THCFarmer.com
121,231 Members Log In Register
Log In Register

860w phillips cdm

  • Thread starter Thread starter larebowm
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

860w phillips cdm

larebowm 39 Replies 12,539 Views
Page 2 of 2 · Replies 21–40 of 40
#21
i think if you look at my shot at the top of the page grown under CMH you will see they grow great buds. as for intensity the 330w lamps produce more PAR light than a 400w HPS. Par is the only real reading we should be paying attention to. unfortunately im finding hard to find where i found tht info again. its been a while since i researched all this. i have been growing with CMH for over 2 yrs now. i will try and find the info bear with me
 
#22
I've been posting on the other thread that I started. On paper, the color spectrum looks great. However, there is a yield loss and it burns hot. I don't know why it turns on at the HPS setting and intermittently turns on at the MH setting.

If they can make a horizontal version, this would be the ultimate veg bulb. But I feel that it lacks in bloom.
 
#23
I wonder how it might do as a replacement for mh in bloom? Not as a replacement for hps, but rather replacing the mh that lots of growers run to supplement spectrum.
 
#24
noone88 said:
I've been posting on the other thread that I started. On paper, the color spectrum looks great. However, there is a yield loss and it burns hot. I don't know why it turns on at the HPS setting and intermittently turns on at the MH setting.

If they can make a horizontal version, this would be the ultimate veg bulb. But I feel that it lacks in bloom.
Click to expand...

whats the other thread?
 
#25
stutter said:
i think if you look at my shot at the top of the page grown under CMH you will see they grow great buds. as for intensity the 330w lamps produce more PAR light than a 400w HPS. Par is the only real reading we should be paying attention to. unfortunately im finding hard to find where i found tht info again. its been a while since i researched all this. i have been growing with CMH for over 2 yrs now. i will try and find the info bear with me
Click to expand...



I never said the CHM bulb wont produce great buds, but those graphs still don't show intensity. And I didn't say the HPS will produce more, but others on here have said so.

I'm honestly not interested in any info you can pull up because it is all skewed in favor of the company that is putting the info out there. What I do want to see are real life results, once well-respected people, like some on this site, have used it over and over with HPS and the same results come back showing the CHM to be just as good, or better during flower, then I will spend my time considering to buy one. As for graphs and info from a manufacturer, they almost never tell both sides of the story.

So there is no argument here, I just tend to believe fellow farmers and there results instead of some company posting graphs trying to sell me a light bulb. If you had great results using it, then thats great, but for me personally, I just need more then 1 person on the internet for me to buy something that expensive.
 
#26
lex0415 said:
I never said the CHM bulb wont produce great buds, but those graphs still don't show intensity. And I didn't say the HPS will produce more, but others on here have said so.

I'm honestly not interested in any info you can pull up because it is all skewed in favor of the company that is putting the info out there. What I do want to see are real life results, once well-respected people, like some on this site, have used it over Eand over with HPS and the same results come back showing the CHM to be just as good, or better during flower, then I will spend my time considering to buy one. As for graphs and info from a manufacturer, they almost never tell both sides of the story.

So there is no argument here, I just tend to believe fellow farmers and there results instead of some company posting graphs trying to sell me a light bulb. If you had great results using it, then thats great, but for me personally, I just need more then 1 person on the internet for me to buy something that expensive.
Click to expand...

if Philips started using questionable data to describe its lighting, they would be shooting themselves in both feet with a howitzer- besides, most of the bulbs they're 'competing against' are their own bulbs- just those of differing design! So, that argument is frankly a bit silly.

So far, the man said that things looked nice and frosty, but yield was down a bit. The bulb only uses 860 watts, so if yield is down by less than 15% then on a per watt basis the bulb would hold its own in terms of outright efficiency.

Finally, what if this bulb's niche is as a better spectrum replacement for MH bulbs? That would still make it an improvement.
 
#27
the color that these lights give the plants are awesome! I always hate pics under HPS lol, these make them POP. I have flowered with them, not sure of a difference in yeild as I am still learning and dont weigh stuff alot, but lots of resin :D Currently I have a GSC scrogged under a 330 and doing great, although this gsc never produced huge colas for me, just nice golfball nugs, so Ill be interested to see how she finishes. I also take into consideration I have a 1k HPS also on the opposite side of my grow space... Overall I have been happy with my phillips, and would purchase again. My biggest concern is going to the 830 and having to run open hood.....Northern CA + Summer heat+Open 830 = too much to deal with the summer heat, maybe for winter ;)
 
#29
I know that everyone has an opinion and if you give the same clone to 10 growers, you'll get 10 different results. I'm currently 50+ lights bloom and whatever lights veg/mother. I'm new to this (only been doing this since 2009), but i've been able to get in multiple cycles for many years in my rooms. I have one specific room that is my test room for nutes and strains. This is my best temp/humidity controlled and 4 vertical light room.

I use the 400 CMHs for vegging plants in soil all the time. It has given me the best results in veg. However, I think the 860 CMH just isn't enough. It burns too hot compared to 1000w HPS. The CMH doesn't allow me to bring plants closer to the bulb.

I'll post some picture comparisons of quality when everything is dried and cured.
 
#30
ttystikk said:
if Philips started using questionable data to describe its lighting, they would be shooting themselves in both feet with a howitzer- besides, most of the bulbs they're 'competing against' are their own bulbs- just those of differing design! So, that argument is frankly a bit silly.

So far, the man said that things looked nice and frosty, but yield was down a bit. The bulb only uses 860 watts, so if yield is down by less than 15% then on a per watt basis the bulb would hold its own in terms of outright efficiency.

