen bulbs, all still work fine.
 

BM9AGS

Well-Known Member
Are you installing them with a hammer?

I changed out just about every bulb in my home with LED bulbs about 3 years ago and not a single one has failed. Quick count in my head - that's close to 2 dozen bulbs, all still work fine.
I imagine he got the discount led lights off eBay or amazon. I just hope my tenants don't steal them when they move out. I actually have them as accountable on a list.
 

Johnnycannaseed1

Well-Known Member
So I have been researching lights, and I am seriously considering getting some LED lights.

MY CONCERN is that all the LED lights I see say for example: MarsHydro 600w. But the actual power draw isn't 600watts.

Does this mean that the 600w is just the model number? and it only really puts out 200watts or so? and will give me the same results as 200watts of hps?

Or does this mean that the 600w can do the same job as a 600watt hps, just with a smaller power draw?
That's about the gimmicky gist of it, more than likely 200 x 3w LED's, depending on how they are being driven they are probably pulling 200 - 300 watts at the wall.

But because the Chinese have a tendency to use crappy/cheapo tech I wouldn't be surprised if those LEDs were only 30 - 35% efficient which equates to a paltry 60/70 - 90/105 max PAR watts.

Sure they look cheap, there wattage figures look fantasic, but when you boil it down you are paying way over the odds and simply buying into a false economy, whereby you will end up paying way more per PAR/Watt when compared to one of the better offerings or DIYing!
 

BM9AGS

Well-Known Member
That's about the gimmicky gist of it, more than likely 200 x 3w LED's, depending on how they are being driven they are probably pulling 200 - 300 watts at the wall.

But because the Chinese have a tendency to use crappy/cheapo tech I wouldn't be surprised if those LEDs were only 30 - 35% efficient which equates to a paltry 60/70 - 90/105 max PAR watts.

Sure they look cheap, there wattage figures look fantasic, but when you boil it down you are paying way over the odds and simply buying into a false economy, whereby you will end up paying way more per PAR/Watt when compared to one of the better offerings or DIYing!
Mars and most pannel leds are in the 20s on efficiency. They propagate that the colors they use effect the plant more. So that's why a lot say crazy ass numbers. They're using hypothetical values.
 

Johnnycannaseed1

Well-Known Member
Don't forget other new (old) tech;

Double Ended HPS
Double ended Metal Halide
Double ended Ceramic Metal Halide

And the Tesla lamp I can't remember the name of right now. PL?

All with great life and great spectrums.
Guessing you mean Induction lamp... Good tech but you would need to pull equivalent HID wattage in order to keep up in terms of yield, although I found quality was better using induction, the let down was Chinese crappy ballasts and weak application of the Phosphor coatings (had some where the coating fell off) poor manufacturing being the weak points here.

OP will definitely get more bang for his buck using 1 of the 3 Double ended offerings you have posted here.
 
Last edited:

Johnnycannaseed1

Well-Known Member
Mars and most pannel leds are in the 20s on efficiency. They propagate that the colors they use effect the plant more. So that's why a lot say crazy ass numbers. They're using hypothetical values.
Wow that is seriously crap and way worse than I imagined lol... Those panels are overpriced to the max:cuss:
 

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
could not find that study. by 4% do they mean 4% of the 18% average THC content or an increase to 22%? the first would not be noticeable but the second would be and most people do notice the improvement
I would have to search you tube for the grower vid. It is 2 parts and the guys wear tyvec suits. First part is mostly them checking out the plants and then trimming them. 2nd vid is the owner testing with the gas chromatograph.

It was as I said. 18% and change for the gavita and led. And 22% and change under the cmh.

The other study I will have to re search but it has been posted here and on the RM3 site. It has a graph of all the different light sources and how much uv ab and c they put out and how much in the most important growth spectrums.

But the Phillips 3100 is the most useful plant light according to more studies than that.

My old computer has issues and that is where all my research is. I am using a phone now. If it will reload Windows 10 I will look.
 

Morth

Well-Known Member
I would have to search you tube for the grower vid. It is 2 parts and the guys wear tyvec suits. First part is mostly them checking out the plants and then trimming them. 2nd vid is the owner testing with the gas chromatograph.

It was as I said. 18% and change for the gavita and led. And 22% and change under the cmh.

The other study I will have to re search but it has been posted here and on the RM3 site. It has a graph of all the different light sources and how much uv ab and c they put out and how much in the most important growth spectrums.

But the Phillips 3100 is the most useful plant light according to more studies than that.

