GML Accusations..

Status
Not open for further replies.
PJ Diaz

PJ Diaz

Well-Known Member
PadawanWarrior said:
Nice. Are those under your QB96's?

And

What's the tent and pot size?

How long have you been using the soil?

And what are you feeding (organics or salts)?
Click to expand...
It's in a 4x4 tent. I just moved it in that tent though, it was in a 32"x32" tent for first two weeks of flowering under 120watts of QB288, and I moved it to the larger tent less than a week ago. Now it's under a 315w cmh plus 4 QB96's, I think just at 50watts each. They are just there to hit the corners of the tent the 315 doesn't fill. The soil is in it's first generation, and is a blend of happy frog, ewc, rice hulls, and some espoma plant-tone. I'm not sure of the pot size, it was just the largest one I had available in the back yard, but I know it's really too small. I think it might be 7-gallon, maybe 10. I didn't really plan this grow, it just kind of happened. I was going to keep the plant as a mother, and then decided that I didn't like the strain enough to keep it, but I didn't want to toss the plant either, so figured I'd give it another try, and in soil this time instead of coco. My feed regimen is a mix. I'm topdressing with espoma weekly, and have a few different solutions that I irrigate with. Sometimes just water, sometimes a mix of kelp/fish/microbes/fulvic, and sometimes Jacks 321. I only feed salts intermittently, but I'm not a purist, and it's not "organic". I have some good beneficial insects crawling around too, and pests have been no issue lately at all. I never spray any chem pesticides, I am a purist in that regard. I even avoid organic pesticides tbh.
 
PadawanWarrior

PadawanWarrior

Well-Known Member
PJ Diaz said:
It's in a 4x4 tent. I just moved it in that tent though, it was in a 32"x32" tent for first two weeks of flowering under 120watts of QB288, and I moved it to the larger tent less than a week ago. Now it's under a 315w cmh plus 4 QB96's, I think just at 50watts each. They are just there to hit the corners of the tent the 315 doesn't fill. The soil is in it's first generation, and is a blend of happy frog, ewc, rice hulls, and some espoma plant-tone. I'm not sure of the pot size, it was just the largest one I had available in the back yard, but I know it's really too small. I think it might be 7-gallon, maybe 10. I didn't really plan this grow, it just kind of happened. I was going to keep the plant as a mother, and then decided that I didn't like the strain enough to keep it, but I didn't want to toss the plant either, so figured I'd give it another try, and in soil this time instead of coco. My feed regimen is a mix. I'm topdressing with espoma weekly, and have a few different solutions that I irrigate with. Sometimes just water, sometimes a mix of kelp/fish/microbes/fulvic, and sometimes Jacks 321. I only feed salts intermittently, but I'm not a purist, and it's not "organic". I have some good beneficial insects crawling around too, and pests have been no issue lately at all. I never spray any chem pesticides, I am a purist in that regard. I even avoid organic pesticides tbh.
Click to expand...
Nice man. I knew you had some QB's in there. My favorite is CMH with LED. But I'm gonna try these HLG UVA strips and see if they work as well.
 
Rocket Soul

Rocket Soul

Well-Known Member
One thing nobody raised in this clusterduck of a thread is reliability of testing. Since the stream isnt there anymore its hard to quote stuff exactly but i do believe GML got several different numbers on his light after repeated tests. To me this feels really relevant: of course you could make a "super light" which is only used for testing in order to boost numbers but what if you dont have to? If you test your light enough times you can just shop around for the results you want.
Also, remember that bins are wider than we think: +-7% is usual which means you can have quite a bit variance. This means you could theoretically have almost 15% difference between one light and another within the same range and still be within tolerance limits. On a 3 ppf/w light that quickly becomes a lot, much more than what people will bicker to death about on here.
 
grotbags

grotbags

Well-Known Member
Rocket Soul said:
One thing nobody raised in this clusterduck of a thread is reliability of testing.
Click to expand...
grotbags said:
the discrepancy in the testing figures could as easily explained by light labouratories inconsistent testing results, gml's own light tested around 10% higher than i should have. hlg might have had these lights tested multiple times and chose to publish just the best results...
Click to expand...
 
Wattzzup

Wattzzup

Well-Known Member
pop22 said:
What happened is I took the time to look into this.
And like you, your not going to change my mind, except that I bothered to look at both sides of the story before deciding where the truth lay.

and it's time to stop feeding the troll.
Click to expand...
So you’re done quoting me? Appreciate it Thanks :peace:
 
Scuzzman

Scuzzman

Well-Known Member
@pop22 well can you please explain the HLG position on this subject - do they have any data to back up there claims , the concern in my view is the fool GML stated LED company's supply fake lights for testing and singled out HLG - I would like to see paper work backing this claim up, also I think its time(as @Rocket Soul ) stated earlier maybe we as customers need to be asking questions of the testing outlets .. -HAS anyone asked questions of testing outlets to comment on this subject ?

Not targeting HLG at all I think people are generally concerned that they are buying what they were told they were getting - sales reps always blame employers when things go pear shape ...

Also that fool GML has edited his video to the point it's all out of context- he does this all the time - he needs to back up his statements with facts still waiting he did the same a few years back.. pretty sure he is not taking his meds

-as they say you cant make a silk purse of of a sows ear
 
PadawanWarrior

PadawanWarrior

Well-Known Member
Scuzzman said:
@pop22 well can you please explain the HLG position on this subject - do they have any data to back up there claims , the concern in my view is the fool GML stated LED company's supply fake lights for testing and singled out HLG - I would like to see paper work backing this claim up, also I think its time(as @Rocket Soul ) stated earlier maybe we as customers need to be asking questions of the testing outlets .. -HAS anyone asked questions of testing outlets to comment on this subject ?

Not targeting HLG at all I think people are generally concerned that they are buying what they were told they were getting - sales reps always blame employers when things go pear shape ...

Also that fool GML has edited his video to the point it's all out of context- he does this all the time - he needs to back up his statements with facts still waiting he did the same a few years back.. pretty sure he is not taking his meds

-as they say you cant make a silk purse of of a sows ear
Click to expand...
I got a solution for you. If you don't like HLG don't buy one. Problem solved, :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top