dont mention LED's

[my my]

I agree NorCal.
I have not gotten a power bill since i took the T-5 out and put the LED's in its place...
keep in mind before you look at the girl under my 1K...
the girl under the LED lights, i thinned the heck out of.....
both th eled girl an dth e1K have been in flower the same amount of time... the girl under the 1K has been around for about 5 months before i flowered her tho,, th eled girl was a clone from a sister plant under the 1K
and i use the 1K to also help heat the building the girls are in..
So it is going to be next spring before i am able to give my LED's a fair complete grow....
In the summer months i had to use a 600 instead of the 1K becouse of heat, even with a water chiller...
so i will be excited to see the difference next summer.

 

[WeedHopper]

Thats what I was thinking Norcal. I grew bigger nugs with T5s. But to each his own. I do like the idea of LEDs,,just dont see them replacing HPS for Flower or T5s for Vegging,,, anytime soon. I look for Lumens per watt,,and the best BANG for my buck. LEDS do not give the Lumens and penetration ya need for good Bud. Maybe some day,,not just yet though.

 

[The Hemp Goddess]

I purchased a watt miser today to check what the LEDs were pulling comparred to the 1000w HPS they are replacing. I calculated the wattage per light by simply counting the LEDs X wattage (3 watt each) = 270 watts per unit. I have 6 Apollo 6's so that's a total of 1620 watts. Ha-ha...no wonder my plants are doing so well, I probably could've gotten by with the Apollo 4's. The LEDs put out alot more of the "useable" spectrum to the plant so the wattage doesn't need to be as high as HIDs. I plan to disconnect two of the fixtures in each unit and see how the plants respond.

Well, back to the watt mizer. Altho the fixture has 270 watts worth of bulbs it is only pulling 194 watts at the outlet. With all 6 units plugged in, that then drew a total of 1128 watts, rather then the calculated 1620 watts. Putting 2 fixtures in each unit out of service will reduce that by one third.

Hope that helps!

Niteshift--I'm confused...I do not understand this. If it is only pulling 194 watts how could it possibly be putting out 270 watts--electricity does not work that way. Are these not really 270W, but actually 194W? So the bulbs are not drawing/emitting 270W? :confused2:

 

[NorCalHal]

The newer LED's are much improved from what they were for sure.
It is an alternitive for folks in different growing situations.

 

[nouvellechef]

Ahh. Putting it so sweet..

 

[NorCalHal]

Haha Chef! I'm getting nicer in my old age....

 

[niteshft]

Niteshift--I'm confused...I do not understand this. If it is only pulling 194 watts how could it possibly be putting out 270 watts--electricity does not work that way. Are these not really 270W, but actually 194W? So the bulbs are not drawing/emitting 270W? :confused2:

I don't know THG, I just did the math and compared that to the meter. Maybe someone with more knowledge on how LED wattage @ 12v compared to HID at 120v is calculated will chime in. Maybe the LEDs aren't drawing the full power and there's head room....I just don't know.

In all honesty, comparing LEDs to HIDs is like comparing apples to oranges. Sure, the HIDs are putting out more lumens but they are nothing but street lamps that have been tweaked a little bit to put out more of the specific wavelength that the plant can use but those lights can be tweaked just so much. Only about 10% of the wavelengths they put out can actually be used by the plant. LEDs on the other hand can be manufactured to put out a specific wavelength to match what the plant needs, with the exception for ultraviolet but that can be filled in with an aquarium bulb as it doesn't need much. (I don't use any).

I have some Big Bud coming down the pike so we'll see how that does as far as bud size and density and will likely be doing it with 2 of the fixtures in each unit disabled. The buds on my Haze came out just as good, if not better, than any Haze I've done to date under 1000w HID, without the leaf loss I usually get late in flowering.

I should've taken harvest shots but the lower section is still in flower and I'll try and get a shot or two today. I was surprised to see how well the lower buds did under the LEDs, expecting to see less penetration therefor, lighter buds, but that wasn't the case. I rarely harvest my plants in stages and just throw the lower buds in with the trim for hash or whatever but the lower buds on this plant were so firm that I decided to save them.

 

[P Jammers]

UV and Blue LEDs run at 3.8V input voltage; Red LED run at 2.6V input voltage; IR LED run at 1.7V input voltage. All run at 700mA input current.

If one was to search the standard Apollo 6 they would see a wattage given, however if they are tweaked to a specific design like I did with these the actual wattage is changed, hence the power draw shown by your meter NS.

It's pretty standard for a company to give a wattage based on the combination of bulbs at 3 watts each, meaning if the cluster has 40 bulbs at 3 watts each they will call it 120 watts. That said if the colors are more red the wattage will drop, and visa versa.

Each of your lights are 194 watts which if you were comparing to an HPS bulb you are getting about the effectiveness of a 400 watt HPS bulb for each fixture, which is why you are seeing an increase of lower flowers, and not the typical popcorn seen from HPS bulbs.

I also wanted to note for Niteshft since I am no longer a member of another site where I was sharing info as I heard through the grapevine.

I was under the impression when you asked for my help that you wanted to make your plants increase yield, and because your legal numbers were a concern you asked me what "I" would do. I was never under the impression that you were trying to save on power, so we tried to match what you were running power wise but increase effectiveness.

If I steered you wrong I am sorry for that, as well as My My. Neither of you ever mentioned you wanted to save on power, so in both cases I doubled your intensity while pretty much keeping total power consumption the same.

