BML Spyder600 Review
- Thread starter Bricksquad2625
- Start date
5suns
Member
Manufacturers recommended 36" above canopy on double ended HPS.
FauxRoux
Well-Known Member
As I mentioned the Amare 880 is comprised of 4xSE220's...if that spectrometer is like the machine they back in college the umol rating in the video is the overall light rating for the light...height wont be a factor inside that machine.... the Amare claim probably is for the complete 880 ...but without a spectrometer its pretty hard to verify ANY umol claims.....
So im not sure what you want man...unless your going to spring for a spectrometer your going to have to take either the manufacturer or some other trusted source at their word. Everything to a point is conjecture. Follow the evidence as far as it goes and then trust your gut.
I thought the same thing man. The only way I find that to be fair is that with un-vented hoods (which I believe those were) its fair to measure umol's from the height you would actually be able to use the lights at without burning.
Last edited:
5suns
Member
Before I pull the trigger, I want to be comfortable in my decision. I guess I was hoping a manufacturer to at least send off their light to have the same test or similar performed to back any umol claims. Saying that the AmareTech doesn't get bad marks simply because no one has put an SE220 in the same integrating sphere is like saying Get the Mars II because they haven't had the test performed either. Going off of numbers alone, and trusting the manufacturer's, they are all bullshitting because the test umol numbers don't always match the stated umol numbers. I'm going to assume some of the manufacturers were forced to change their stated numbers once the tests came out so they just opted for new model numbers instead. This is definitely true for LSG and Black Dog. They have new products now and don't list the old ones on their site.
LSG VividGro - 664 umol test - n/a stated - 1.7 umol/J
Neosol DS - 744 umol test - 720 umol stated - 1.45 umol/J
CLW 880 - 811 umol test - 3694 umol stated* - 1.3 umol/J
BlackDog Platinum XL-U - 842 umol test - 1.14 umol/J
BML Spydr 1000 - 900 umol - 1.73 umol/J
BML Spydr 1200 - 1163 umol - 1000-1250 umol stated - 1.67 umol/J
*CLW claims a very high number Luminous output measured using a spectrometer radiometer with NIST traceable calibration (calibration certificate available upon request.) Measurements are adjusted to account for plant spectral absorption according to DIN 5031-10
The new LSG VividGro V2 claims 1081 umol/sec at center beam (another manufacturer trick?) and fixture efficiency at 1.838 umol/J
LSG VividGro - 664 umol test - n/a stated - 1.7 umol/J
Neosol DS - 744 umol test - 720 umol stated - 1.45 umol/J
CLW 880 - 811 umol test - 3694 umol stated* - 1.3 umol/J
BlackDog Platinum XL-U - 842 umol test - 1.14 umol/J
BML Spydr 1000 - 900 umol - 1.73 umol/J
BML Spydr 1200 - 1163 umol - 1000-1250 umol stated - 1.67 umol/J
*CLW claims a very high number Luminous output measured using a spectrometer radiometer with NIST traceable calibration (calibration certificate available upon request.) Measurements are adjusted to account for plant spectral absorption according to DIN 5031-10
The new LSG VividGro V2 claims 1081 umol/sec at center beam (another manufacturer trick?) and fixture efficiency at 1.838 umol/J
BM9AGS
Well-Known Member
It's word of mouth from a top secret/SCI informant.
5suns
Member
Travis who works at BML sent me a PM over on Reddit and said "we are introducing new products later this year. I can't give you a specific time frame, but wanted to be upfront in case you wanted to wait. I'll extend the same price whether you choose to buy now or wait for the next-gen system."
FauxRoux
Well-Known Member
First off...NO ONE said this.
I jumped around a bit in my answer earlier so maybe you misunderstood me, (or maybe I didn't speak clearly).
You said.
I maintain that the ONLY thing you can do, especially if in your view most companies are misrepresenting their performance
Best of luck
I said.
I would LOVE to see a SE-220 in a similar test and I agree with you that it would be fantastic if more of them were made. Even better if companies sought that kind of verification/transparency.
I jumped around a bit in my answer earlier so maybe you misunderstood me, (or maybe I didn't speak clearly).
You said.
I replied.
What I feel it comes down to and what I was trying to say.
I maintain that the ONLY thing you can do, especially if in your view most companies are misrepresenting their performance
Is to...
And buy whatever seems right to YOU for YOUR space/needs based on the information you find valid.
Best of luck
Last edited:
pop22
Well-Known Member
5suns
Member
Sounds like you're taking this personal. Didn't mean it that way at all. Just stating that it would be foolish for anyone to purchase a high dollar product based on "I haven't heard anything bad about it." I researched Mars II for a long time before I found people with consistent negative reviews of the product. I would never buy a Mars II now that I have seen enough of the bad ones. As for AmareTech, about the only person who gives solid feedback (good and bad) about the SE-220 is petflora. That dude is on a mission to sell those. ha ha. I'm not dropping that much cash simply from the rating a product off of a couple of veg cycles and single person who sounds like they've used it for an extended period. At least with BML, CLW, Black Dog, Illumitex and LSG there are numbers that someone has verified. I can't find anything with AmareTech. Maybe I'm googling this wrong?
Like I said, I'm just here to research and make the best decision. I've been a member of many forums and I like to talk to people who are here, and also people who might later come here to read about it. (That's how I ended up here - Google). So if anyone was reading this thread, I was brainstorming for them as well.
I think it's safe to say that the AmareTech is overpriced at $695 for a 220 watt system. The BML-600 can be had for $900. Those are my opinions.
