The Dawg House Grow Featuring Area-51 Leds
- Thread starter The Dawg
- Start date
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
You're in luck. Check out Astir Grow's LED thread on riu
El Superbeasto
Active Member
You sure spam that Astir LED a lot, and it's kind of bogus of you to do it in someone's grow journal.
Isn't it true your only LED experience whatsoever, is with a 90 watt UFO from 3 or 4 years ago?
Not that there is anything wrong with the Astir panels, but aren't those like $75 for 22 watts? That's $3.40 a watt for what they openly tell you are cheap Chinese parts.
Isn't it true your only LED experience whatsoever, is with a 90 watt UFO from 3 or 4 years ago?
Not that there is anything wrong with the Astir panels, but aren't those like $75 for 22 watts? That's $3.40 a watt for what they openly tell you are cheap Chinese parts.
stardustsailor
Well-Known Member
Well...
1) They do work...Aren't they ?
2) Better be honest ,eh ? Almost 90% of any other panel in the market uses same quality (or even inferior ) parts....
3) 80% of the price is the heatsink...I do not think that you'll find a better price anywhere else,for 4 lbs of soft alum passive coolin'....
4)Spam ? Why is not so for any other led grow panel ,that other people suggest ? (i.e . Kessils or Area 51,or..,or...or... ,ect ) ..
Hmmmmm...Bothered,eh ?
Maybe a toe of yours is stepped on, really hard ,I guess....
Which means we're headin' the right way ....
Thanx.
....
Edit: Brother Dawg ,forgive me for "spammin' your thread....
First and last time.
El Superbeasto
Active Member
1) They do work...Aren't they ?
Yes they do work. Do they work the best, or even worth the price? That remains to be seen.
2) Better be honest ,eh ? Almost 90% of any other panel in the market uses same quality (or even inferior ) parts....
There are plenty different LEDs, drivers, bin selections, etc available, so 90% are not the same, I disagree....
3) 80% of the price is the heatsink...I do not think that you'll find a better price anywhere else,for 4 lbs of soft alum passive coolin'....
I build DIY LEDs, and know very well what heat sinks cost. My point was someone recommending $3.40 per watt lights as an alternative to "expensive LED lights".
4)Spam ? Why is not so for any other led grow panel ,that other people suggest ? (i.e . Kessils or Area 51,or..,or...or... ,ect ) ..
No one should be spamming in people's grow journals period, or recommending anything unless they are looking for recommendations within the journal.
I never said anything negative about Astir, but you sure came on the quickness to their defense, but whatever, my whole point was Petflora constantly posting the same exact post everywhere, and I did not subscribe this thread to see his recommendations for something that he has no clue about, so I said something. Maybe if he tried the Astir panels he'd have a valid recommendation, but still shouldn't do it in people's journals.
As far as the Astir thread goes, I'm subbed to that too, it's an interesting thread for sure and I am enjoying it, though I do not agree with everything you say, especially about the 660nm's, but that discussion is for another time.....
Yes they do work. Do they work the best, or even worth the price? That remains to be seen.
2) Better be honest ,eh ? Almost 90% of any other panel in the market uses same quality (or even inferior ) parts....
There are plenty different LEDs, drivers, bin selections, etc available, so 90% are not the same, I disagree....
3) 80% of the price is the heatsink...I do not think that you'll find a better price anywhere else,for 4 lbs of soft alum passive coolin'....
I build DIY LEDs, and know very well what heat sinks cost. My point was someone recommending $3.40 per watt lights as an alternative to "expensive LED lights".
4)Spam ? Why is not so for any other led grow panel ,that other people suggest ? (i.e . Kessils or Area 51,or..,or...or... ,ect ) ..
No one should be spamming in people's grow journals period, or recommending anything unless they are looking for recommendations within the journal.
I never said anything negative about Astir, but you sure came on the quickness to their defense, but whatever, my whole point was Petflora constantly posting the same exact post everywhere, and I did not subscribe this thread to see his recommendations for something that he has no clue about, so I said something. Maybe if he tried the Astir panels he'd have a valid recommendation, but still shouldn't do it in people's journals.
As far as the Astir thread goes, I'm subbed to that too, it's an interesting thread for sure and I am enjoying it, though I do not agree with everything you say, especially about the 660nm's, but that discussion is for another time.....
stardustsailor
Well-Known Member
We should take the "debate" on Astir's thread...
Both of us (and not only us )have a lot to learn from ....
Both of us (and not only us )have a lot to learn from ....
Eraserhead
Well-Known Member
A51 doesn't have UVB switches, just cool white, red and deep red, and 2 switches for 1/2 and full power.