My old computer has issues and that is where all my research is. I am using a phone now. If it will reload Windows 10 I will look.
The Guy is John Berfelo he isn't exactly a scientist in a real lab but seems to have his stuff togeather the video is here

If you do your research you will see that CMH, MH & HPS have the correct spectrum and then some. They tend to waste 25% of the power used creating spectrum the plant cant use. Simple reason LED's are better is that you can customize the spectrum and lower that 25% loss to almost nothing and just produce a spectrum the plant can use. CMH has better resin production because of the UV-B it produces and you can add a UV-B fixture to your DIY COB setup to cover the UV-B. No clue why the LED manufacturers are not doing this themselves. Closing MY LED troll (not a troll just info but sure someone will disagree). A proper led will use half the power of conventional lights with the same production weight wise and resin wise if you supplement the UV-B somehow. So DIY COB with a UV-B lamp you can equal the production of traditional lights with less heat less power and longer lifespan of the light. LED are not really better than traditional lights per say they are just more efficient so cheaper over the long run and give you the ability to customize the spectrum. I like the idea of the UV-B lamp being separate so i can control it's on time. CMH basically is constantly stressing your plant by literally giving it a sunburn for the duration the light is on. Seems lowering the duration of UV-B exposure during the light cycle would produce less stress and still rase resin production.
 

mauricem00

Well-Known Member
a goo
I would have to search you tube for the grower vid. It is 2 parts and the guys wear tyvec suits. First part is mostly them checking out the plants and then trimming them. 2nd vid is the owner testing with the gas chromatograph.

It was as I said. 18% and change for the gavita and led. And 22% and change under the cmh.

The other study I will have to re search but it has been posted here and on the RM3 site. It has a graph of all the different light sources and how much uv ab and c they put out and how much in the most important growth spectrums.

But the Phillips 3100 is the most useful plant light according to more studies than that.

My old computer has issues and that is where all my research is. I am using a phone now. If it will reload Windows 10 I will look.
google search indicates that Phillips 3100 is a high cri metal halide bulb. life expectancy and output are the same as a CMH bulb. the 4200k cmh seem to have a more balanced spectrum but phytochrome responds to a wide spectrum of orange and red light and chlorophyll A actually emits deep red light when exposed to violet light apparently the S2 to S1 transition drives photosynthesis and the energy for S1 to ground state is waste emitted in the form of light. apparently deep red is only needed in large amounts if you light can't produce violet light
 

Attachments

Morth

Well-Known Member
Disclaimer: Don't stand under a light with UV-B actually you shoulden't even be in the same room as UV-B can damage you on a genetic level. So if you have a light producing UV-B it's probably a good idea to have an alternate light source so you can turn off the UV-B wile tending to your plants. Unless you like skin cancer and all the other ugly things it can cause
 

mauricem00

Well-Known Member
The Guy is John Berfelo he isn't exactly a scientist in a real lab but seems to have his stuff togeather the video is here

If you do your research you will see that CMH, MH & HPS have the correct spectrum and then some. They tend to waste 25% of the power used creating spectrum the plant cant use. Simple reason LED's are better is that you can customize the spectrum and lower that 25% loss to almost nothing and just produce a spectrum the plant can use. CMH has better resin production because of the UV-B it produces and you can add a UV-B fixture to your DIY COB setup to cover the UV-B. No clue why the LED manufacturers are not doing this themselves. Closing MY LED troll (not a troll just info but sure someone will disagree). A proper led will use half the power of conventional lights with the same production weight wise and resin wise if you supplement the UV-B somehow. So DIY COB with a UV-B lamp you can equal the production of traditional lights with less heat less power and longer lifespan of the light. LED are not really better than traditional lights per say they are just more efficient so cheaper over the long run and give you the ability to customize the spectrum. I like the idea of the UV-B lamp being separate so i can control it's on time. CMH basically is constantly stressing your plant by literally giving it a sunburn for the duration the light is on. Seems lowering the duration of UV-B exposure during the light cycle would produce less stress and still rase resin production.
how can all 3 bulbs have the correct spectrum for cannabis when they all have radically different SPDs?COBs produce a very narrow spectrum of blue light and plants use broad spectrum blue light. video was interesting but a little long winded.sunlight only contains 0.15% UV-B and UV-B damages plants and slows growth. UV-A increases THC content without slowing growth or damaging plant but LEDs can not produce UV-A or violet light efficiently so bulbs would need to be added to a COB to get the best flavor and potency and mixing bulbs and LEDS can be a bit of a nightmare since T5s need to be much closer to the plant and LEDs need to be farther away to prevent burning.wonder if he used enhanced spectrum horticultural HPS bulbs in his test or just standard street lights
 
Top