FauxRoux
Well-Known Member
Naa man im not taking it personal at all. Just sounded like you were taking things in a whole different direction then i was saying.
I agree with you that amare does NOT have a reputation at this point 1 way or the other and for most it wouldnt be wise to make a huge investment without solid data. But having said that if folks dont trust the company in question for honest specs then we as the customers/community must lead the charge... In other words its gotta start somewhere.
Its why i said before that if i had the time i would wait for the new bml's to come out. And may in fact get some when they do depending on how things go.
When i finish this first round with the amares i will post my finding for sure. So far its going quite well in week 2 of flower.
Also unless im wrong doesnt the bml 600 use 300w? Thus making the price difference comparable?
I agree with you that amare does NOT have a reputation at this point 1 way or the other and for most it wouldnt be wise to make a huge investment without solid data. But having said that if folks dont trust the company in question for honest specs then we as the customers/community must lead the charge... In other words its gotta start somewhere.
Its why i said before that if i had the time i would wait for the new bml's to come out. And may in fact get some when they do depending on how things go.
When i finish this first round with the amares i will post my finding for sure. So far its going quite well in week 2 of flower.
Also unless im wrong doesnt the bml 600 use 300w? Thus making the price difference comparable?
5suns
Member
Whether you believe it or not man, you're actually helping me understand all of this more and more and I appreciate you taking the time to go through all of my points with points of your own.
The BML 600 is 330W but replaces a 1000 watt HPS (PAR for PAR). They use passive heat sinks whereas the SE-220 uses fans. I can't figure out what SE-220 is replacing, so I can't say.
When you received your AmareTech SE-220x4 lights, did you get a spec sheet or something? Because I can't find any of the information you have been providing me with on their site.
The BML 600 is 330W but replaces a 1000 watt HPS (PAR for PAR). They use passive heat sinks whereas the SE-220 uses fans. I can't figure out what SE-220 is replacing, so I can't say.
When you received your AmareTech SE-220x4 lights, did you get a spec sheet or something? Because I can't find any of the information you have been providing me with on their site.
the BML 600 will replace a 600 watt hps. not a 1000 watt hps.
from their website:
"the SPYDR 600 LED lighting system uses an amazing 50% less electricity to deliver the same light level as 600W High Pressure Sodium lights (HPS)."
they also claim that the bml 600 could replace a 1000 watt hps in some greenhouse applications. but that's really a stretch, perhaps as a daylight supplemental.
FauxRoux
Well-Known Member
No spec sheet. The specs i posted were the response i got from amare when i requested them. Amare was quite transparent about info when i asked for it. If you want any clarification i would write them.
The amare's have a computer fan in them which is probably no more then 5-10w and 4 pretty decent sized heatsinks. 1 above every cob/diode cluster
The amare's have a computer fan in them which is probably no more then 5-10w and 4 pretty decent sized heatsinks. 1 above every cob/diode cluster
5suns
Member
Yes, from their website, they list a 1000 watt in greenhouse applications. As you know, 1000 watt hps =/= all 1000 watt hps, the way LED giving great results =/= all LED giving great results.
"Due to an innovative optical system, the SPYDR 600 can provide the same PPFD (PAR) levels as 1000W HPS and Metal Halide (MH) fixtures in many greenhouse applications. "
Most people who use a 1000W HPS are either commerical growers or overzealous diy growers. It's truly overkill for many tent growers. The majority of people growing in tents only need a 600W at most, many could do a 400W HID light. So a Spydr 600 will do great for me.
PSUAGRO.
Well-Known Member
LSG vividgrow v2 claiming 1.84umol/j ! using 450/660nm spec , I can take a bet on who's diodes are involved
https://www.lsgc.com/products/vividgro-v2-grow-fixture?variant=3852683205 call for pricing, lol
https://www.lsgc.com/products/vividgro-v2-grow-fixture?variant=3852683205 call for pricing, lol
Last edited:
5suns
Member
Maybe you skipped over the Utah State study of the 600W Spydr, same PAR as 1000w HPS. Do you know the PAR output of a 1000W HPS mounted at manufacturers recommended height of 36"?
It's marketing for pretty much any other company other than BML. They have the proof. There are some very detailed studies performed with the 1200 and 600. You should check them out. 1200 is aimed more at commercial growers using CO2. I'm growing in a 4x4 tent. If you want to know about marketing, talk to an HPS bulb manufacturer about their PAR readings from 15" and 27". lol How is that even legitimate? You ever see someone mount a 1000w HPS 15" from canopy?
Below is another Spydr 1200 review.
http://www.bmlhorticulture.com/content/files/BML_SPYDR_1200_Cannabis_LED_Case_Study.pdf
5suns
Member
VividGro v1 was tested at 1.7 umol/j. I don't think 1.84 is too far fetched, but I agree with you, it would be nice to get a standard test facility that would do the same tests to all of these fixtures. It would separate the BS from the real.LSG vividgrow v2 claiming 1.84umol/j ! using 450/660nm spec , I can take a bet on who's diodes are involved
https://www.lsgc.com/products/vividgro-v2-grow-fixture?variant=3852683205 call for pricing, lol
sorry buddy its pure marketing as in its NOT possible to get the same amount of photons out of a BML 600 as a 1000 watt HPS.
Your comparing an input source of ~330 watts vs. ~1200 watts. you can do all the playing around with spectrum as you want, but a top of the line 1000 watt HPS will smoke a single BML 600.