I guess it's more like the simulator for the Q-series is completely unreliable. Indeed I see it produces incredibly unlikely numbers and wild swings with small changes.
In the real world you could use a 20% bigger alu U-profile to compensate. To be honest, I doubt either of them will ever run at 40C.
On efficacy, yes, but cost per strip is lower on the Q - by about $2 for the 22". - and running them hotter - up to 900 mA - shows you really don't need a larger number of strips
That's still not how that works.
If the strips will put out nearly equal efficacy and light levels at a given current (900 mA and lower), then yes it IS how it works. I can replace six F strips with six cheaper Q strips, run them with the exact same driver and get the same results (within a few percentage point of variance). I'm simply replacing a softy run strip with one running harder. The only drawback is I can't run them as hard as I can run the F series. I don't see that as a negative unless I am trying to cut the cost to the bare minimum - in that instance the F strips win out. But if the cheapest option is your goal then you may as well use HPS, no?
Come on man, it's clear the Q simulator is broken from 3500K and up. You don't get 6% extra efficacy going from 3000K to 3500K. That's what you would get for going from 3000K to 4000K. Actually not even then.
Again, that is not how it works. The way to properly compare led strips is by comparing them on equal efficacy. Or if that is impossible or not sensible, you'd need to add running costs for a number of years. That's where HPS loses out.
Plenty of people choose 3500K so I will dispute the second part of that, but for arguments sake, fine, lets just consider the 3000k numbers since the calculator does have duplicated values at 4000k and 5000k for the Q's.
Again, that's not how it works. You need to compare them at equal efficacy. To get 10% higher efficacy means you need to reduce the power by 50%. That's where the real difference is.
No, I really don't. I can make any comparison I wish. You just don't want to accept that. I am not comparing efficacy - I am merely NOTING very similar efficacy. I am comparing TOTAL LIGHT OUTPUT at the same current and (very nearly) the same wattage (there is a 0.1W difference). And it is almost the same to within 1% - and that equates to a one for one replacement when running at 900 mA and below. Really, what part of that do you not get? Its just like replacing 100W incandescent bulbs with 14W LED bulbs in my house - I don't need to match efficacy numbers to compare them, I just want to know if they put out the same amount of light when I plug them in.
Sure you can but it's pointless.
No, I'm clearly not, you keep droning on and on and on and on about this.
See? There you go again. And you are still wrong about this. Seriously what is your problem? You know what, I don't care what your problem is.
That's a 350mA driver though.
But I will get a kit or fixture. I could build one but i dont mind paying a bit extra and having it all look awesome. And after 1 grow the lights are paid for with my personal consumption savings.
