THCFarmer.com
121,113 Members Log In Register
Log In Register

HPS light superior vs current led tech?

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

HPS light superior vs current led tech?

DIYDanny 884 Replies 152,751 Views
Page 22 of 45 · Replies 421–440 of 885
#421
MIMedGrower said:
You want samsung 301B or 301H diodes for best efficiency I believe.

I translated this. He wants to know best efficient led if anyone has suggestions.
Click to expand...
Before I got that mars light I was (still am ) gonna build and I was gonna use 301h
 
#423
LED is popular with the craft growers in Canada but their weed looks like shit. I have the Kessil 350M the seeds seem to like it but you only need it for a few weeks. Id be mixing LED PLASMA and the gavita. I bet it would look really nice. Im sure the plasma could replace the yields from the CMH.
 
#424
Been growing for around 12 yrs or so, solely HPS flowers....but I recently (and secretly) 🤫 upgraded my flower room to all QBs (Spider farmer) from se 1000w hps ... Replaced each hps set up 6 in total with 600 watts of LEDs (3 sf2000s pulling 200w each)....I was prompted to upgrade (a buddy just recently upgraded to de hps phantoms from se hps setups and was bragging! 🙅‍♂️) .... Long story short... First harvest was yesterday and my buddy is seriously butt hurt 😂😂😂😂😂😂.... Needless to say I pulled almost exactly what he pulled a few weeks back with 7200 watts de hps with 3600 watts qb LEDs and no AC (I grow for QUALITY ABOVE ALL ELSE so gpw numbers are irrelevant to me due to the FACT that those numbers are totally proportionate to VEG time while also being STRAIN DEPENDANT💯 ...and that's not up debate!)... Not to mention shorter more compact plants with harder buds that are more colorful and frosty!!... Best $5k I've spent in at least 8 yrs!! 🙌💯 ... And to think I just so happen to stumble onto a QB thread a few months ago outta pure boredom and prolly would have went to de hps next otherwise🙋‍♂️ LUCKY ME! ... Not about to debate anyone, so take this post for whatever u like ✌
 
Last edited:
#425
313 Terps said:
Been growing for around 12 yrs or so, solely HPS flowers....but I recently (and secretly) 🤫 upgraded my flower room to all QBs (Spider farmer) from se 1000w hps ... Replaced each hps set up 6 in total with 600 watts of LEDs (3 sf2000s pulling 200w each)....I was prompted to upgrade (a buddy just recently upgraded to de hps phantoms from se hps setups and was bragging! 🙅‍♂️) .... Long story short... First harvest was yesterday and my buddy is seriously butt hurt 😂😂😂😂😂😂.... Needless to say I pulled almost exactly what he pulled a few weeks back with 7200 watts de hps with 3600 watts qb LEDs and no AC (I grow for QUALITY ABOVE ALL ELSE so gpw numbers are irrelevant to me due to the FACT that those numbers are totally proportionate to VEG time while also being STRAIN DEPENDANT💯 ...and that's not up debate!)... Not to mention shorter more compact plants with harder buds that are more colorful and frosty!!... Best $5k I've spent in at least 8 yrs!! 🙌💯 ... And to think I just so happen to stumble onto a QB thread a few months ago outta pure boredom and prolly would have went to de hps next otherwise🙋‍♂️ LUCKY ME! ... Not about to debate anyone, so take this post for whatever u like ✌
Click to expand...
what spectrum boards did you get? how many months of electrical bills will it take to make up the nearly $4k difference between your 18 boards and your buddies 7 phantoms?
 
#426
visajoe1 said:
what spectrum boards did you get? how many months of electrical bills will it take to make up the nearly $4k difference between your 18 boards and your buddies 7 phantoms?
Click to expand...
I think the boards spectrums are around 3300k - 3500k total when all the different LEDs spectrums are combined.....Only 6 phantoms total... de hps run at 1200w each. Well considering I pay 1k+ a month in gas and electrical plus summer approaching and no perceived need for the mini split... Figure I make that difference up in 7-8 months max.... Not to mention the fact that his bills will reman sky high all the while
 
#427
Rikismom420 said:
Both iPhone and Samsung are great phones. I just like my. I. Phone and iPad but I like led and it seems like hps does a good job too,.my led are dimmable with several settings and I paid 75.00 free shipping for a 300 watt. So I don’t think that is expensive. Seem to be working good so far, but u put all lights and and fans in tent and it gets hot , in the summer time...so
Happy growing 😉✨
Click to expand...
What kind of led’s do you have ?
 
#428
az2000 said:
Instead of HPS, if I were you, I'd consider two CMH LEC 315s. Each one will cover 3x3' space. That would fit your space very well. (They make a 630.). I think separate fixtures would give you more flexibility and if one went out, you'd still have some light. (You can get remote-mount ballasts if heat is a problem. CMH isn't very hot even with the ballast in the tent.). Use the 4200 bulb for veg. After 12/12 stretch is complete, switch to the 3100. (Some people use 4200 all the way through. If you switch to soon, they'll stretch to much.).

