Kingbrite review

[Aqua Man]

Whos lumping them together? Have you been reading this whole thread becuase I touched on this already earlier:



Lol, now whos comparing apples to oranges. The hlgs put more waste heat into the plants compared to the timbers when the lux is the same and when they are the same distance from the canopy. Raising the hlgs and increasing their power gives more room for airflow between my plants and the fixtures to avoid heat stress without a loss in lux.

What waste heat? Are you sayimg the timbers are more efficient? I will have to look into that

 

[Aqua Man]

+1
All true info.
I’ve got a side by side going now. Definitely have to back the quantum board off more than the timbers. Personal experience.

Again which quantum boards and driven how hard? I understand what your saying but its not cut and dried like that. You can run more boards at lower wattage with diy kits.

For instance several hlg 120 boards as opposed to the 288s with high wattage

QB120 V2 Board Guide

High efficiency boards designed for Horticulture Lighting projects. QB 120 Boards can be powered upto 70 watts. Ideal for use in grow tents or grow area with reflective walls and grow spaces with limited height. No metal heatsink or thermal paste is required .

horticulturelightinggroup.com

 

[Aqua Man]

You can run 8 of those boards off a 600w driver giving much better coverage than timber and run way closer.

 

[BurnzYzBudZz]

Again which quantum boards and driven how hard? I understand what your saying but its not cut and dried like that. You can run more boards at lower wattage with diy kits.

For instance several hlg 120 boards as opposed to the 288s with high wattage

QB120 V2 Board Guide

High efficiency boards designed for Horticulture Lighting projects. QB 120 Boards can be powered upto 70 watts. Ideal for use in grow tents or grow area with reflective walls and grow spaces with limited height. No metal heatsink or thermal paste is required .

horticulturelightinggroup.com

Posted in an earlier post. I’m not the one trying to prove anything. Kingbrite 240w quantum uv ir, timber trio of daisies dimmed to 240w.

 

[Aqua Man]

I think all the ppl new to led are forgetting all the diy stuff in how this all started.

 

[Aqua Man]

Posted in an earlier post. I’m not the one trying to prove anything. Kingbrite 240w quantum uv ir, timber trio of daisies dimmed to 240w.

No no bro I understand. I just trying to point out even qb are not just QBs there are options.

 

[BurnzYzBudZz]

No no bro I understand. I just trying to point out even qb are not just QBs there are options.

I understand. I like both lights honestly. No complaints with either.

 

[MIMedGrower]

Again which quantum boards and driven how hard? I understand what your saying but its not cut and dried like that. You can run more boards at lower wattage with diy kits.

For instance several hlg 120 boards as opposed to the 288s with high wattage

QB120 V2 Board Guide

High efficiency boards designed for Horticulture Lighting projects. QB 120 Boards can be powered upto 70 watts. Ideal for use in grow tents or grow area with reflective walls and grow spaces with limited height. No metal heatsink or thermal paste is required .

horticulturelightinggroup.com

Funny. Top Cob lamps used to be 50w 3590’s (cree?) and now are 100w each. While the diy guys keep running boards lower and lower I am seeing. The manufacturers are 100-150 watts per board and the diy guys are running more boards at 60 watts.


Boards give light stress more than heat right?

 

[MIMedGrower]

I think all the ppl new to led are forgetting all the diy stuff in how this all started.

The cheap components go down easier that way.

 

[Aqua Man]

Funny. Top Cob lamps used to be 50w 3590’s (cree?) and now are 100w each. While the diy guys keep running boards lower and lower I am seeing. The manufacturers are 100-150 watts per board and the diy guys are running more boards at 60 watts.


Boards give light stress more than heat right?

Yeah ppl are so focused on watts and not looking at the shit we need. Even the manufacturers going in the wrong direction except the strips. We would benefit imo from running more low wattage boards or cobs than this ever increasing wattage over less cobs or boards

Honestly I think the 120 v2 boards are the shit. 70w/board. No heat sink and run off one driver gives unbelievably even coverage and can be run super close. Seen more than a few ppl do this and much like say gavita strips its absolutely awesome.

That how most used to roll when these came out and now I must admit I would trade my hlg600 in a second for that build.

