LEC - Light-Emitting Ceramic

MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
I'm sure you can grow with cheaper lights... But none come close to the crazy G/W, and life time that COBs do, especially water cooled ones... The lifetime for his light will be well over 100,000 hours... Not an exaduration. That said yes it's more expensive.
Click to expand...

Just ONCE. After that, everything is cheaper. And better.
 
since1991 said:
People threatening to whoop each others asses on a dope growing forum is completely asinine but extremely funny as fuk at the same time. Going to fist a cuffs with thierJack Johnsons. This is too funny....this image i got.... 2 goofy dope growers squaring off on a street in some po dunk town in Colorado. With Spaghetti Western music playing in the background. All over which light grows the best dope. Lolololololol
Click to expand...
You guys go for it!

Best western of all time
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
It's not better per say, but it was cobs, just search 1.6g/w you will see a lot of results. What tech are you running currently? 3590?
Click to expand...

Most of my LED is CXB3590 3500K CD bin.

There's a couple quantum boards, and I'm about to take delivery of a pile of RAZOR 250 bars. These will allow me to retire HID for good.
 
ttystikk said:
I don't cotton to being called a liar.

Especially by a wannabe punk amateur with fuck all for proof.

I even have witnesses.

Unlike some, i take my credibility seriously.
Click to expand...

How much more proof do you need? You saw my journal every day at the other site. I can produce proof of everything I said.

And you know the only witness is extremely impressed.

Where is your proof? You have a very long journal of you talking and very few pictures.

On both sites...............

Do you prefer the word exaggerator to liar?

and I just wanted you to stop pretending when you don't know the answer. And I still would like that. But it's an open forum. So talk all you want. But now you deal with it.

You make the claims constantly. Let's see some more pics. I would think you would be proud to show what your cobs can do.
 
MichiganMedGrower said:
There is that pic of the burned plant you won't show like I asked in the other thread. I really just wanted to see your "evidence" of yours and the cobs superiority.



This is about 6oz dry not counting any larf. Not that there ever is much under HPS and cmh lighting. They offer penetration. Your system can't even fill in . . .
Click to expand...

I'm finally getting around to having a couple of entirely(or mostly) LEDs, and I'm not experiencing much larf. No more so than my HPS room. I thought that would be an issue as I made the switch to LEDs, but it hasn't been. I'm not even experiencing larf in my "hand-me-down" room - only 2 COBs in there, the rest is older, single diode tech.
 
Iam not messing with any light ya gotta build yerself. I will wair till cobs are on the shelves at an affordable price. Then i will see for myself. As of now...cmh (lec) lamps are in my sights. Retiring my Gavitas soon. I might still run em...but not at this spot. The amount of ac you need for a bunch of them is ridiculous.
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
It's not better per say, but it was cobs, just search 1.6g/w you will see a lot of results. What tech are you running currently? 3590?
Click to expand...
ive hit 1.63 gpw with 2 and 3 315 watt lec's over a 4x6ft f&d table on 3 different runs now... my current is just finishing, ill pull and dry and weigh over the next few days, i added 2 100 watt citizen cobs on this run, my new run will begin in about a week i hope the led lights perform as i hope,, my plan is to run 2 315's for the first 2 weeks of bloom then turn on the 2 led's for the following 6 weeks, next ill run all lights the hole way and see my gpw average..any less than 1.6 gpw and the led was a waste of cash..
 
TheChemist77 said:
ive hit 1.63 gpw with 2 and 3 315 watt lec's over a 4x6ft f&d table on 3 different runs now... my current is just finishing, ill pull and dry and weigh over the next few days, i added 2 100 watt citizen cobs on this run, my new run will begin in about a week i hope the led lights perform as i hope,, my plan is to run 2 315's for the first 2 weeks of bloom then turn on the 2 led's for the following 6 weeks, next ill run all lights the hole way and see my gpw average..any less than 1.6 gpw and the led was a waste of cash..
Click to expand...

