What are you going to do differently with the lights this round seeing that you learned a ton form the first run with a single light?
LumiGrow ES 330w LED Test
- Thread starter calibuddz
- Start date
What are you going to do differently with the lights this round seeing that you learned a ton form the first run with a single light?
the second unit is in the mail. i will be doing things slightly different. first off, seperate pots. i just special ordered the new white 12"x12" square pots from HydroFarm. i got a case, which is 24 count. $90. they have some crazy ass drainage and aeration holes on them. second, i will be keeping the units as close as possible THROUGHOUT. im also not gonna hold back on the nutes and boosters.
project fuoro
Well-Known Member
Its going to be stellar Cali....simply stellar!
How many you going to do?? What size of area?
How many you going to do?? What size of area?
BobCajun
Well-Known Member
Thanks for proving that 330 watts of LED does not equal 600 watts of HPS. They are actually about the same watt for watt. The narrower spectrums don't really translate to a lower wattage requirement as the manufactures claim. Even if your growing conditions were not optimal when they yielded about .3 gram per watt, a generous prediction would be .5 gram per watt under optimal conditions. Thanks for clearing up the confusion, Cali.
asdfva
Well-Known Member
^^Not at all conclusive. It's one test.
The bell curve isn't even in effect yet.
Thanks for jumping the gun, Bob.
BobCajun
Well-Known Member
What do you mean, do you think the yield with LED is really more than that? It seems conclusively to prove that LED requires at least as high a wattage as HID. There's no way Cali's two grows could have had different enough other growing conditions to have skewed the results. He was careful to make the comparison as fair as possible. It would certainly be good to do more test grows to get a more accurate gauge on the expected yields but even with just this first test the results show a drastically lower yield than suggested by the manufacturers.
It just doesn't seem to matter that much what the exact spectrum is, just the total amount of light being delivered. This has already been shown by HPS, which is mostly yellow and yet still produces high yields. You do need some blue and red in there but using pure blue and red doesn't really reduce the wattage requirement to a significant degree.
I suppose it's possible that the LumiGrow performed so poorly because their spectrums aren't really precisely matched to plants' needs. It's in the general vicinity but not precisely matched. The red is considerably off and the blue is also not that precise.
project fuoro
Well-Known Member
The lumigrow does not perform poorly. At all. It is not just straight up blue and red...
I think people who bash the lumigrow are just pissed cuz they can't afford one...
Buy one, then grow with it, then bash it...k?
Till then...let the people who own the unit speak for it..
-pf-
I think people who bash the lumigrow are just pissed cuz they can't afford one...
Buy one, then grow with it, then bash it...k?
Till then...let the people who own the unit speak for it..
-pf-
i should have had the unit closer to the canopy throughout flower. peep this.. the 250w test yielded 80 grams, i also had the unit at 12-15" throughout flower, AND had the test in the same room as my 2-1000w HPS. no barrier. for this test i kept the unit high, had a light barrier, and still yielded 30 grams more than the previous test. i am not a scientist, nor do i have any funding for my testing and research. ITS ALL ME BABY. i am not dissapointed one bit. next test is gonna be off the chain. "LumiGrow ES 600w Challenge" just waiting on my containers.........damn that shit is lagging.
asdfva
Well-Known Member
I think your usage of the word 'conclusively' is a
slap in the face to definition, and THIS well documented
journal depicting the initial testing phases of a totally
brand new product.
I mean... That this grow did not have sufficient
data to even begin to be considered conclusive.
Now I know what I am up against.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
The blue spectrum that plants utilize is visible
to the human eye.
The Red portions, the mystical 660nm Red, are
just on the cusp of our visual spectrum. Even if
you think you see, you still cannot.
Do your homework dummy.
I suppose it's possible that you own stock in
some HPS industry and just want to jibe or
stymie purely free, documented, experimentation.
Take a hike with your bad attitude and your,
speculative at best, talk of 'Conclusiveness.'
Cali- Sorry for thread jacking.
BobCajun
Well-Known Member
Well, I may be a "dummy" but I have enough sense to see that 107 grams from 330 watts, or 80 grams from 250 watts, is not particularly impressive. I didn't run the test, I simply read the results. Now if you, asdfva, see that as impressive yields then I guess that makes you a genius, right?
I agree that 107 grams from 330w is a bit disappointing. And while improved techniques, such as keeping the light closer, will almost certainly bring about an improvement, I still think LEDs at present are a long way off the touted 2g/watt mark many manufacturers are claiming.
