IF you are new to LED and want help choosing what to buy, POST HERE!

captainmorgan said:

Looks like a tree vs a bush,let the insults fly.

Click to expand...

Who is the troll again? lol.

nomofatum said:

My first two questions in a decision tree would be:

How big is your space?
How much $ do you have available for setup?

The 2nd question is just as important as the 1st. You can keep ignoring that, but you do yourself and the tree a disservice by being closed minded.

Click to expand...

The very first two decisions of the tree were:

- if not in a vertically-challenged space,
- - if unable or unwilling to buy high-efficiency LED,

I'm kinda leaning towards CaptainMorgan's conclusion. Feel free to carry the decision tree further. But, so far it seems to boil down to exactly what I laid out.

Cheers!

az2000 said:

The very first two decisions of the tree were:

- if not in a vertically-challenged space,
- - if unable or unwilling to buy high-efficiency LED,

I'm kinda leaning towards CaptainMorgan's conclusion. Feel free to carry the decision tree further. But, so far it seems to boil down to exactly what I laid out.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

If you don't care about the money why bother with CMH? The rocket plasma is more efficient and is more capable at lower power. I would think if money is no object you would pick it over CMH any day. If the decision tree isn't going to be logical, there is no point making it.

CMH is the more logical decision with those two options, because there are no cases where the Rocket pays off with the greater initial investment and greater bulb replacement costs. Those costs will never be countered with enough electrical savings. The time required to recoup thousands of dollars in electrical savings is not short. So up front costs, light output, operating costs, and the requirements of your space are the 4 keys to choosing lights. If your tree doesn't cover these, why waste your time, your tree will be a low quality product.

I agree! If I didn't go LED! I would have went plasma for sure!

I was looking at the rocket system and its nice!

JimmyIndica said:

I was looking at the rocket system and its nice!

Click to expand...

I agree, but ouch $1000 for a 280w system and $100 bulbs every 9-12mo. So amazing tech, but not a wise selection until it's price drops, CMH kicks it's ass on $/results, other things kick CMH's ass on $/results.

nomofatum said:

If you don't care about the money why bother with CMH? The rocket plasma is more efficient and is more capable at lower power. I would think if money is no object you would pick it over CMH any day. If the decision tree isn't going to be logical, there is no point making it.

CMH is the more logical decision with those two options, because there are no cases where the Rocket pays off with the greater initial investment and greater bulb replacement costs. Those costs will never be countered with enough electrical savings. The time required to recoup thousands of dollars in electrical savings is not short. So up front costs, light output, operating costs, and the requirements of your space are the 4 keys to choosing lights. If your tree doesn't cover these, why waste your time, your tree will be a low quality product.

Click to expand...

Plasma blows imo. It takes serious cooling, has low intensity, and short service lives. And efficiency wise CMH and plasma seem to be about the same...with in percents. And the CMH will substantially outlast the plasma in service life and lumen depreciation.

nomofatum said:

If the decision tree isn't going to be logical, there is no point making it.

Click to expand...

Take a stab at it. I laid it out based upon what had been concluded so far. You objected saying the first two question should be about space and money -- the very questions I asked. (IMO, this does lead to the conclusion others have reached about preferring disagreement and misunderstanding.).

But, fill it in as you prefer and let's talk.

FWIW: This "decision tree" resulted from enthusiasts of epi-whatever lights feeling their lights are devalued. So, that's the part of the tree I thought should be filled in. Not the part about whether (if money is no object, what's better than epi-whatever). Nor the part about electrical use being no object (i.e., running 80w/sq. ft. for diminishing returns on yield, valuing real-estate cost over all else). Those are valid branches in the "tree." But, they don't affect the original branch which originated with this question: when are Chinese epi-whatever fixtures a good choice?

I'd say the decision tree will never be reality when the topic keeps shifting like this. But, give it a shot. I don't think we disagree (except when you need to be).