If it's the same strain you should be happy as long as you're running at a decent efficiency. If it's at like 49% or below well we will see how it goes, if it's above you should be set.

To be fair 630W getting 1.6g/W in a 4x6 (1sqft short of a 5x5) with LEC isn't unheard of getting around that. The benifit with cobs will always be their life time at between 50,000-100,000 hours.

With LEC/CMH being around $350 for 315W it's hard to argue them not being worth it any more
 
TheChemist77 said:
ive hit 1.63 gpw with 2 and 3 315 watt lec's over a 4x6ft f&d table on 3 different runs now... my current is just finishing, ill pull and dry and weigh over the next few days, i added 2 100 watt citizen cobs on this run, my new run will begin in about a week i hope the led lights perform as i hope,, my plan is to run 2 315's for the first 2 weeks of bloom then turn on the 2 led's for the following 6 weeks, next ill run all lights the hole way and see my gpw average..any less than 1.6 gpw and the led was a waste of cash..
Click to expand...

My quality improved quite a bit between CMH and LED.
 
Johnny Lawrence said:
I'm finally getting around to having a couple of entirely(or mostly) LEDs, and I'm not experiencing much larf. No more so than my HPS room. I thought that would be an issue as I made the switch to LEDs, but it hasn't been. I'm not even experiencing larf in my "hand-me-down" room - only 2 COBs in there, the rest is older, single diode tech.
Click to expand...

Ok. I have never used led. And I never debated its validity. But I do know from experienced growers that they lack penetration compared to my HPS.

And in my set up and house they would cause me to need lights on heat in my growroom. Which is really expensive with propane heat out in the woods. So I added LEC.

It's the 315 LEC that isn't powerful to penetrate my already HPS bushy plants. I am going to try rotating them all evenly under both kinds of lamps to compensate.

But the LEC has increased plant health and potency from the better spectrum and uv so it stays.
 
MichiganMedGrower said:
Ok. I have never used led. And I never debated its validity. But I do know from experienced growers that they lack penetration compared to my HPS.

And in my set up and house they would cause me to need lights on heat in my growroom. Which is really expensive with propane heat out in the woods. So I added LEC.

It's the 315 LEC that isn't powerful to penetrate my already HPS bushy plants. I am going to try rotating them all evenly under both kinds of lamps to compensate.

But the LEC has increased plant health and potency from the better spectrum and uv so it stays.
Click to expand...
I've been doing this for years and built multiple setup, both for myself and for friends, running SE 1000s and 600s. I still have a 4x4 with an aircooled six. My biggest room, a 5x9 has a 600 centered, with 315s at each corner. And then 2 more rooms that are LED, and I'm telling you, there is no difference in the amount of larf between the various flower rooms. The "LEDs can't penetrate" thing is a myth.

This spring I'm hoping to replace the 600 in the 4x4. I want to grab a vertical 315 hood from Phantom, and then build a custom frame around it with 50 watt Citizens at each corner. It should at least match the 600, while running 100 watts less.
 
MichiganMedGrower said:
Ok. I have never used led. And I never debated its validity. But I do know from experienced growers that they lack penetration compared to my HPS.

And in my set up and house they would cause me to need lights on heat in my growroom. Which is really expensive with propane heat out in the woods. So I added LEC.

It's the 315 LEC that isn't powerful to penetrate my already HPS bushy plants. I am going to try rotating them all evenly under both kinds of lamps to compensate.

But the LEC has increased plant health and potency from the better spectrum and uv so it stays.
Click to expand...

I have grown with both and HPS has some self inflicting issues.

LEC is great and efficient enough to talk about but it lacks coverage area with a 315W only covering 2.5x2.5, so that means more lights and more bulbs.

True, HPS is a good light for what it is, but the reason you need "penetration" is because of the spectrum itself! It's a catch 22 with the light. Now if you take a look at my signature or my side by side thread you will see that the LEDs have not stretched nearly as much but also stay much lower in the Scrog. So it doesn't required penetration in the first place.

