Cheap and Cheerful DIY using Citizen cobs
- Thread starter JorgeGonzales
- Start date
JorgeGonzales
Well-Known Member
Having money left over for the old in-n-out with a gal is not the same thing.
JorgeGonzales
Well-Known Member
That's last generation as far as I know. Better off with the 3618, but I'd run 6 at 150W if you want to replace a 1000Wer. Citizen and my digitized data says that puts you at 2000 umols, combined with real world measurements, maybe a bit more. Harder to say at high currents.
Whats the price on those? I was thinking the clu550 at 250w would cost less than 250 but I didn't look up heatsink cost. And it might shut up all the hps guys that preach about penetration haha
JorgeGonzales
Well-Known Member
Actually this is something I discussed briefly with @Growmau5 in a PM, if you combined a couple of these https://www.cdiweb.com/ProductDetail/ICELEDULTRA-mechatronix/573532/ for $14 with a couple CLU058s running at 150W, you'd have a $200 monster, driver included. That's the loudest cheapest light I can think of.
No optics, though. Actually I think a 250W driver is better value. So an actual 250W replacement.
JorgeGonzales
Well-Known Member
What's wrong with them? Serious question. @nevergoodenuf mentioned but didn't necessarily recommend them to me.
I'd want a massive passive if I was building a 150W light for myself, but you mentioned cost.
Nothing is really wrong with them I just wasn't impressed they seem kinda cheap and I didn't like how the chips mounted to them I don't use them anymore I bought a heatsink usa bar and sold the lights that I made with those heatsinks but I know the grower that's been using them for like 6 months an they work fine I would go with pin heatsinks for future builds. There are some sweet looking high bay heatsinks but they don't show the price online
nevergoodenuf
Well-Known Member
There is nothing wrong with the CLU 550. It's just expensive at over $100 each. This is what I have been trying to show in my thread. Running Soft right now with 1800 watts, I am only using 12 COBs (about 60 square feet). I do have a CLU550 and CLU056 3618's in the mix. I will be updating my thread soon.
I would like to see some #'s to see the difference that $40 makes between the CLU058 and the CLU550 @ 200w and 250w.
I would like to see some #'s to see the difference that $40 makes between the CLU058 and the CLU550 @ 200w and 250w.
JorgeGonzales
Well-Known Member
Your thread is awesome.
According to Citizen, the CLU058-3618 is the better cob, and much cheaper as you said. But they are within a few lm/W at 250W, and same thermal resistance. Since the CLU058 is cheaper, well...no reason to upgrade the 550, or buy a 550 new I guess.
nevergoodenuf
Well-Known Member
There has to be some kind of advantage to the CLU550 over the CLU058 if you take price out of it, right?
JorgeGonzales
Well-Known Member
Not according to Citizen, no. The CLU550 is one generation back, like I said. So presumably the improved efficiency and thermal resistance of the CLU058-3618 more than makes up for the reduced die count.
Maybe the retail price of the CLU550 was simply higher and the old stock prices reflect that. I know CDI still sells the 0x6 series for the same prices as the 0x8, which makes zero sense.
weed-whacker
Well-Known Member
i think the clu550 is like 2x 300w cobs in one while the clu058 is a single 360w cobs
so in theory if we were to drive both cobs at say 100w then we would actually be driving 2 300w cobs at 50w vs 1 360w cob at 100
efficiency should be much higher, right?
so in theory if we were to drive both cobs at say 100w then we would actually be driving 2 300w cobs at 50w vs 1 360w cob at 100
efficiency should be much higher, right?
JorgeGonzales
Well-Known Member
Again, I can only tell you what Citizen says, the CLU058-3618 is newer and better at all currents. Even @ 300W.
nevergoodenuf
Well-Known Member
Are you sure Jorge??? I can't use excel, but the CLU058 @168 watts is 135 lm/w and the CLU550 @ 243 watts is 134 lm/w, according to CDIwebs pages.
JorgeGonzales
Well-Known Member
No, I'm never sure...let me check.
JorgeGonzales
Well-Known Member
Well, there's good news and bad news. The good news is we are both right, and the bad news is...well, it's the same thing.
The data sheet and spreadsheet don't match.
JorgeGonzales
Well-Known Member
Further investigation reveals that the data sheet is likely incorrect.
Temp vs vF chart:
Specs they are using for lm/W:
Notice the typical voltage is 112.3V. This makes little sense. It should be ~2x 52V, or exactly what the temp vs vF chart says. Somebody made a boo boo. That's errors I've found in Samsung, Bridgelux, and now Citizen data sheets. Jeez. And don't get me started on the Cree PCT.
nevergoodenuf
Well-Known Member
That duel input might be throwing it for a loop. So for me 243 watts @ 135 lumen per watt with the 3500K 80 cri