I think you're thinking of Cali Lightworks. Doesn't seem to be a bad light at all, if I didn't build and sell my own LEDs, Cali Lw would be a light I would consider using, providing I didn't have enough money to buy an Apache Tech with red and white LEDs.
I think you're thinking of Cali Lightworks. Doesn't seem to be a bad light at all, if I didn't build and sell my own LEDs, Cali Lw would be a light I would consider using, providing I didn't have enough money to buy an Apache Tech with red and white LEDs.
I might stop by sometime for debate, maybe we can learn something from each other.
El Superbeasto
Active Member
I'm more of a reader than a poster, but I'll engage in a debate as time permits.
I work 60+ hours per week and have a family, I wont be posting too often, but I will contribute the best I can.
I work 60+ hours per week and have a family, I wont be posting too often, but I will contribute the best I can.
Endur0xX
Well-Known Member
How would you compare the Apache Tech to the AF600 ?A51 doesn't have UVB switches, just cool white, red and deep red, and 2 switches for 1/2 and full power.
I think you're thinking of Cali Lightworks. Doesn't seem to be a bad light at all, if I didn't build and sell my own LEDs, Cali Lw would be a light I would consider using, providing I didn't have enough money to buy an Apache Tech with red and white LEDs.
I might stop by sometime for debate, maybe we can learn something from each other.
Eraserhead
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure, I'd need to see PAR readings for the entire footprint of the AT to know for sure...
Though, they are only 120w, vs. almost 600w, so a comparison isn't really easy...
I am a fan of multiple smaller-medium sized panels over 1 large unit...
Personally, the 600 is too big for me, and is larger than anything I would ever need, I am only using 190w total at the moment.
Also, the 600 will only be around till maybe the end of the year as well as the entire A51 series, they are getting replaced with a new series around the 1st of the year, of course using the same LEDs/spectrum/ratio, but with new, more efficient 550mA drivers, new quieter fans, new 73° lenses, and new cases.
2013 will be a fun year for LEDs
Though, they are only 120w, vs. almost 600w, so a comparison isn't really easy...
I am a fan of multiple smaller-medium sized panels over 1 large unit...
Personally, the 600 is too big for me, and is larger than anything I would ever need, I am only using 190w total at the moment.
Also, the 600 will only be around till maybe the end of the year as well as the entire A51 series, they are getting replaced with a new series around the 1st of the year, of course using the same LEDs/spectrum/ratio, but with new, more efficient 550mA drivers, new quieter fans, new 73° lenses, and new cases.
2013 will be a fun year for LEDs
Eraserhead
Well-Known Member
The Dawg
Well-Known Member
MaryAnn G-13 Gigabud Week10 Day5 Of Flower.I Have To Say MaryAnn Is Becomming My Favorite.She Looks So Sexy And Healthy And She Continues To Swell Up.Im Going Out On A Limb Here But I Do Belive She Will Out Produce Sally More About This In Sallys Update.Ive Been Reviewing My Flora Nova Bloom Only Nute Program And I Decided To Make A Change In My Add Back Soluition.I Will Start Adding R/O Water Only To See If My Ppms Will Drop Like I Like It.I Belive I Have Been Over Doing It With The Cal/Mag Suppliment.I Did A Res Change Last Night And I Bumped My Ppms Back Up To 800.
The Dawg
Well-Known Member
Thank You Brother Txchilies.MaryAnn Is Really Thriving In My Cab
Now For An Update On Sally.I Damn Near Over Dried Sally But I Did Catch Her In Time And Shes Jarred Up Setting At 55% Humidity Which Is Perfect For Curing.Her 1st Harvest Is 3.2 OzsAnd I Plan On Finishing Her Off Next Weekend.Im Hoping For Another 2 Ozs From Her.I Have Racked My Brain On Why She Didnt Yield Like I Thought She Would.She Really Didnt Fill Out Not Even The Top Buds.Sally Really Didnt Perform In flower Like She Should Have.Just Alot Of Thumbnail Buds And Not Really Any Main Colas To Speak Of.I Put Them Blame On Bad Genetics.I Mean I Went Back And Checked Out Everything My Light Hights Were Within Range With No Bleaching Or Stunting And No Signs Of Heat Stress.I Did Have A Crazy pH Drop That Lasted For A Few Days In My 4th Week Of Flower.I Honestly Cant Really Put A Finger On It So When In Dought Blame The Genetics
stardustsailor
Well-Known Member
While I'm on the same ship with you considering the "smaller-medium sized panels over 1 large unit" part...
I'm standing totally on the other side considering use of lenses....
Especially regarding steeper angles than 120°-130°...
We can have a nice analysis on that also ,my brother EraserHead ...