Also in my signature I demonstrate that penetration doesn't go past the first leaves anyways due to the light being absorbed.

The cobs don't have a penetration problem then have a cost problem. The old diodes have A lack of coverage just like the HPS lights do, it's not even and can't get to that state without multiple light sources which is why COBS will be better for a long time till the tech evolves in some way.
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
I have grown with both and HPS has some self inflicting issues.

LEC is great and efficient enough to talk about but it lacks coverage area with a 315W only covering 2.5x2.5, so that means more lights and more bulbs.

True, HPS is a good light for what it is, but the reason you need "penetration" is because of the spectrum itself! It's a catch 22 with the light. Now if you take a look at my signature or my side by side thread you will see that the LEDs have not stretched nearly as much but also stay much lower in the Scrog. So it doesn't required penetration in the first place.

Also in my signature I demonstrate that penetration doesn't go past the first leaves anyways due to the light being absorbed.

The cobs don't have a penetration problem then have a cost problem. The old diodes have A lack of coverage just like the HPS lights do, it's not even and can't get to that state without multiple light sources which is why COBS will be better for a long time till the tech evolves in some way.
Click to expand...

The only thing I disagree with here is that light passes through the leaves in many wavelengths. They do not absorb it all at the top. So I believe it is the wattage and the intensity of the LEC 315 just like if I use a 400 MH or even 400HPS. No big dense lowers in my room. And they went right to double bulb reflectors to compete. 630 watts.
 
MichiganMedGrower said:
The only thing I disagree with here is that light passes through the leaves in many wavelengths. They do not absorb it all at the top. So I believe it is the wattage and the intensity of the LEC 315 just like if I use a 400 MH or even 400HPS. No big dense lowers in my room. And they went right to double bulb reflectors to compete. 630 watts.
Click to expand...

The issue with that frame of thought is that you assume that more watts equals more penetration when thats not the case with cobs and honestly it doesnt need to be because of how much more usable light gets to the canopy compared to a DE HPS.

As for the penetration thing. One leaf dropped it from 1400PPF to 100PPF, no way that the light go past the first set of leaves, this was demonstrated in my signature. I can do it for the HPS and DE HPS if that will help you see what Im saying.
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
The issue with that frame of thought is that you assume that more watts equals more penetration when thats not the case with cobs and honestly it doesnt need to be because of how much more usable light gets to the canopy compared to a DE HPS.

As for the penetration thing. One leaf dropped it from 1400PPF to 100PPF, no way that the light go past the first set of leaves, this was demonstrated in my signature. I can do it for the HPS and DE HPS if that will help you see what Im saying.
Click to expand...

Defoliation.
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
The issue with that frame of thought is that you assume that more watts equals more penetration when thats not the case with cobs and honestly it doesnt need to be because of how much more usable light gets to the canopy compared to a DE HPS.

As for the penetration thing. One leaf dropped it from 1400PPF to 100PPF, no way that the light go past the first set of leaves, this was demonstrated in my signature. I can do it for the HPS and DE HPS if that will help you see what Im saying.
Click to expand...

I will check out your sig info when I have some time and I will recheck where I learned what I wrote. This is very interesting. As the Universities are still showing basically (and I realize this terminology is actually incorrect but explains the point) lumens beat spectrum as the plant transfers photosynthesis to the strongest wavelength regardless.
 
Acording to my reading different chlorifill (pardon my spelling) are excited by different spectrium though most react to blues and reds. Also blue light particles cary more energy than red. Its funny how different schools conduct the same studdies with different results. Not just when it comes to light but with everything. It shows how little we really know☺
 
MichiganMedGrower said:
I will check out your sig info when I have some time and I will recheck where I learned what I wrote. This is very interesting. As the Universities are still showing basically (and I realize this terminology is actually incorrect but explains the point) lumens beat spectrum as the plant transfers photosynthesis to the strongest wavelength regardless.
Click to expand...
Exactly total power trumps spectrium but for best results have both
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top