M-land Super Grow Light?? 300w replaces 1000w

heffe'

heffe'

Member
I was wondering if anyone has heard of the M-land Super Grow light? Apparently they have been around for about 3 years. They are said to be an electro magnetic gas discharge light that produces 15600~16800Lm w/o producing the heat that HPS does. The operating temps are said to be slightly higher than led's with a lifespan of 100,000hrs. Power consumption is 80% less than HPS/MH. I am setting up my first grow and am very interested in hearing if anyone has had any experience with them?
 
B

bubblegoogles

Member
I am in the lighting business and want to clear up some claims that are posted about these "super grow" lights. These lights are a purple violet color spectrum induction light. The problem with them is that in order to produce this color spectrum, the glass tubes used in the bulbs is coated with phosphorus so thick, it blocks out most of the lights output. A better bet is to find a induction light at 2700K and 6400K. These induction lights produce almost four times the light output of the purple color ones. The 300 watt purple produces only 12000 lumens the 6400K and 2700K 300 watt light produces 45000 lumens for better light penetration. 2700K and 6400K color fluorescents are already successful in CFL grow lights. The only problem with the CFL's are they don't put out enough light for good penetration yet a 250 watt cfl still outperforms a purple spectrum induction light at much lower price. It's not just lumens the purple spectrum is lacking in but also Umol (PAR) light too. Our test show that the purple produces less than half of the 6400K induction. I am responding to this thread because we don't want these Purple induction lights giving induction lights a bad name and growers giving up on induction lights. We believe induction lights are the future in grow lights and in industrial and commercial lighting applications. It was a great idea to produce a full spectrum induction light, unfortunately it needs to be improved so that it can produce better light output. standard spectrum induction lights also come in 40 to 500 watt versions. The 500 watters produce over 96000 lumens approaching the output of MH 1000 watt bulbs but with more PAR spectrum light than the MH. The best feature of induction lights is that they last 100000 hours with low light degradation. That's over 27 years at 10 hour cycle 365 days a year!! It would be the last grow light you will ever buy!! Check out this link www.enviro-techlighting.com
 
D

dgp

Well-Known Member
Where can I buy the envirotech efdl? do I just email them? can't find it anywhere, thanks
 
B

bubblegoogles

Member
Well guys, here are some pics from a test grow. We are comparing the puple mland induction to 6400K/2700K induction. Both are 300 watt. This is at 6 weeks. The puple vegged very nice and was neck and neck with the 6400K but when we went to bud with the 2700K the purple fell way short. This was a simple grow no co2, heat and humidity was not optimum. this was just to compare the different color spectrums available. with these issues addressed we believe the 300 watters would have given a 1000 watt hps a run for the money. We definetly think the 400 watter would keep up to a 1000 hps. Remember this is a third of the power! bottom line is the purple acted simular to a LED grow, good veg but low bud. We believe the right combo would be to veg on 6400K CFL's and bud on the 2700K induction or EFDL. We are very pleased with the results and are going ahead to order the 2700K EFDL and will be retailing them. Any questions contact me at [email protected] to explain the photos the ones in the yellow light is the 2700K the ones in the blueish light is the mland purple. Why is the light blue you may ask? it is only purple when first fired up and turns more blue white when it comes upto temp.
 

Attachments

heffe'

heffe'

Member
bubblegoogles said:
Well guys, here are some pics from a test grow. We are comparing the puple mland induction to 6400K/2700K induction. Both are 300 watt. This is at 6 weeks. The puple vegged very nice and was neck and neck with the 6400K but when we went to bud with the 2700K the purple fell way short. This was a simple grow no co2, heat and humidity was not optimum. this was just to compare the different color spectrums available. with these issues addressed we believe the 300 watters would have given a 1000 watt hps a run for the money. We definetly think the 400 watter would keep up to a 1000 hps. Remember this is a third of the power! bottom line is the purple acted simular to a LED grow, good veg but low bud. We believe the right combo would be to veg on 6400K CFL's and bud on the 2700K induction or EFDL. We are very pleased with the results and are going ahead to order the 2700K EFDL and will be retailing them. Any questions contact me at [email protected] to explain the photos the ones in the yellow light is the 2700K the ones in the blueish light is the mland purple. Why is the light blue you may ask? it is only purple when first fired up and turns more blue white when it comes upto temp.
Click to expand...
Hey, Thanx 4 the feedback! Were these plants also vegged w/ 27k? I am hoping to veg then bud on one bulb. What is the price?
 