 

[MIMedGrower]

Yeah ppl are so focused on watts and not looking at the shit we need. Even the manufacturers going in the wrong direction except the strips. We would benefit imo from running more low wattage boards or cobs than this ever increasing wattage over less cobs or boards

I have been thinking of running 3 cheap 400 hps in my shorty 4x8 tent. Can get 12” from the tops and 3 lights can yield more than 2. Plus i already have 2 dimmable ballasts. Just need a ballast and cheap reflectors and a 6” fan and im growing in the basement too. ;-)

 

[FourthCity]

Heat stress? From 18" led? You kidding me? IR is what causes the heat stress

If hlg thought it was a good idea to run their fixtures that close then why do they recommend running them higher? Even if you can successfully grow with them that close doing so would effectively reduce the available footprint.

What waste heat? Are you sayimg the timbers are more efficient? I will have to look into that

Im not commenting on what I don't know and I don't have the ability to tell you which one is more efficient. All fixtures that I have ever used produce heat, any heat is waste heat because it means energy was taken from the wall but created heat rather than light. I dont even know which fixture puts out the most heat, what I do know is that at the same distance from the canopy with the same amount of lux at canopy level more heat is coming out the bottom of the hlg fixtures than the timbers. I suspect this is due to heat sink and fixture design but I don't disagree that the deep red on the hlg is also part of the difference I am seeing.

Funny. Top Cob lamps used to be 50w 3590’s (cree?) and now are 100w each. While the diy guys keep running boards lower and lower I am seeing. The manufacturers are 100-150 watts per board and the diy guys are running more boards at 60 watts.


Boards give light stress more than heat right?

Fwiw I was never comparing quantum boards to cobs, I was comparing three fixtures I own as whole units. Taken as a whole, regardless of any inherent advantage qbs may have over cobs when it comes to heat, both the hlg and kingbrite qbs I have direct more heat downwards towards the plant than my timber cob fixtures.

 

[Aqua Man]

I have been thinking of running 3 cheap 400 hps in my shorty 4x8 tent. Can get 12” from the tops and 3 lights can yield more than 2. Plus i already have 2 dimmable ballasts. Just need a ballast and cheap reflectors and a 6” fan and im growing in the basement too. ;-)

Sounds like a solid plan bro.

 

[Aqua Man]

If hlg thought it was a good idea to run their fixtures that close then why do they recommend running them higher? Even if you can successfully grow with them that close doing so would effectively reduce the available footprint.

Im not commenting on what I don't know and I don't have the ability to tell you which one is more efficient. All fixtures that I have ever used produce heat, any heat is waste heat because it means energy was taken from the wall but created heat rather than light. I dont even know which fixture puts out the most heat, what I do know is that at the same distance from the canopy with the same amount of lux at canopy level more heat is coming out the bottom of the hlg fixtures than the timbers. I suspect this is due to heat sink and fixture design but I don't disagree that the deep red on the hlg is also part of the difference I am seeing.

Fwiw I was never comparing quantum boards to cobs, I was comparing three fixtures I own as whole units. Taken as a whole, regardless of any inherent advantage qbs may have over cobs when it comes to heat, both the hlg and kingbrite qbs I have direct more heat downwards towards the plant than my the timber cob fixtures.

Well I can tell you that the IR is far more influential than the radiant heat and especially at that distance. Yes the red IR diodes are whats making the difference there.

I'm not gonna go deeper into this as for some reason it just gets to offensive and personal.

I understand the difference and when comparing say 2 fixtures with the same wattage and nearly the same efficacy the heat produced is the same. The heat sinks will affect how well ita diapearsed but its not the radiant heat that affecting the plants at that distance with that amount of "waste heat" which is directly tied to the efficacy

 

[FourthCity]

Well I can tell you that the IR is far more influential than the radiant heat and especially at that distance. Yes the red IR diodes are whats making the difference there.

I'm not gonna go deeper into this as for some reason it just gets to offensive and personal.

I understand the difference and when comparing say 2 fixtures with the same wattahe and nearly the same efficacy the heat produced is the same. The heat sinks will affect how well ita diapearsed but its not the radiant heat that affecting the plants at that distance with that amount of "waste heat" which is directly tied to the efficacy

Why would it need to get offensive and personal? That kind of seems like a cop out to me, if you can explain why running my hlgs closer than my timbers is better despite the fact the my observations and manufacturer recommendations suggest otherwise I would like to know. Just because I have reasoning for doing it this way doesn't mean I won't respectfully listen to what you have to say, I just may ask you to clarify or explain yourself so myself and others can understand better where you are coming from.

