LED vs HPS again... pre-experiment.

Over the past 3 months or so I've been extensively researching the LED story, from the claims of LED salesmen to the great controversy surrounding them and their efficacy. So here is my breakdown of what I've learned so far (in order):

1. The first LEDs were really bad, stay away from the low watt models.
2. LED lights emit specific wavlengths of light to match the PAR spectrum and create less heat.
3. LED manufacturers greatly inflate the claims of performance of LED lights based on the above.
4. HPS is still superior.
5. LED lights come in a wide variety of quality/price/efficiency.
6. Finding a quality LED light for a reasonable price is exceedingly difficult.
7. There is a great bias towards LEDs, partly due to early models, partly due to the lies/fake videos online.
8. The PAR spectrum isnt completely accurate to measure photosynthesis due to testing methods biased towards algae in a test tube etc, see www.pcp.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/4/684.full

With those points made, there are even further reasons why LED's are so controversial. Why are there so many LED vs HPS threads EVERYWHERE? Because as soon as someone asks "Is led better than hps", some say "no, hps is better", some say "no, LED is better". And then of the people who have actually tried both, and tried a decent LED system, some will say "I tried LEDs im sticking with HPS", some "I tried LEDs and I will never go back". The common theme being LED is good for veg, and in flower actually makes better bud, but not enough (less than half) of HPS.

So whats the next step? You search for led vs hps grow journals/vids/harvests... but even those are laced with complications. Are the people testing true watts of LED? Are they SELLING these lights? Are they controlling variables adequately (seperate rooms, same nutes/medium etc)?

You'd think with all the scientific knowledge (right down to the photochemical equations governing photosynthesis) that by now we would be able to determine what the best lighting system is, but even the scientific side has opposing theories lost in the complications. Why the hell cant we just get a straight answer? Why aren't more people testing LED directly against HID? >

It seems that if I want a real answer I'll have to do it myself.

I ordered two custom 15 spectrum apollo LED 135w actual (including fans), with UV, IR, and WHITE (kelvin rating converted to nm for green/cartenoid absorption). Each of the 15 diodes on a module is a different wavelength, a combination of the wavelengths used by top LED companies and my own research. The reason I went for a broader spectrum is because the PAR spectrum isnt quite up to PAR , and there is also a quantum light effect (forget what its called) that says lights of different wavelengths can synergise to greatly enhance photosynthesis.

I also have a "US made" 135w (90w actual) 7-band UFO which is more concentrated on the typical 430, 460, 630, and 660, but also has the same IR, UV, and WHITE as the apollo's.

I will be using a two tray 8 plant NFT hydro system. Strains I have at my disposal: 10xBDS Blue Mystic regular, 1xUFO#1 CH9 Blue Lemon Thai Female, 1xUFO #2 CH9 Female Seeds Cluster. And finally, 10xRare Dankness OG Ghost Train Haze #1.

First I will pit one of the apollos against the UFO in a grow down to determine if the broader spectrum is better, while also using colloidal silver to make some femenized seeds for the next experiment. At the flower switch I will swap some of the plants around so that both lights are flowering plants vegged under the opposing light (maybe the ufo is better for veg, and the apollo is better for flower or vica versa). The limitations of this experiment will be that there will be males, and hence a possibly dispropotionate amount of females under each light and also they are different watts, but it should give me a general idea of the comparitive efficacy of the two. I know 135 + 90 = 225w isnt really enough for 8 plants, I use watts required = first plant 100w then 50w per additional plant so that should be 100 + 7x50= 450w. Should be fine for veg though, which means im actually hoping for about 4 males. leaving 100w + 3x50w = 250w

The next experiment will be the real kicker, given that the apollo kicks the UFO's ass. I will use BOTH apollo4's (270w total actual) against a 250w cooltubed HID system. The extra 20 watts for the LED account for the fans, and also HID uses a bit more than stated due to ballasts etc so I think this accounts for it nicely. The problem is I havent researched HID nearly as extensively as LED, but from what I gather I should use an electronic ballast, and I can get away with using a MH conversion bulb in the HPS ballast.

So I will use MH for veg, HPS for flower, VS the two apollo4's throughout on a total of 8 femenized (hopefully) plants, 4 each, SEPERATED from each other. Yes this is only a pre-experimental thread so that I can get this down properly. Should I swap out half the plants under the HID/LED test at flower as per the UFO/Apollo test?

After THAT experiment I will see if I get better yeilds by using the two 135w LEDS in combination either side of the 250w HPS for flower...maybe eventually a perpetual system vegging under the 90w UFO and flowering under the 520w HPS/LED combo.

Having said that the only people I want to hear from on the LED/HPS debate are those who have used BOTH led AND hps for flower and determined for themselves which is better. Anyone can comment on the upcoming experiments. Keep it civil and back up your statements with logic, not flaming.