B

bubblegoogles

Member
heffe' said:
Hey, Thanx 4 the feedback! Were these plants also vegged w/ 27k? I am hoping to veg then bud on one bulb. What is the price?
Click to expand...
Hi Heffe,
No these were veged on 6400K. You have a couple options though. I suggest vegging on either a smaller version say 200 watt 6400K EFDL or you can vegg on hi power cfl's work great and are cheap as you can vegg on much less light. We have been testing all sorts of lights in the past year like Leds CFL etc. and found all of these lights generally vegg very well but fail on the bud side.
Price for 300 watt is $480 and 400 watt is $575 250 watt CFL's 6400K are $70ea.
These are WITHOUT reflctors as we found them way too heavy and bulky almost 70 lbs. which made it costly to ship. You can build a very effective reflector for about 10 bucks.
Now the bad news... we are currently out of stock of the 2700K we only have 300 watt 6400K and purple spectrum and waiting for our shipment.
 
heffe'

heffe'

Member
bubblegoogles said:
Hi Heffe,
No these were veged on 6400K. You have a couple options though. I suggest vegging on either a smaller version say 200 watt 6400K EFDL or you can vegg on hi power cfl's work great and are cheap as you can vegg on much less light. We have been testing all sorts of lights in the past year like Leds CFL etc. and found all of these lights generally vegg very well but fail on the bud side.
Price for 300 watt is $480 and 400 watt is $575 250 watt CFL's 6400K are $70ea.
These are WITHOUT reflctors as we found them way too heavy and bulky almost 70 lbs. which made it costly to ship. You can build a very effective reflector for about 10 bucks.
Now the bad news... we are currently out of stock of the 2700K we only have 300 watt 6400K and purple spectrum and waiting for our shipment.
Click to expand...
Any chance you have or will carry 200w induction in 6400k for vegging? How long do you expect it will take for your shipment to arrive? Do you take paypal?
 
B

bubblegoogles

Member
heffe' said:
Any chance you have or will carry 200w induction in 6400k for vegging? How long do you expect it will take for your shipment to arrive? Do you take paypal?
Click to expand...
Hi Heffe,
we do have a few 200 watt 6400K. I have a set in round and square. both are the same price $375 and i do take paypal
The new shipment will take about 6 weeks unfortunatly.
thanks
 
heffe'

heffe'

Member
bubblegoogles said:
Hi Heffe,
we do have a few 200 watt 6400K. I have a set in round and square. both are the same price $375 and i do take paypal
The new shipment will take about 6 weeks unfortunatly.
thanks
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply.
What has more usauble light(lm,spectrum)...(2) 250w 64k cfl or (1) 200w 64k induction?
 
B

bubblegoogles

Member
heffe' said:
Thanks for the reply.
What has more usauble light(lm,spectrum)...(2) 250w 64k cfl or (1) 200w 64k induction?
Click to expand...
Hi Heffe,
Sorry iv'e been out of town and havn't checked this thread in a while. A 200 watt induction would be better.they produce 19000 lumins. i used a lux meter and the 200 induction produced much more light than 2 250 cfl's I've found something interesting about cfl's in 250 watt. I measured current draw of one of these 250 watt cfl's and found they only draw 0.9 amps or 103 watts @115 v. I really don't know why they are marketted as 250 watts they only draw 103 watts. and the advertised output of 15000 lumins is also exaggerated. It's more in the neighbourhood of 8000 lumins. These CFL's use T5 "u" tubes that measure out to about 15 ft. If you look at what a T5 4 ft lamp 28 watts puts out 2000 lumins ea . times four gives you 16 ft.of tubes and 8000 lumins at 112 watts. so these numbers are pretty close.Having said that, previous comparisons of cfl's vs. HID were done incorrectly. Too few cfl's where used because the test were done assuming the watages of the cfl's are correct and in actual fact they were over rated more than two times. A fair test between cfl's and hid should be a 1000 watt hid vs 8-10 "250" watt cfls. This would give the correct power consumption between both types of lights and corrected heat outputs. i think the cfl's would do better than the hid's. If anyone wants to do this test, i can supply the cfl's.
 
S

sherriberry

New Member
well, i used my amazing networking skills to figure out the factory in china that makes these damn things, and convinced them to sell me a couple as a test setup (because im going to buy a couple hundered if they work for my needs :)

so now that we are past that little white lie...

i have the pdf's of all their lights, including the 500 watters.

lady tried to explain to me that they have 2 kinds...

the 2700 and 6500, and that they are NOT for plant growth...

and the 3600 and the 8700 which ARE for plant growth.

obviously, i disagreed with her somewhat, but who cares... ill test them both i suppose :)

anyway... here is where i am confused...

the plant bulbs... dont create many lumens at all... and then she started talking about pupil lumens, etc (way over my head)

but, either way, on these pdf's, it just says lumens.

and the plant bulbs... are not efficient at all!!!!

but the 2700 and 6500 are very efficient

so im completely lost on this one... ive got to be missing the boat somewhere.

