I happen to be buddies with a solistek rep and they've just come out with a thousand watt splitter so now you can run one 1000w ballast but run to air-cooled hoods and put it on like super lumens and you can run to 600w double Enders this is new technology just now coming out on the market he was telling me about show me a couple pictures this is going to blow shit out of the water guys watch out for solistek man they're coming for them whole freaking Market

Legalize70 said:

I happen to be buddies with a solistek rep and they've just come out with a thousand watt splitter so now you can run one 1000w ballast but run to air-cooled hoods and put it on like super lumens and you can run to 600w double Enders this is new technology just now coming out on the market he was telling me about show me a couple pictures this is going to blow shit out of the water guys watch out for solistek man they're coming for them whole freaking Market

Click to expand...

You sound like you're the rep.. Why do you want to sell the best lights you have ever used?

I have way more than i need, just yrying to spread the love. 4 of them in my 4'x8' tent and one in veg is plenty, that leaves me one still in the box, jump on it or dont, it will be sold by tommorrow is all Im saying. A big event going on and it wont last more than a couple houts at $more than $200 off retail.

See above

Just a heads up, offering up services, selling, or asking for seeds/clones/etc is against the rules on this forum. Please keep this to your local Craigslist or local sales.

Thanks

My sincerest apologies I was not aware of this I do not use Craigslist because I do not feel like messing with a bunch of amateurs but I do understand the reason for having these rules please feel free to delete anything that was inappropriate I did not mean to break any rules just trying to offer up some quality Goods at a reasonable price but I understand there are reasons for rules and it was not my intention to break them again please feel free to delete anything that was inappropriate and my deepest apologies

See above

Your all good.

so i joined this thread from the the very beginning now that a year as past what is every ones thoughts on the 315w lights results ect

I have ZERO complaints with them... Power bill has gone and stayed down while my quality and yields have gone up. Seems like a no brainer to me....

So what is a 315 cmh in comparison to say a 1000w hps yield wise? How many average grams do you get per watt?

Gpw is gpw. No matter if it's from 315w or 1000w. A gram is still a gram.

I couldn't be happier. Same.or better yields, and better quality.

dan1989 said:

So what is a 315 cmh in comparison to say a 1000w hps yield wise? How many average grams do you get per watt?

Click to expand...

I ran a Phillips 3100k next to a Hortilux 600 Super HPS all last year and my opinion is that the 315 cmh compares to about 450 watts of HPS flowering light.

My best yield in a 4'x4' area with the 600 HPS was 22 oz. dense dry nugs.

My best yield in a 3'x3' area with the 315 CMH was 15 oz.

Denser larger buds with low leaf/bud ratio with HPS.

More colorful and somewhat frostier looking buds but less dense and more lower larf with CMH.

Both lamps are capable of excellent smell and flavor. I think the added blue in the Hortilux spectrum helps the hps here.

Both lamps grow very potent flowers with full complexity of canabanoids as genetics allow.

I thought the flowers that stretched in between the 2 lamps were consistently the best looking.

I think 2 315's might solve the density problem over the 600 and beat the yield by a good margin in the same area.

I plan to run a cycle from start to finish in a 3'x3' tent and the 315 next.

MIMedGrower said:

I ran a Phillips 3100k next to a Hortilux 600 Super HPS all last year and my opinion is that the 315 cmh compares to about 450 watts of HPS flowering light.

My best yield in a 4'x4' area with the 600 HPS was 22 oz. dense dry nugs.

My best yield in a 3'x3' area with the 315 CMH was 15 oz.

Denser larger buds with low leaf/bud ratio with HPS.

More colorful and somewhat frostier looking buds but less dense and more lower larf with CMH.

Both lamps are capable of excellent smell and flavor. I think the added blue in the Hortilux spectrum helps the hps here.

Both lamps grow very potent flowers with full complexity of canabanoids as genetics allow.

I thought the flowers that stretched in between the 2 lamps were consistently the best looking.

I think 2 315's might solve the density problem over the 600 and beat the yield by a good margin in the same area.

I plan to run a cycle from start to finish in a 3'x3' tent and the 315 next.

Click to expand...

Certainly sounds like 2 315's could be better. I'd personally choose appearance and smell over density any day of the week, if the potency is the same with either. What's everyone's thoughts on supplementing a 315 with a couple of LED panels? Nothing special, Mars for example? I'm thinking power saving here...

ive only just got round to setting up a room with all maxibright 315w ballasts and x4 Phillips 930 x3 942 lamps 3 lights on while i veg 6 lights in total i replaced the x2 gavita 1000de with this setup so hoping to see good results

Bigjuice said:

ive only just got round to setting up a room with all maxibright 315w ballasts and x4 Phillips 930 x3 942 lamps 3 lights on while i veg 6 lights in total i replaced the x2 gavita 1000de with this setup so hoping to see good results

Click to expand...

Please keep us updated.

MIMedGrower said:

I ran a Phillips 3100k next to a Hortilux 600 Super HPS all last year and my opinion is that the 315 cmh compares to about 450 watts of HPS flowering light.

My best yield in a 4'x4' area with the 600 HPS was 22 oz. dense dry nugs.

My best yield in a 3'x3' area with the 315 CMH was 15 oz.

Denser larger buds with low leaf/bud ratio with HPS.