Area 51 led panels ,are really something I'd be buying for sure ,
if i wasn't on the DIY side myshelf ,researching for the Astir company...
Maybe I should get some of these...
I really would like to have to my collection (inside my tent,I mean...)
3-4 pieces of A51-60s'....(but without any lenses there for me... lol...)
Up till now ,they have proved that they work really fine ....
But that "lenses" thing .....
It affords some more of our "debate "...
Eraserhead
Well-Known Member
Why I use lenses are for a few reasons.
1) An LED that is rated at 90° doesn't mean 100% of the beam is within that 90°, it means it is mostly within that range between 1-90, but there's plenty of light still emitted from 90-170, most of which will never make it to the plants because it is almost emitting sideways from the LED.
A lens "collects" those sideways lost beams and redirects them to the plants.
A lens may block out 10-15% of your light, but it saves the 40% you're gonna lose without them.
The 73°'s are custom made, that's the exact angle they need to be in the panel they're going in, so when the panel is 12" above the plants, there is a perfect intended footprint and 30w per square foot and more evenly spread out PAR. I paid a lot of money to get the mould made to make those lenses.
The lenses in the current panels are 80°, they are the closest to ideal for the panel sizes I have. There's no glass, it's just the LEDs > lenses >
2) I do sell the panels in fairly large volumes and to keep warranty costs down for me, the LEDs need to be protected. My choices are an older traditional glass face, which also blocks out 10-15% of light, but some of the light emitted emits between the circuit board and the glass and that was too much wasted light for me to not do anything about. My other choice are lenses, and if possible, with no glass face, which is what I have. Those Helixeon's from Heliopto are pretty costly, and the silicone domes can snap off easily if someone is trying to clean them too roughly...
My original plan were to use reflectors and bare LEDs, as that would deliver the most PAR possible, but the thought of all the broken LEDs stopped that plan...
1) An LED that is rated at 90° doesn't mean 100% of the beam is within that 90°, it means it is mostly within that range between 1-90, but there's plenty of light still emitted from 90-170, most of which will never make it to the plants because it is almost emitting sideways from the LED.
A lens "collects" those sideways lost beams and redirects them to the plants.
A lens may block out 10-15% of your light, but it saves the 40% you're gonna lose without them.
The 73°'s are custom made, that's the exact angle they need to be in the panel they're going in, so when the panel is 12" above the plants, there is a perfect intended footprint and 30w per square foot and more evenly spread out PAR. I paid a lot of money to get the mould made to make those lenses.
The lenses in the current panels are 80°, they are the closest to ideal for the panel sizes I have. There's no glass, it's just the LEDs > lenses >
2) I do sell the panels in fairly large volumes and to keep warranty costs down for me, the LEDs need to be protected. My choices are an older traditional glass face, which also blocks out 10-15% of light, but some of the light emitted emits between the circuit board and the glass and that was too much wasted light for me to not do anything about. My other choice are lenses, and if possible, with no glass face, which is what I have. Those Helixeon's from Heliopto are pretty costly, and the silicone domes can snap off easily if someone is trying to clean them too roughly...
My original plan were to use reflectors and bare LEDs, as that would deliver the most PAR possible, but the thought of all the broken LEDs stopped that plan...
stardustsailor
Well-Known Member
Fair enough...Why I use lenses are for a few reasons.
1) An LED that is rated at 90° doesn't mean 100% of the beam is within that 90°, it means it is mostly within that range between 1-90, but there's plenty of light still emitted from 90-170, most of which will never make it to the plants because it is almost emitting sideways from the LED.
A lens "collects" those sideways lost beams and redirects them to the plants.
A lens may block out 10-15% of your light, but it saves the 40% you're gonna lose without them.
The 73°'s are custom made, that's the exact angle they need to be in the panel they're going in, so when the panel is 12" above the plants, there is a perfect intended footprint and 30w per square foot and more evenly spread out PAR. I paid a lot of money to get the mould made to make those lenses.
The lenses in the current panels are 80°, they are the closest to ideal for the panel sizes I have. There's no glass, it's just the LEDs > lenses >
2) I do sell the panels in fairly large volumes and to keep warranty costs down for me, the LEDs need to be protected. My choices are an older traditional glass face, which also blocks out 10-15% of light, but some of the light emitted emits between the circuit board and the glass and that was too much wasted light for me to not do anything about. My other choice are lenses, and if possible, with no glass face, which is what I have. Those Helixeon's from Heliopto are pretty costly, and the silicone domes can snap off easily if someone is trying to clean them too roughly...
My original plan were to use reflectors and bare LEDs, as that would deliver the most PAR possible, but the thought of all the broken LEDs stopped that plan...
The best reasons given so far,for using lenses...
Nothing more to add...
