Do Mars hydro 300w full spec led's really suck that much?

SirDirkDiggler420

SirDirkDiggler420

Member
yankeeny20 said:
If you're set on buying from Amazon, check out
https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Board-Grow-Bloom-3000K/dp/B078P484HD/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1518020586&sr=8-4&keywords=Horticulture+Lighting+Group
You can do 1-2 of those for a 2x2 space and they're actually from HLG, not some unknown vendor, so you know what you're getting.

And free 2day shipping if you have prime!

*Edit: HLGs page in case you want to check out some of the info/reviews
https://horticulturelightinggroup.com/products/hlg-65
Click to expand...
I went ahead and pulled the trigger on buying one of those for the time being, Unfortunetly I'm stuck w the mars hydro, so my thoughts were a 4x2 tent with that quantum board and the mh300.. What are you thoughts for this run? Make that big of a difference between using two of those instead of one and one? Lemme kno what you think
 
yankeeny20

yankeeny20

Active Member
SirDirkDiggler420 said:
I went ahead and pulled the trigger on buying one of those for the time being, Unfortunetly I'm stuck w the mars hydro, so my thoughts were a 4x2 tent with that quantum board and the mh300.. What are you thoughts for this run? Make that big of a difference between using two of those instead of one and one? Lemme kno what you think
Click to expand...
I've had mine running for about a week now and I do notice my plants growing significantly faster. The heat is a little more manageable as well especially since I have it in a small box 18" x 24". Basically it seems to be giving better results than the vipar600 which might be similar to the mars, not sure.

I actually have the 260w xl kit in my 2' x 4' tent and it works great. I ordered that one thru growerslights.
 
Last edited:
B

boostedhonda

Well-Known Member
I would run the quantum board , take the drivers out of the mars and use them to make 2 cob lights. Run the quantum in the center and the cobs on the outside. That would be the cheapest way to get the most light, but If u are not into diy then running the mars with the quantum should give u decent results
 
InTheValley

InTheValley

Well-Known Member
Tellin ya, If you have a Mars300, Get lenses, and change the diodes if your handish.

1500+ PAR with Factory spectrum, but the spectrum blows. Change out all the diodes, replace with 3500K, 4000K, and 8 Fulspec diodes. If your bored, have at it. Ull be freakin amazed.

Lenses $9
Diodes $10 maybe,

Not many other "Chinese" blurple even came close to the Mars300 with lenses.

so dont throw it away, hook it up like i said above, Makes a badass veg light, and flowered reallly good, tillyou get black mold or something;/ like I did, lol..

I vegged for 30 days, pulled out males, then scrogged. Grow was total shit the entire time, my first really grow, didnt know much, coco, UGGGGG.

anyways, got black mold on stems, trashed, sanitized, moved to different location out of the basement,.

Couldnt keep humidity down, was 77% from start to finish, smh..

I had to keep it atleast 30inches from canopy, to strong. I also did 3 leafstrips,
 

Attachments

Last edited:
[]D[][]\/[][]D

[]D[][]\/[][]D

Member
InTheValley said:
Tellin ya, If you have a Mars300, Get lenses, and change the diodes if your handish.

1500+ PAR with Factory spectrum, but the spectrum blows.
Click to expand...
This makes no sense, PAR specifically measures intensity at the usable spectrum, hence the name "photosynthetically active radiation"

Maybe you meant coverage? Like if that 1500par was only available in the center of the light at a few inches that's not so great
 
InTheValley

InTheValley

Well-Known Member
Yes, correct, Footprint at 18 inches is about 8x8 inches, BUT, because its so intense, you can raise it to 30 inches and get pretty good coverage and still get around 900, which is very good.

I posted pics above using it.
 
[]D[][]\/[][]D

[]D[][]\/[][]D

Member
InTheValley said:
Yes, correct, Footprint at 18 inches is about 8x8 inches, BUT, because its so intense, you can raise it to 30 inches and get pretty good coverage and still get around 900, which is very good.

I posted pics above using it.
Click to expand...
Oh cool, I missed the pics :P

So you're using the white spectrum eh? It is my unprofessional and probably stupid understanding that much of white spectrum is also a waste of power because of the intensity outside of the PAR range. The 1st generation blurple lights sucked because while they had the idea right, they missed the spectrum and used really inefficient phosphor to color the LEDs.

Do you know the beam angle on those lenses (60deg or 90deg?)?
I am doing a similar project :p
 
InTheValley

InTheValley

Well-Known Member
Cool man, have fun on the project. These are 120deg, or they said so anyways,lol..

It wasnt really just white. it was like 30pc 4000k, 15pc 3000k ( mars factory diodes) 7 reds ( factory diodes) and 8 fullspec diodes, to that effect. Id have to look for the ratio i put in. I kept all the Mars white diodes and most red, and took all the rest out and replaced.

Even tho the green/yellow spec waves arnt used PRIMARILY, those waves do help in CO2 uptake for the plant.
 
[]D[][]\/[][]D

[]D[][]\/[][]D

Member
nfhiggs said:
Your understanding is incorrect. "White light" falls entirely within the par range.
Click to expand...
Yes it falls within the par range but my understanding is that only 20% of the ~550nm (green) spectrum is used for photosynthesis.

So if you can shine 50,000 LUX onto a surface and 1/4 of that intensity is in the green spectrum, the only 20% of that light in that spectrum is being used for photosynthesis.
This was my understanding of it and I thought this is the reasoning behind why some grow LEDs are the color they are.

Am I missing something?
Par_action_spectrum.gif pl11772068-remark.jpg
 
Buds.on.a.budget

Buds.on.a.budget

Well-Known Member
The McCree Curve indicates nothing about an ideal plant light profile. A growth light matching the McCree
Curve would not be ideal, it probably is a relatively decent spectrum, but that is just circumstantial. This is a very
common misconception about plant lighting which escapes many designers who try to match the McCree curve
profile.

Not my words.. copied from "inda grow"
 
[]D[][]\/[][]D

[]D[][]\/[][]D

Member
nfhiggs said:
Yes. Stop looking at dissolved cyanobacterial chlorophyll charts and look up "Mcree curve" which is based on whole leave studies of terrestrial plants, not algae and cyanobacteria. The Mcree curve looks nothing like that chart you posted.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the knowledge, I did end up learning about the mcree curve.
I found this material from a MSU lecture:
http://leds.hrt.msu.edu/assets/Meeting/Optimal-spectrum.pdf

It does seem to find that chlorophyll absorbs minimal green light, it is 20% less effective on the mcree curve than red in terms of quantum absorption and is more costly amperage wise to run.
But in the same slideshow there are data points showing that the white light outperforms the blue/red one they're using so 3500k white seems to be a good spectrum.

Thanks
 
Humple

Humple

Well-Known Member
[]D[][]\/[][]D said:
Thanks for the knowledge, I did end up learning about the mcree curve.
I found this material from a MSU lecture:
http://leds.hrt.msu.edu/assets/Meeting/Optimal-spectrum.pdf

It does seem to find that chlorophyll absorbs minimal green light, it is 20% less effective on the mcree curve than red in terms of quantum absorption and is more costly amperage wise to run.
But in the same slideshow there are data points showing that the white light outperforms the blue/red one they're using so 3500k white seems to be a good spectrum.

Thanks
Click to expand...
Poke around here in the LED section for a while. Look at some of the grow journals. Read some of the scientific discourse that goes on between the manufacturers and the more educated LED grow-light veterans. You'll soon discover that despite any of the theory, these white lights just kick ass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top