 

[Aqua Man]

Why would it need to get offensive and personal? That kind of seems like a cop out to me, if you can explain why running my hlgs closer than my timbers is better despite the fact the my observations and manufacturer recommendations suggest otherwise I would like to know. Just because I have reasoning for doing it this way doesn't mean I won't respectfully listen to what you have to say, I just may ask you to clarify or explain yourself so myself and others can understand better where you are coming from.

Well with your board you probably can't because of the IR which is a benefit. Not 100% but I dont believe the timbers have added IR. This would explain why you see what you do but not for the reason you stated of radiant heat. Can you link your exact timber fixture? As I stated there are differences in QBs and some can be run less than 12"s away..

Also as for your lix statement it just so happens lux meters do not pick up IR or UV and poorly pick up red and blie spectrums. So the ppfd (actual light intensity) can vary a lot and is particularly why lux should never be used with blurples. Often you see bleaching and light stress when ppl try to do so. Basically you are giving the plant under the HLG far more ppfd so you can actually reduce the intensity and adjust the height for even spread. Its not as simple as recommendations.

Its not a cop out. Its that I have done this time and time again and everytime I go into an led thread I have to go through a million things to get ppl to understand what I'm talking about and I'm just as I was years ago burnt on it.

There are reasons you see what you do in your grow but its not for the reasons you are claiming. Its a topic can can be discussed for years and in the end the answer is there is no right answer or one best light.

For instance the addition of IR changes many variables from light distance to changes needed in environment. Side by sides only show how well it works in one set of conditions. This is why they are flawed bit many ppl see them as an end all be all. Both lights should be run in their optimal conditions. With IR you can't run room twmos as high which changes everything from nutrients needs to watering times.

So I'm just gonna drop it if ya don't mind. Rather not spend a year in this thread just to come to the conclusion there is no right answer and there are reasons why some lights do better under certain conditions.

In short your cobs run closer because they are lower wattage without IR added bit also producing less ppfd even though the lux is the same. The same can be done with QBs and even more effectively which is also true can be done with the cobs.

 

[Kanzeon]

Why would it need to get offensive and personal? That kind of seems like a cop out to me, if you can explain why running my hlgs closer than my timbers is better despite the fact the my observations and manufacturer recommendations suggest otherwise I would like to know. Just because I have reasoning for doing it this way doesn't mean I won't respectfully listen to what you have to say, I just may ask you to clarify or explain yourself so myself and others can understand better where you are coming from.

People get all kinds of defensive about the lights they use, it's just a thing. If you can dig up the old Marshydro thread and wade through that, you'll get an idea.

 

[Aqua Man]

People get all kinds of defensive about the lights they use, it's just a thing. If you can dig up the old Marshydro thread and wade through that, you'll get an idea.

Yeah those who have been here a while know how many threads end in insults and well hurt feelings.

I'm not by any means suggesting @FourthCity that you are doing so. I just see the tone of the thread changing and just choose to bail. And yes a part of that is me thinking how much attention I would have to focus in one thread and how much confusion it would create all for info thats already in our many LED threads and for lack of a better term shot shows on LED.

I did however learn the timbers removed the lenses and thats great news to me as I think they are now much better suited for height. With the HLGs fixtures increasing in wattage and not so much footprint I feel the older diy HLG builds are far better than the current and timber and HLG are both great options for height limited grows.

But IMO opinion boards and cobs are on the way out as we get close to reaching the optimal LEDs where not much is left to make giant leaps foreword and they settle in I think we will see most transition into strips.

The next big LED advancement will be adequate UV spectrums and intensities as that tech develops but still not there yet.

 

[FourthCity]

Well with your board you probably can't because of the IR which is a benefit. Not 100% but I dont believe the timbers have added IR. This would explain why you see what you do but not for the reason you stated of radiant heat. Can you link your exact timber fixture? As I stated there are differences in QBs and some can be run less than 12"s away..

Also as for your lix statement it just so happens lux meters do not pick up IR or UV and poorly pick up red and blie spectrums. So the ppfd (actual light intensity) can vary a lot and is particularly why lux should never be used with blurples. Often you see bleaching and light stress when ppl try to do so. Basically you are giving the plant under the HLG far more ppfd so you can actually reduce the intensity and adjust the height for even spread. Its not as simple as recommendations.