I've grown a considerable amount using LED. I ended up feeling like they don't produce the same finished quality (crystals, terpenes). I think it has something to do with absence of UV. It's also a very confusing topic with so *much* flim flam out there (cheap LEDs sold for high-end prices). There are good brands. If you absolutely need heat reduction, lower energy use, then spending more for high-end LED could be worth it. But, not all expensive LED is high end. So... it can take time orienting yourself to the topic. The mid-grade brands aren't going to run cooler or more effciently than CMH (at 35w/sq ft. I guess the ballast adds 10% to that.). But, if you're considering HPS, I'd replace that idea with CMH.
Click to expand...
 
#429
LED lamps don't cover the UV spectrum, as presented by daylight. This is a (IMHO) gap that CMH lamps cover to better results.
 
#431
LED in the wavelenths required to fill that gap are expensive and are not available in the required intensities ( photon flux ). To have effective power in those wavelengths - you have to utilize metal vapor (Florescent UV) or use induction lamps ( another kind of mercury vapor lamp ).

The LED vendors are not terribly forthcoming about this issue.
 
#432
The deal is there are lots of LED that go to just around 400nm. To get true sunlight reproduction - you have to mimic the UVB roll-off as absorption increases to end up with a proper UVA-UVB ratio. This is what activates the terpene mechanisms to develop the phenotype of the strain.
 
#433
WankirA said:
I have 5 diff LEDs, all have UV & ir..
Just saying...
Click to expand...


Led companies all try to minimize mentioning this flaw. They only include UVA. It is UVB that is proven to increase thc potency. UVA isnt proven to increase anything in marijuana.
 
#434
weedtech said:
The deal is there are lots of LED that go to just around 400nm. To get true sunlight reproduction - you have to mimic the UVB roll-off as absorption increases to end up with a proper UVA-UVB ratio. This is what activates the terpene mechanisms to develop the phenotype of the strain.
Click to expand...


UVA is not proven to do anything to marijuana. There are a few tests on food cultivars that showed increased flavanoids.

Only UVB has been proven to increase thc.
 
#435
Aye, @MIMedGrower seems we had a thread about this awhile back. I've come to the understanding that indeed UVB plays a role however all these experiments that attempt to isolate a specific spectrum create a subtle bias in the results. UVB is attenuated by certain materials and conditions, creating a roll-off in relative intensity - the result is a distinct ratio around 1:10 for UVB:UVA. When you then look at the cellular level, UVA provides the activation energies on a molecular level to repair inevitable disorder created by the UVB component.

In the environment - UVB is the photon stressor that varies depending on water vapor and the other natural filtering mechanisms. UVA above 400nm is relatively unhindered by any atmospheric filtering.
 
#437
weedtech said:
Aye, @MIMedGrower seems we had a thread about this awhile back. I've come to the understanding that indeed UVB plays a role however all these experiments that attempt to isolate a specific spectrum create a subtle bias in the results. UVB is attenuated by certain materials and conditions, creating a roll-off in relative intensity - the result is a distinct ratio around 1:10 for UVB:UVA. When you then look at the cellular level, UVA provides the activation energies on a molecular level to repair inevitable disorder created by the UVB component.

In the environment - UVB is the photon stressor that varies depending on water vapor and the other natural filtering mechanisms. UVA above 400nm is relatively unhindered by any atmospheric filtering.
Click to expand...


Got a link? Because the light coming off a phillips 315 cmh for example is not in the ratio you are saying. And neither is sunlight.
 
#438
weedtech said:
The deal is there are lots of LED that go to just around 400nm. To get true sunlight reproduction - you have to mimic the UVB roll-off as absorption increases to end up with a proper UVA-UVB ratio. This is what activates the terpene mechanisms to develop the phenotype of the strain.
Click to expand...

I notice no difference in the end product between the same plant grown with led or CMH. They were both just as flavorful, just as potent, and almost indistinguishable from one another.

However I did notice that LED gave me higher yield per watt and denser flowers. Also LED required less AC time to keep temps in range.
 
#439
BigCube said:
I notice no difference in the end product between the same plant grown with led or CMH. They were both just as flavorful, just as potent, and almost indistinguishable from one another.

However I did notice that LED gave me higher yield per watt and denser flowers. Also LED required less AC time to keep temps in range.
Click to expand...


You would need the same watts to directly compare.

However,

A 315 cmh didnt make a percievable difference against my 600 hps in quality. But it did grow shorter, leafier plants with a lower yield.

However there are many tests that show up to a 4% increase in thc in lab tests against led and hps. And tests showing adding uvb the last two weeks shows the same thc increase as running uvb full cycle.

This is what the metal halide “finishing” 10k bulb was for.

I liked the buds best (and yield) with hps and cmh combined.

And i was only asking for a link proving what @weedtech stated.
 
#440
@MIMedGrower I seem to recall the test you ran with hps and CMH. I'm not sure I can provide a specific reference that would satisfy your request. The one reference that comes to mind, I'm gonna have to find again. As I mention, and it seems we talked about this before - most of the published studies were not broadband light with a measured UV component, like we use in practice. On a cellular level, there are various receptors for specific wavelengths that do certain jobs, but only up to the UVA wavelengths. AFAIK, there are no UVB receptors. UVB does have effect, but the effect is damage control.
 
Page 22 of 45 · Replies 421–440 of 885
Back
Top Bottom