I am glad to hear that your results have gotten better making the switch, as that was the intention I had in mind.

Rule of thumb in case that info has gotten crossed. A 300 watt LED has the effectiveness or useable light of a 600 watt HPS setup. A lot of companies say it is about three times, but the real facts are closer to about twice the amount of useable light.

Hope that clears up some info for you.

PJ

 

[Locked]

Thanks for clearing that up PJ...

 

[my my]

Thanks PJ,
I am fine with the LED's...
For my case however, i do nto think they are going to work out well in the winter months for me...
But will really help out in the summer time...
Again Thanks PJ...
BTW.
Miss ya!
My My

 

[WeedHopper]

I cant see any 300 watt LED having more effectiveness or penatration(which you need) then a 600 watt HPS.
Im not trying to give ya a hard time Bro,,but some of these things dont add up.

 

[niteshft]

Well, that clears a couple of things up for me but most importantly, PJ is the same PJ from "that" other site, lol. Cool as I was hoping to be able to keep in touch.....I missed ya too, man.

No problems with the LEDs on my end either. Like I said, I'll disable a couple of the fixtures in the unit and go from there.

 

[Locked]

I cant see any 300 watt LED having more effectiveness or penatration(which you need) then a 600 watt HPS.
Im not trying to give ya a hard time Bro,,but some of these things dont add up.

I think the effectiveness comes from them not wasting power on the unusable light spectrum. I believe an HPS puts out a lot of spectrum that the plant does not use. Not to mention all the power going towards the heat the HPS creates. Jmo

 

[P Jammers]

I cant see any 300 watt LED having more effectiveness or penatration(which you need) then a 600 watt HPS.
Im not trying to give ya a hard time Bro,,but some of these things dont add up.

Not sure where you are reading where I said that a 300 watt LED has more effectiveness than a 600 watt HPS?

I said it is equal too. LED's have twice the amount of useable light per watt.

I have also answered the penetration question. Growing and flowering with LED's is different in that you do not grow trees.

What the normal guy grows with HPS at 4 feet can be accomplished at about 2 feet with LED's.

Not sure what does not add up for you, or make sense?

Help me understand what you don't think adds up and maybe I can help you understand.

Again, LED's are not going to be for everyone, but for someone just getting started, or wanting to cut your overall cost over time, they are a no brainer.

 

[Roddy]

What the normal guy grows with HPS at 4 feet can be accomplished at about 2 feet with LED's.

Maybe I missed something, but how is this possible without making the plant 2x as big around? A plant will only produce so much regardless of lights, right?

 

[niteshft]

That is quite a bold statement...not your every day grower is going to acomplish that, IMO.

Well anyway, here are the pics I promised. The first two are the tub of buds and what was left after the chop, still alot there to harvest. The rest are just randome shots of the lower buds.

 

[Growdude]

Rule of thumb in case that info has gotten crossed. A 300 watt LED has the effectiveness or useable light of a 600 watt HPS setup.
PJ

Then why did you replace your 2, 1000 watt setups with 6 appolo 10's?

I thought the whole idea was to save money on electricity costs?
For questionable results we should be drawing about half power.

 

[P Jammers]

What the normal guy grows with HPS at 4 feet can be accomplished at about 2 feet with LED's.

Maybe I missed something, but how is this possible without making the plant 2x as big around? A plant will only produce so much regardless of lights, right?

Good question, and I will explain. [Again let me preface this by stating that this is with an LED I designed, and not ALL LED's are the same. This also is not any of the lights shown in this thread or discussed]

If one uses LED's to veg plants stacking of nodes is very tight. Stretch in flowering is very limited creating plants that are extremely tight, however you are able to obtain the same amount, and in some cases more, and some less, but as a general rule more bud sites PSF per plant.

Your A typical plant that stretched to 4 feet and went 2 to 3 zips just finished at 2 feet and yielded exactly the same.

Exhibit A

This is a Blue Meanie clone only I run. This plant was 18" tall at the finish. It yielded 54grams of medicine.


Hope that all made sense.

 

[P Jammers]

Then why did you replace your 2, 1000 watt setups with 6 appolo 10's?

I thought the whole idea was to save money on electricity costs?
For questionable results we should be drawing about half power.

When I ran 2 1000's I used and still use an HID-2 light controller and I flip flopped back and forth every three hours within a 12 hr period.

I tested the theory back when I ran HPS, and saw no loss, or gain.

Well maybe a little gain back in my pocket and not in the electrical companies.

 

[Roddy]

Good question, and I will explain. [Again let me preface this by stating that this is with an LED I designed, and not ALL LED's are the same. This also is not any of the lights shown in this thread or discussed]

If one uses LED's to veg plants stacking of nodes is very tight. Stretch in flowering is very limited creating plants that are extremely tight, however you are able to obtain the same amount, and in some cases more, and some less, but as a general rule more bud sites PSF per plant.

Your A typical plant that stretched to 4 feet and went 2 to 3 zips just finished at 2 feet and yielded exactly the same.

Exhibit A

This is a Blue Meanie clone only I run. This plant was 18" tall at the finish. It yielded 54grams of medicine.
View attachment 197178

Hope that all made sense.

It made sense, but I have a hard time believing this is the case time after time. Simply put, I have grown and am growing gals that would be hard-pressed to fit additional bud sites on....

If your claim might have been faster grow rates due to better light usage, I'd have been on the bus, but I'm having a hard time with your statement claiming more sites/shorter gal.