More colorful and somewhat frostier looking buds but less dense and more lower larf with CMH.

Both lamps are capable of excellent smell and flavor. I think the added blue in the Hortilux spectrum helps the hps here.

Both lamps grow very potent flowers with full complexity of canabanoids as genetics allow.

I thought the flowers that stretched in between the 2 lamps were consistently the best looking.

I think 2 315's might solve the density problem over the 600 and beat the yield by a good margin in the same area.

I plan to run a cycle from start to finish in a 3'x3' tent and the 315 next.

Click to expand...

This is basically what I've heard too. Healthier looking plants, more colorful buds but slightly smaller, less dense and leafier. And it makes sense if you've ever flowered under reg MH the results are very similar because it's not that drastically different in terms of spectrum . . . Just a little more efficient at producing usable light per watt and the bulbs last just over twice as long in terms of bulb output depreciation.

If you look at what jungle boys did with cmh, they replaced 20k de HPS with 18K in cmh and the buds do look a little smaller, not sure on numbers cuz they haven't put those out that I know of( probably cuz they don't wanna do the research for everyone else). And that's only a 2000watt down grade....

I think the guys seeing the biggest gains in terms of gpw were likely running their original HPS lights too close to the canopy in the first place due to things like limited ceiling height etc or maybe their cooling was less than adequate and switching to lower wattage less infrared spectrum helped them get a better handle on temp control (which is massive in terms of yield).

All that said I haven't pulled a cmh crop yet but I'm heavily committed to these things and hope I'm wrong lol. I do have a strong suspicion I'll be throwing a few HPS in there to supplement the cmh

PharmHand said:

This is basically what I've heard too. Healthier looking plants, more colorful buds but slightly smaller, less dense and leafier. And it makes sense if you've ever flowered under reg MH the results are very similar because it's not that drastically different in terms of spectrum . . . Just a little more efficient at producing usable light per watt and the bulbs last just over twice as long in terms of bulb output depreciation.

If you look at what jungle boys did with cmh, they replaced 20k de HPS with 18K in cmh and the buds do look a little smaller, not sure on numbers cuz they haven't put those out that I know of( probably cuz they don't wanna do the research for everyone else). And that's only a 2000watt down grade....

I think the guys seeing the biggest gains in terms of gpw were likely running their original HPS lights too close to the canopy in the first place due to things like limited ceiling height etc or maybe their cooling was less than adequate and switching to lower wattage less infrared spectrum helped them get a better handle on temp control (which is massive in terms of yield).

All that said I haven't pulled a cmh crop yet but I'm heavily committed to these things and hope I'm wrong lol. I do have a strong suspicion I'll be throwing a few HPS in there to supplement the cmh

Click to expand...

I also suspect that most growers who report they like cmh or led more as well never used hps to its potential.

I also think that if there are multiple 315's and the footprint is kept to 2.5'x2.5' that they would work much better.

I really preferred the way the cmh looked and even felt in the room. It's like sunlight.

But to say they can equal a 600hps individually. No. And some compare them to 1000's. Which supports your theory about heat management I think.

It's like the difference between being on earth or mars lol. Which bulb/bulbs were you running 3k or 4K? Thanks for the info man ,appreciate the real world input @MIMedGrower

PharmHand said:

It's like the difference between being on earth or mars lol. Which bulb/bulbs were you running 3k or 4K? Thanks for the info man ,appreciate the real world input @MIMedGrower

Click to expand...

I used the Phillips 3100k in the remote sun system open vertical reflector and a galaxy ballast.

I read that max par was measured at 16" and 2.5x2.5 feet square (sorry don't have link from commercial Test) and was able to keep the canopy between 16" and 18" with pretty great results.

Here are some pics and some more about my findings and research.

Frostiest, most resinous flowers I have grown were flowered full cycle or finished the last two weeks under the 315.


Brought out way more color than hps alone. And helped keep leaves soft, green and healthy to the finish.

But the most potent plants seem to still be coming from under the 600's regardless of frosty appearance or resin content.

I believe wattage or lumens as a measure still counts for yield and potency. Ed rosenthal says this in his book. He recommends not going below 600 watts for potent flowers and suggests 1000's of possible. He tested a lot of flowers for thc back then.


Here is a Hortilux 600w blue mh, a Hortilux 600w Super HPS and the 315 cmh. I tested a bunch of lighting options.

I found that with the 2 halide fuller spectrum lamps in the room there was even more leafy, larfy buds and ultimately a 30% loss of yield per plant from average with HPS only.

Better results over all with 2 hps and 1 cmh. Or mh I suspect.

Using just the 2 blockbusters with the blue and hps did not hurt yield much but did make leafier plants.

I am using only 2 600 super hps right now and everyone is very happy. We didn't say that we noticed less potent flowers without the cmh or mh. But they are not as frosty looking and don't stain the roach from a smoked joint with so much amber resin.

Here is 2 hps and 1 cmh at work. I ended up just rotating the plants and finishing them under the cmh for best results.


My garden never looked better though. :-)


The university of Utah found that a 50/50 mix of red to blue spectrum is best for plant health.

The university of Michigan suggests the same for leafy crops but for flowering plants they suggest more red and less blue light.

Just enough blue to add health and keep plants compact enough for the system intended.

That's what I have seen and read.