Finally, what if this bulb's niche is as a better spectrum replacement for MH bulbs? That would still make it an improvement.
Click to expand...



I don't remember him saying the yield was lower, but the past couple days every time I log on this site I have 20+ alerts and I'm sure he said that some time in this thread I just don't remember. What I do remember is him saying the spectrum blows the HPS out of the water (paraphrasing), so I don't think my argument is 'silly', I was just trying to show how those graphs are not accurate. We all seen LED manufacturers using them to show the 'superiority' over HPS bulbs, but in real life grows, the LED's almost never match up to the yield of a HPS. That was my point and I probably didn't express it correctly.

In regards to Phillips using 'questionable' data because they are comparing against there own bulbs, how much does the CHM cost compared to the HPS?? Alot more, so for them its a win-win, whatever sales they lose from HPS because people see how the spectrum is better with a CHM, then they will make more money. So they are not shooting there self in the feet, they are trying to sell a more expensive product.

I don't wanna change the subject from 'CHM bulbs' to 'how companies market bulbs', but that was how I could explain the inaccuracies with spectral graphs, to each there own and good luck to all.

Oh yeah, and I think the CHM would be amazing at replacing the MH, but for the cost, I'm not so sure, more research must be done for me.
 
#31
So you seriously think that one of the largest electronics manufacturers in the world would intentionally misstate the data from one of their most established and respected product lines?

I'm not going to debate this with you. Just do us all a favor and the next time you start talking, at least try to do some research so you're not completely out in left field? People who don't know better might believe you.
 
#33
for what its worth this when i speak of my experiences with the CDM lamps i am talking about my experiences with the 400w (330w) i clearly stated that at the start. so i have no experience with the 860w whatsoever i do however think it would be a nice lamp and despite what ever anyone says i dare so i will try them in the future. thats just me though. so my comparisons have been between a 33ow CDM and a 400W hps (son-t,gro-lux and a few others)

also i grow under 2 of them. which increases intensity 2 x 330W = 660w so i pretty much compare my results under 2 330w CDM with my 600w HPS grows. i understand the CDM has a slight wattage advantage but i love the way they grow my plants.
 
#34
Aquaponics and the aquarium hobby have a lot in common, obviously. Seamaiden is/was into that and knows a great deal about it. I wonder what she might say about the utility of this bulb for reefers, or salt water reef aquarium enthusiasts. I'm not saying that being good at such an application proves anything about its use for our purposes, but but my curiosity gets me to thinkin sometimes...
 
#35
ttystikk said:
So you seriously think that one of the largest electronics manufacturers in the world would intentionally misstate the data from one of their most established and respected product lines?

I'm not going to debate this with you. Just do us all a favor and the next time you start talking, at least try to do some research so you're not completely out in left field? People who don't know better might believe you.
Click to expand...


Are you serious bro???? Come on, my post does not mean Phillips was actually doing what I said, it was an 'example' just like you used an 'example' saying a company would not 'shoot there self in the foot'. I don't buy Phillips bulbs and I'm sure most growers don't use there bulbs either. Its not about 'mistaken data', its just inaccurate data (like I've said multiple times) that those graphs show, because it has NOTHING to do with intensity, which has ALOT to do with bud development.

If the CMH bulbs have such a better spectrum then HPS, then why doesn't it produce more yield then HPS bulbs??? I'll answer that, its because plants don't need as much blue-purple spectrum when developing buds, so maybe I came about it the wrong way with my argument, but the facts are there, and HPS is the best known bulb to produce cannabis flowers.

So don't get me wrong, the CMH is a great bulb, and I'm not saying its not, but it does not produce the same intensity of the orange-red spectrum a plant needs when budding because alot of the energy (watts) is being used for blue and purple spectrums.

Again, this is not a debate or argument I am trying to start, its what I believe based on real growers sharing there experience and what the graphs themselves show, or lack thereof, in regards to intensity.

If somebody 'doesn't know better' and they believe me, then I urge them to do there own research on both sides so they can believe what they choose themselves.
 
#37
Look what I found on sun*light*supply's website

xxxlightsupply.com/p-14937-phillips-mastercolor-lec-315-lamp.aspx

(replace xxx with sun)
 
#38
I'm back from a vacation and some time off. Will post some stuff later
 
#40
Alright, some time off. I'm a bit annoyed because I labeled all kinds of shit and then apparently lost in translation the trimming crew just ran through all of it without separating it. I hate making excuses and it fucks with my credibility. I'll be take pictures from this cycle as the grow goes along.

I did see less of a yield, but that could be from a different number of factors. I was going to compare main cola to main cola as a reference, but of course I can't do that now.

The more interesting thing is that some of the plants that did not get the direct light from the 860 CDM bulb started to do weird things. I have an OGR fire alien from seed which is pretty finicky when it comes to how it grows (rockwool versus soil versus hydroton and even different nutrient programs). So I usually use that strain when i'm testing out new equipment/nutrients because the quality and yield can vary wildly versus some of the other strains I have like Blue Dream which are pretty stable.

I started seeing stacking single calyxes on flower sites on plants that did not had indirect light exposure. However, I did notice that flower sites that had direct light exposure did have more calyx growth, but it ultimately did swell at harvest.

This room, i'm throwing in my most unstable strain which is my platinum bubba. Hopefully i'll be able to chronicle this one better. I apologize for not getting pictures up.
 
Page 2 of 2 · Replies 21–40 of 40
Back
Top Bottom