Check out GROWINGFORFREEDOM on youtube. Sublbc just ran leds and trashed em. He put up 250w hps in their place and watched his plants take off. I would say they are sub par from what i have seen and read. The technology is there, but has yey been perfected and at the moment they are ridiculously expensive for the results theu put out compared to H.I.D's. Am I a hater of leds? No, I just look at results and the science of things rather than speculate.

well im after havin a smoke just before i read this and its mad. how can u have an experiment that can tell u anything, unless u have a constant/comparison.
ur growin a lot of stuff under a lot of lights! any 1 of the seeds u use could be a dud.
clone some thing and get a comparison. my 2 cent on the leds is, plants from different parts of the world would get different light off the sun so if a company makes a flowering light then some plants will react differently because the spectrum of the led. if u want to grow a plant from anywhere some1 needs to go there and get a reading off the sun for a day in autum there and duplicate it.
people seems to think led can veg ok.
i was thinkin of gettin an apollo or a hans but im thinkin hans and some cfl and i would do an experiment but ill only have the 1 light.lol. i do hope to clone and on the second run use a different second light source doh. A CONSTANT!. lol. good luck with the grow
1 more thing i was reading some fella on to apollo they (apollo) recomended 2 his to turn the amps/volts (cant remember) down for longer led life. apollo are suppose to run their led a little higher than most and on readin (Leds are different – they are non-linear devices. A small increase in voltage causes a large increase in current, so a 10% increase in voltage may cause a 50% increase in current and goodbye led! full story. http://plantphotonics.com/LED_info.html. im thinkin hans. its good to share what do ya tink.lol

money doesnt seem to be ur problem so why get identical apollos. i would have changed 3/4 leds on1 and the other as recommended. as for the experiment. crack open 4of the unsext 1s and the 2 simular fems. get them flowering take cuttings to sex get red of unwanted males. then start. i
f u did at flowering point
clone blue mist and what ever under 1 apollo.
clone blue mist and ,,,,, under apollo and ufo
clone bluemist and ,,,, under hps
all clones off the 1 plant
u would have a comparison and i would follow it.
anything with a long name is trouble to grow and if u change from led to hps mid cycle there might be trouble. ive give u 5 cents worth

I use both HPS and LED for 2 different areas. I use a 740 watt LED in a small space for 6 plants and a 1000 watt HPS in another larger area for 16. The plants under the LEDs did not grow as large as the ones under the HPS, but have very good bud density and weight. The HPS produces a larger plant, no question, but the LED can work in areas that a HID light can't. I recently started using a VHO 8 lamp fixture that kicks ass. 157,000 lumens and your plants can almost touch it without heat damage. Grew some Ultimate under it from seedling to finish and I think it was better than both of them. The very high output makes a huge differance over a standard T5. Anyway, keep it green. Peace

Yeaaaa, Pet! Thought I was the only LED reg that browses the Setup Thread

Sounds like you need to delve into things a bit more OP, 15 separate nm's diodes are not going to give you what you want..

you obviously still haven't done all your research. and to top it all off you buy from another chinese company expecting the best results. i can see where this thread is going already. look at the led section and see our numbers, read about the good lights and inform yourself. this isnt even a debate anymore people are just to fucking stupid to read and get educated.

Alex281 said:

you obviously still haven't done all your research. and to top it all off you buy from another chinese company expecting the best results. i can see where this thread is going already. look at the led section and see our numbers, read about the good lights and inform yourself. this isnt even a debate anymore people are just to fucking stupid to read and get educated.

Click to expand...

Which is why if I ever decide to give it a shot, am going to DIY the LED with 3W, except for the UV which will be a few strategically placed 5W. I do not trust bulbs that I can not verify the origin of, no matter what the manufacturer says.

Figong said:

Which is why if I ever decide to give it a shot, am going to DIY the LED with 3W, except for the UV which will be a few strategically placed 5W. I do not trust bulbs that I can not verify the origin of, no matter what the manufacturer says.

Click to expand...

Seriously, read up dude

There was a thread that had stated the price for REAL...ACTUAL UV emitters- and they would blow your mind. and your wallet.

Not too mention you are talking about 5 watt UV diodes?! How much is this panel?

You guys 'member what Im talking about? I think FranJan...or 'Pheda posted it?? Or I think it may have been you Pet!? I cant recall which thread it was in...

Either way, point made- UV and IR chips are a tech that is even further out there than LED's themselves..

Stick to Reptibulbs for UVB, T5's or Floodlights

Scotch089 said:

Seriously, read up dude

There was a thread that had stated the price for REAL...ACTUAL UV emitters- and they would blow your mind. and your wallet.

Not too mention you are talking about 5 watt UV diodes?! How much is this panel?

You guys 'member what Im talking about? I think FranJan...or 'Pheda posted it?? Or I think it may have been you Pet!? I cant recall which thread it was in...

Either way, point made- UV and IR chips are a tech that is even further out there than LED's themselves..

Stick to Reptibulbs for UVB, T5's or Floodlights

Click to expand...

The panel would be quite expensive, and is why I said if I ever chose to do it - that said, LED is mostly new to me and am reading almost daily on it, no worries there.

I feel dumber after reading this thread.