Its not a cop out. Its that I have done this time and time again and everytime I go into an led thread I have to go through a million things to get ppl to understand what I'm talking about and I'm just as I was years ago burnt on it.

There are reasons you see what you do in your grow but its not for the reasons you are claiming. Its a topic can can be discussed for years and in the end the answer is there is no right answer or one best light.

For instance the addition of IR changes many variables from light distance to changes needed in environment. Side by sides only show how well it works in one set of conditions. This is why they are flawed bit many ppl see them as an end all be all. Both lights should be run in their optimal conditions. With IR you can't run room twmos as high which changes everything from nutrients needs to watering times.

So I'm just gonna drop it if ya don't mind. Rather not spend a year in this thread just to come to the conclusion there is no right answer and there are reasons why some lights do better under certain conditions.

In short your cobs run closer because they are lower wattage without IR added bit also producing less ppfd even though the lux is the same. The same can be done with QBs and even more effectively which is also true can be done with the cobs.

I did link the specific fixture in my earlier post that you already quoted, its just above the link to the hlg.

All I could offer was my personal experience with the lights being discussed. I thought it could be useful to some people trying to make decisions even if it lacked me going into detail about every aspect of each light and why they perform the way they do.

When you stated specifically that timbers fixtures needed to be further away from the canopy than hlgs fixtures this was contrary to my experience and the manufacturers info so I wanted to understand where you were coming from. I was asking more specifically in regards to the fixtures being offered by both brands rather than getting into all the variations of light design possible.

People get all kinds of defensive about the lights they use, it's just a thing. If you can dig up the old Marshydro thread and wade through that, you'll get an idea.

Im just trying to understand. I mean honestly I dont even think the optimal operating height really gives one light an edge over the other, I'm happy with both of them but if there is a good reason I should be using them differently I would like to know.

Shortly after I joined this forum @Aqua Man and @MIMedGrower helped convince me of using the same nutrients for the whole grow rather than switching to bloom nutrients in flower. This was a new idea to me but aqua man pointed out a study as well as mimeds grows that helped convince me to change. Because of this (and this goes for others on the forum I respect as well) if aqua man says something contrary to my understanding Im more likely to press him on explaining it because I'm really giving him the benefit of the doubt and need someone to point out where or what I am misunderstanding.

That being said, in the absence of evidence to convince me otherwise, I can not rule out the possibility that I might be right or that maybe something was misunderstood. In this case I think most of the confusion was due to aqua man making reasonable statements that were unfortunately based on out of date/not current hardware. Unless I am mistaken it seems like he has come around to the fact the the majority current of fixtures offered by hlg optimally operate at a greater height than than the majority of timbers fixtures.

 

[MIMedGrower]

Well with your board you probably can't because of the IR which is a benefit. Not 100% but I dont believe the timbers have added IR. This would explain why you see what you do but not for the reason you stated of radiant heat. Can you link your exact timber fixture? As I stated there are differences in QBs and some can be run less than 12"s away..

Also as for your lix statement it just so happens lux meters do not pick up IR or UV and poorly pick up red and blie spectrums. So the ppfd (actual light intensity) can vary a lot and is particularly why lux should never be used with blurples. Often you see bleaching and light stress when ppl try to do so. Basically you are giving the plant under the HLG far more ppfd so you can actually reduce the intensity and adjust the height for even spread. Its not as simple as recommendations.

Its not a cop out. Its that I have done this time and time again and everytime I go into an led thread I have to go through a million things to get ppl to understand what I'm talking about and I'm just as I was years ago burnt on it.

There are reasons you see what you do in your grow but its not for the reasons you are claiming. Its a topic can can be discussed for years and in the end the answer is there is no right answer or one best light.

For instance the addition of IR changes many variables from light distance to changes needed in environment. Side by sides only show how well it works in one set of conditions. This is why they are flawed bit many ppl see them as an end all be all. Both lights should be run in their optimal conditions. With IR you can't run room twmos as high which changes everything from nutrients needs to watering times.

So I'm just gonna drop it if ya don't mind. Rather not spend a year in this thread just to come to the conclusion there is no right answer and there are reasons why some lights do better under certain conditions.

In short your cobs run closer because they are lower wattage without IR added bit also producing less ppfd even though the lux is the same. The same can be done with QBs and even more effectively which is also true can be done with the cobs.

Question? Does an ir diode put out more heat than a “white” diode or just the color frequency in the spectrum?