Greengenes707 said:

Plasma blows imo. It takes serious cooling, has low intensity, and short service lives. And efficiency wise CMH and plasma seem to be about the same...with in percents. And the CMH will substantially outlast the plasma in service life and lumen depreciation.

Click to expand...

Either of those options have fairly fast lumen depreciation but the plasma has better spectrum distribution. It's more efficient at growing than a CMH. I think whatever your solution the key it to get it at optimal levels for your space, once you do that results will be very similar regardless of your lighting selection. What makes one lighting solution better than another other is the total cost (up front, replacement bulbs, and electric bill) comparison.

nomofatum said:

I agree, but ouch $1000 for a 280w system and $100 bulbs every 9-12mo. So amazing tech, but not a wise selection until it's price drops, CMH kicks it's ass on $/results, other things kick CMH's ass on $/results.

Click to expand...

Its no more money than good,reflector,ballast, bulb change and all the heat problems that cost $ to combat with hps/mh system. bulb change with that! I have been looking at it and doesn't seem to produce much heat! I don't know though! I am not gonna say it blows though! Seems like around here people wanna bash everything but what there selling!!!

Greengenes707 said:

Plasma blows imo. It takes serious cooling, has low intensity, and short service lives. And efficiency wise CMH and plasma seem to be about the same...with in percents. And the CMH will substantially outlast the plasma in service life and lumen depreciation.

Click to expand...

This^^^......................also CMH can be run for cheap using the philips all-start line/mh mag ballast. Slightly lower ppf/w and spec than the 315w agro.

JimmyIndica said:

I don't know though! I am not gonna say it blows though! Seems like around here people wanna bash everything but what there selling!!!

Click to expand...

From what I've seen, what agitates those people is when people push something as being effective while saying "I don't know." Like your impassioned advocacy of expensive Kind lights when he hasn't finished a grow. Or, Chinese epi-whatever fixtures when CMH produces more light for the same electricity and heat.

There should be some way to layout the benefits and deficits of each choice. I'd prefer sticking with Chinese epi-whatever fixtures since that's what most people are inclined to purchase. Expand upon that, following branches that lead to use cases that could include plasma. Get down to actual details about plasma and how it compares in concrete terms.

az2000 said:

Take a stab at it. I laid it out based upon what had been concluded so far. You objected saying the first two question should be about space and money -- the very questions I asked. (IMO, this does lead to the conclusion others have reached about preferring disagreement and misunderstanding.).

But, fill it in as you prefer and let's talk.

FWIW: This "decision tree" resulted from enthusiasts of epi-whatever lights feeling their lights are devalued. So, that's the part of the tree I thought should be filled in. Not the part about whether (if money is no object, what's better than epi-whatever). Nor the part about electrical use being no object (i.e., running 80w/sq. ft. for diminishing returns on yield, valuing real-estate cost over all else). Those are valid branches in the "tree." But, they don't affect the original branch which originated with this question: when are Chinese epi-whatever fixtures a good choice?

I'd say the decision tree will never be reality when the topic keeps shifting like this. But, give it a shot. I don't think we disagree (except when you need to be).

Click to expand...

I will make up a draft version of one, that is a fair request. I think you will understand what I am saying better from that too. It will take me some time, expect that either later tonight or tomorrow.

az2000 said:

From what I've seen, what agitates those people is when people push something as being effective while saying "I don't know." Like your impassioned advocacy of expensive Kind lights when he hasn't finished a grow. Or, Chinese epi-whatever fixtures when CMH produces more light for the same electricity and heat.

There should be some way to layout the benefits and deficits of each choice. I'd prefer sticking with Chinese epi-whatever fixtures since that's what most people are inclined to purchase. Expand upon that, following branches that lead to use cases that could include plasma. Get down to actual details about plasma and how it compares in concrete terms.

Click to expand...

