You said: "The Bar-8 has a 1730 ppf dude. 2.8 UMOL/J set to 660w. 2.7 (2.689) @ 900w."
OK, how is 2.8 30% higher than 2.6?
And how much higher would the efficacy of the HLG be if dimmed the same percentage as the Amare?
Last edited:
Help me choose a 4x4flowertent light
- Thread starter evn_420
- Start date
OK, how is 2.8 30% higher than 2.6?
And how much higher would the efficacy of the HLG be if dimmed the same percentage as the Amare?
a mongo frog
Well-Known Member
Have you seen his bud? Who's growing better?
christopher jordan
Well-Known Member
If you want top bin diodes, you can order the 301h. It only comes in top bin.
christopher jordan
Well-Known Member
I think the larger factor is that the state subsidizes business.
hybridway2
Amare Shill
I guess even now knowledge here on components & light distribution is all well know. Some will continue to be in denial. Common sense dude.
hybridway2
Amare Shill
Pretty sure i stated at 660w somwhere. Unless i accidentally went of Mi-Gro's 2.0 for hlg in a reflector box. Still .6 or .7 is allot. Granted his flat - integration may depreciate Amares too.
But you can clearly see the difference between the 2, QB-550's vs a single Bar 8 in a 6x4.5. Although i don't own specifically the 550's i have one better & the Trinity which is now basically the Eco. So i have a clue dude. And a par meter showing this in my threads at various points.
Id like to see the Bar-8 in Shane's Box with his honest review too though to be fair.
Idk. 2.6 of a no ir spectrum (lost yield) & is that board or system?, W/ like 35% + less reds. Bar vs small, dense board distribution? What our plants see is what matters. Not the ceiling of a sphere. But that's another story.
Last edited:
christopher jordan
Well-Known Member
I really like Hybrid, but he said the China boards are 10 to 15% less efficient in his opinion. Same driver, and chips?
PrometheanLeaf
Well-Known Member
301b and 301h are the exact same diode.
christopher jordan
Well-Known Member
Yes, but binning is different. They only sell the 301h in top bin.
Humple
Well-Known Member
We can agree to disagree on that point. My common sense tells me that a company that's to be taken seriously will shell out the relatively small amount of coin required to have their claims verified by someone who doesn't have a vested interest.
Humple
Well-Known Member
You have something other than your personal experience to support the claim that IR equals more yield? That's a serious question, because that's not something I know to be an established fact.
hybridway2
Amare Shill
No, agreed, just cuz they have spheres doesn't make it not necessarily. Look how hard it makes it for me.
When using more of an equal to better diode with same or better drivers with way thicker thermal mngmt & all the options makes it common sense to me but i hear ya.
Commercial growers want to know.
Why tenters argue over .4 umols is beyond me.
hybridway2
Amare Shill
One you can check out is Bruce Bugbeees "Far Red, The forgotten photon".
Damn, everyone listened to what companies told them so to get max efficiency #'s off a par meter that does not read all photosynthetic points & not spend more money on much more expensive red chips. Smh!
Last edited:
hybridway2
Amare Shill
I've no recollection of this. Try not to speak much on things i have no experience with.
Idk if knock offs carry the same chips. I don't trust it but it's minute for immediate photons. Longevity, warranty & service are the issues id imagine would be the biggest difference.
Have noticed the knock-offs offer upgrades as well as spectral options.
dontgotochina
New Member
Airwalker can you helo me. Im into the 2nd week of flowering and a 14 hour light on cycle. Ive just gone down to turn them ON and one light 600 wt hadnt switched off so effectively they've had light for 24hrs. I turned light off and now they're in complete darkness. They're from seed and have been doing grt. What should I do. Some say leave them for 24hours in dark some say switch 12 to 12. First mistake ever like this.
Rocket Soul
Well-Known Member
Iirc chilledled hit 2.7 on their gen2 before the bar-8, on a independent sphere.
ChilLED Gen2 - LED Grow Light Module Lab Report
Photon Flux Test Report Test results reported for: Horticultural integrating sphere testing Samples Covered in Report: 1 Orb Optronix report: CHIH002-011 Original issue date: November 18, 2016 Revision Issue Date: November 21, 2016 2.1 REQUIREMENT: Luminaire Efficacy, Photometric and Radiometric...
chilledgrowlights.com
Rocket Soul
Well-Known Member
The bar-8 surely looks like an impressive light. What seems not mentioned here is that it has much better spread than a hlg550. I feel its pointless arguing the ppf/w without taking this into account. Wall losses account for a lot more than those measley little % people are arguing about.
The addition monos in order to target a hortispectrum seems to have a definite effect on growth but afaik it hasnt been proven properly. The last tests i saw the winner was a targeted white spectrum (@Grow Lights Australia high light) that won over qb96 and qb288 both with a load of monos added. All fixtures were tuned so ppfd was the same and spectrums were very similar.
The high lights won, just barely, on a bit more weight a bit faster finish and clearly better looking product/bag appeal. The results would have to be duplicated really but it also mirrors our own experience: blux eb gen 1 2700k 90cri (vestas) beat the crap out of samsung 3000k 80cri, even on lower power levels. So although id like to see more grows and info im leaning towards getting your spectrum tuned towards red already in your white diodes rather than adding monos later on. White diodes (and the blue they are based on) has superior performance in efficiency and as far as handling heat.
As for the rest of the discussion: theres definite difference in saying "this is better" and "i like this better". Without independent testing on both products its hard to say which is better but everbody can like their light. Its also a bit pointless for users to get wound up in repping lights, shouldnt the light makers make the case to us rather than us to eachother?
The addition monos in order to target a hortispectrum seems to have a definite effect on growth but afaik it hasnt been proven properly. The last tests i saw the winner was a targeted white spectrum (@Grow Lights Australia high light) that won over qb96 and qb288 both with a load of monos added. All fixtures were tuned so ppfd was the same and spectrums were very similar.
The high lights won, just barely, on a bit more weight a bit faster finish and clearly better looking product/bag appeal. The results would have to be duplicated really but it also mirrors our own experience: blux eb gen 1 2700k 90cri (vestas) beat the crap out of samsung 3000k 80cri, even on lower power levels. So although id like to see more grows and info im leaning towards getting your spectrum tuned towards red already in your white diodes rather than adding monos later on. White diodes (and the blue they are based on) has superior performance in efficiency and as far as handling heat.
As for the rest of the discussion: theres definite difference in saying "this is better" and "i like this better". Without independent testing on both products its hard to say which is better but everbody can like their light. Its also a bit pointless for users to get wound up in repping lights, shouldnt the light makers make the case to us rather than us to eachother?
Airwalker16
Well-Known Member
Just give them 13 hrs of dark, 11 of light for 2 days, then go to 12/12. You'll be just fine.
Humple
Well-Known Member
Very good video, with good info. But it doesn't come close to convincing me that - in a shade avoiding plant like cannabis - far red reliably increases yield over simply adding more "white light". If we were on lettuceitup.org, this would be a different conversation. I'm ready and willing to be convinced, however. Just give me something compelling that's cannabis-specific.