2700 is:
Photo Parameters:​
​
​
​
(Standard lamp:A3000K)​

Flux:[FONT=Symbol,Bold][FONT=Symbol,Bold]F [/FONT][/FONT]=44213(lm) Luminous Efficacy: 83.31(lm/W) Luminous Power:P=128.4(W)


3600 is :
Photo Parameters:​
​
​
​
(Standard lamp:A3000K)​

Flux:[FONT=Symbol,Bold][FONT=Symbol,Bold]F =2127.5(lm) Luminous Efficacy: 10.42(lm/W) Luminous Power:P=19.38(W)


other important numbers i noticed are thaton the 2700,

1.0 = 3757mW/nm

that is the peak point on the light graph we are all used to seeing that goes from 300 - 800

it peaks around 620 and at 80% of that at 550.

then youve got the "grow bulb" 3600...


1.0 = 302mW/nm

thats the quantity at the top of its graph... wayyyy lower in value than the other lgihts graph.

this 3600 light peaks at about 680. And has a curve very similar to an hps, where it provides lumens in all the red wave lenths like the hotilux hps... their graphs are identical almost infact...

but who knows if this produces as much juice as the hps?

so thats where im lost.

the grow bulb graph is a lot more full throughout, but the 2700 bulb graph seems to peek at way higher powers.

someone save me from my ignorance :)
[/FONT][/FONT]
 
heffe'

heffe'

Member
bubblegoogles said:
Hi Heffe,
Sorry iv'e been out of town and havn't checked this thread in a while. A 200 watt induction would be better.they produce 19000 lumins. i used a lux meter and the 200 induction produced much more light than 2 250 cfl's I've found something interesting about cfl's in 250 watt. I measured current draw of one of these 250 watt cfl's and found they only draw 0.9 amps or 103 watts @115 v. I really don't know why they are marketted as 250 watts they only draw 103 watts. and the advertised output of 15000 lumins is also exaggerated. It's more in the neighbourhood of 8000 lumins. These CFL's use T5 "u" tubes that measure out to about 15 ft. If you look at what a T5 4 ft lamp 28 watts puts out 2000 lumins ea . times four gives you 16 ft.of tubes and 8000 lumins at 112 watts. so these numbers are pretty close.Having said that, previous comparisons of cfl's vs. HID were done incorrectly. Too few cfl's where used because the test were done assuming the watages of the cfl's are correct and in actual fact they were over rated more than two times. A fair test between cfl's and hid should be a 1000 watt hid vs 8-10 "250" watt cfls. This would give the correct power consumption between both types of lights and corrected heat outputs. i think the cfl's would do better than the hid's. If anyone wants to do this test, i can supply the cfl's.
Click to expand...
Thanks so much for the informative reply. I'm dying to try the 200w 65k + 500w 27k induction to take the grow from start to finish. Would love to post results for you. I am convinced that in my small space these lights may just speak for themselves. I once met a holy man that upon looking me over exclaimed :clap:"Lucky Man, Lucky Man, money come, money go... O what a Lucky Man" I was ready to purchase, then my washing machine broke. I have saved several times and each time :•C ,... Seems the Holy Man was right,... If you want to donate these amazing lights for testing I will gladly post:leaf:.
 
S

Swansen

Active Member
sherriberry said:
no one knows the about different types of lumens?
Click to expand...
Well i guess this depends on who you follow here, bubblegoogles said its because the phosphorus coating is so thick, which i'm sure causes issues. The other thing would be because lumens are measured around yellow-ish light. ie. light that is most sensitive to our eyes. CMH bulbs and LEDs have the same issue here. the lumen rating is low because of the spectrum lumens are measured from.
 
U

urbangrowereastend

Member
bubblegoogles said:
Hi Heffe,
Sorry iv'e been out of town and havn't checked this thread in a while. A 200 watt induction would be better.they produce 19000 lumins. i used a lux meter and the 200 induction produced much more light than 2 250 cfl's I've found something interesting about cfl's in 250 watt. I measured current draw of one of these 250 watt cfl's and found they only draw 0.9 amps or 103 watts @115 v. I really don't know why they are marketted as 250 watts they only draw 103 watts. and the advertised output of 15000 lumins is also exaggerated. It's more in the neighbourhood of 8000 lumins. These CFL's use T5 "u" tubes that measure out to about 15 ft. If you look at what a T5 4 ft lamp 28 watts puts out 2000 lumins ea . times four gives you 16 ft.of tubes and 8000 lumins at 112 watts. so these numbers are pretty close.Having said that, previous comparisons of cfl's vs. HID were done incorrectly. Too few cfl's where used because the test were done assuming the watages of the cfl's are correct and in actual fact they were over rated more than two times. A fair test between cfl's and hid should be a 1000 watt hid vs 8-10 "250" watt cfls. This would give the correct power consumption between both types of lights and corrected heat outputs. i think the cfl's would do better than the hid's. If anyone wants to do this test, i can supply the cfl's.
Click to expand...
May I ask what brand of CFL's you were testing, I currently have 8x 250W CFL's by "plug and grow". Whilst researching these bulbs I found out that the Chinese imports were far inferior and read wrong rather similarly to what you have described here. My plug and grows were accurately measured at 19400lm instead of the mnfg. claim of 19500lm. I run all 8 27k's on 12/12 and consume around a £1 p/day in electricity.

Curious......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top