Having said that, given the improvements we have seen over the last 12 months, I still think there is massive potential in LED grow lighting in general and look forward to new units coming out. If they continue improving at their present rate, I would not be surprised to see LED take over from HPS in around maybe 5 years. Good news for the hobby grower, bad news for the sellers of enormous extractor fans! Let's wait and see. I think I personally would wait until a 300 dollar LED light can produce 10 ounces from 250w or so before I jumped on board!
growin4myhead
Active Member
I just thought I would add some pertinent info. I use LED's as well as HPS and thought that adding a cost comparison might help all of these skeptics realize the actual cost for these systems. I would like to say that these are of course based on if you got the same yield from each system and the only difference being cost of the products and power. I exclusively veg all of my plants under LED light and for the time being flower them under HPS. One may also want to factor in that you can use less nutrients with LED because they do not evaporate off nearly as much water. well this is my .02 thanks for reading! BTW nice grow CALI
Lumatek 600 Digital ballast 154.70
600 watt Hps bulb 100.00 X5 500.00
Air cooled reflector 150.00 150.00
8" vortex fan 190.0 190.00
8" duct 25 ft 40.00 40.00
Electricity 12 hours a day 365 days a year $.12 per killowatt hour (light only) 315.26 x 5years = 1576.30
Total 5 year cost of 2611.00
Lumigrow LED 330w $1400
Electricity 12 hours a day 365 days a year $.12 per killowatt hour (light only) 173.45 x 5years = 867.24
Total 5 year cost of 2267.24
LED wins in the total cost of ownership!
Lumatek 600 Digital ballast 154.70
600 watt Hps bulb 100.00 X5 500.00
Air cooled reflector 150.00 150.00
8" vortex fan 190.0 190.00
8" duct 25 ft 40.00 40.00
Electricity 12 hours a day 365 days a year $.12 per killowatt hour (light only) 315.26 x 5years = 1576.30
Total 5 year cost of 2611.00
Lumigrow LED 330w $1400
Electricity 12 hours a day 365 days a year $.12 per killowatt hour (light only) 173.45 x 5years = 867.24
Total 5 year cost of 2267.24
LED wins in the total cost of ownership!
tom__420
Well-Known Member
I'll spend the extra 400 dollars over 5 years and get thousands of dollars bud more than LED. Totally worth it in my eyes
growin4myhead
Active Member
I did note that it was if the yields WERE the same.
And I have to agree with you which is why I still flower with HPS! My point is merely that people are too damn critical. Everyone knows LED's don't outperform HPS. However there is progress being made. I will continue to follow cali's progress as he clearly wants to see where this technology can go!
alrighty alrighty.....lets move all this talk to the new test. the test area is all set up, and i will be planting them out in an hour or so. its titled "LumiGrow ES 600w Challenge". lets see what yields better, and creates superior quality. BOOM DRAW!!!! im out yall. thanks for tuning in for this test, was fun. this next one will be KILLER!
IAm5toned
Well-Known Member
nice grow, seriously, im impressed with the results.
however im not impressed with the fixture.
same thing with all led fixtures worth a damn ive seen though- theres an ENORMOUS point of failure built into the fixture. i would be beyond pissed if i lost a 1600 fixture and hermied a crop because the cooling fans locked up. i dunno, maybe its my local conditions but i have a hard time keeping cooling fans running like that for extended periods of time....
again theres no doubt that led will work, but i think the product itself needs alot more egineering. at least with the other options available finding spare parts is a cinch, what do you do if an led panel or capacitor goes bad?
personally i think i will wait on the r & d boys to come up with something better
however im not impressed with the fixture.
same thing with all led fixtures worth a damn ive seen though- theres an ENORMOUS point of failure built into the fixture. i would be beyond pissed if i lost a 1600 fixture and hermied a crop because the cooling fans locked up. i dunno, maybe its my local conditions but i have a hard time keeping cooling fans running like that for extended periods of time....
again theres no doubt that led will work, but i think the product itself needs alot more egineering. at least with the other options available finding spare parts is a cinch, what do you do if an led panel or capacitor goes bad?
personally i think i will wait on the r & d boys to come up with something better
project fuoro
Well-Known Member
You started a new thread? or you doing it here? Keep me posted bro!
-pf-
-pf-
Me too I want to see
Similar threads