To make this concrete someone would have to buy all the options and build ideal setups for each in identical controlled rooms and actually test it out on multiple strains and multiple grows until they had enough data to build a statistical model. Then we can talk concrete, otherwise you are in a fantasy land even hoping for any thing concrete.

For now the best comparison we can expect is to take as much trustworthy output data on each lighting option, use that to size the system to ideal levels, and compare the costs (both up front and operating/maintenance costs.)

The thing that drives me nuts is that so many people actually believe that one solution will get them more nug out of the same grow room. It's not true, they will all get you the same if you hit the right spectrum at the right levels, and most of these systems are capable of that. The deciding factor is costs in your situation. (including cooling costs if applicable)

nomofatum said:

I will make up a draft version of one, that is a fair request. I think you will understand what I am saying better from that too. It will take me some time, expect that either later tonight or tomorrow.

Click to expand...

No hurry. I'm out till tonight. Looking forward to it. I really don't think everyone's in disagreement. If we can just avoid hopping from one factor to another (one lighting solution to another). Follow the branches, documenting the pros/cons leading to each.

I agree with you that plasma fits somewhere in there (pending working out how it compares in concrete ways to efficient LED). HPS fits somewhere (pending the question about heat, space).

I'm not trying to jump around myself. Just saying that I think jumping around leads to not finalizing what we (as a group) can agree upon. So far, from what was discussed last night, I don't see much of a use case for imported Chinese epi-whatever fixtures. Unless someone can fill in more, I think what I did is about it for growing (maybe there are topics for side-lighting, backup lighting).

The other topics about balancing DIY vs. purchase, going low-end versus high-end to avoid being left behind by technology change, etc. But, your cost/peformance scale posted last night seemed to eliminate a lot of choices there. It seemed to boil down to CMH or high-efficiency LED for larger spaces.

I wish we had a wiki. This is a perfect example of what wikis are good for compared to conversational communities. A "talk" page where the minutia is discussed leading to the conclusions found on the wiki page. Perpetual update as technology evolves.

What we're doing expects someone to wade through 200 pages to find these pages (200 pages in the future). Fun, but not very effective at communicating knowledge.

nomofatum said:

To make this concrete someone would have to buy all the options and build ideal setups for each in identical controlled rooms and actually test it out on multiple strains and multiple grows until they had enough data to build a statistical model.

Click to expand...

How do we not have that right now as it pertains to imported Chinese epi-whatever fixtures vs CMH, high-efficiency LED fixtures and LED "lightbulbs?" Are you saying umoles, par watts and the like aren't enough to form valid conclusions?

az2000 said:

I agree with you that plasma fits somewhere in there (pending working out how it compares in concrete ways to efficient LED). HPS fits somewhere (pending the question about heat, space).

Click to expand...

In my tree I think the only place where plasma will end up is in a case where someone is playing/experimenting with it for personal bud and doesn't care about costs at all.

I'm much more excited about CMH now that I see the potential to get a fixture without the surcharge for new tech. I'm eagerly waiting on a reply from Welthink. It may be what I use when I go from one space to separate grow/veg.

nomofatum said:

They will all get you the same if you hit the right spectrum at the right levels, and most of these systems are capable of that. The deciding factor is costs in your situation. (including cooling costs if applicable)

Click to expand...

As far as I've seen, that's exactly what everyone (you're complaining about) are saying. There is a presumption that the average grower would like to do what you describe with the least electrical, heat and up-front costs. That's why the "decision tree" for imported Chinese epi-whatever lights is so short. It's not that epi-whatever is orders of magnitude worse, just that (assuming someone can accept the heat) it's not the best use of up-front dollars and electrical cost.

IMO, that's the easy branch. So far, the only responses to it seem to stray off in different directions about "well, if you have a fortune to spend, buy plasma." I agree, we may not conclude the Plasma vs. efficient-LED question as conclusively as the Chinese epi-whatever question. But, the latter seemed to have more importance because that's what gets people upset that their lights don't get the respect they deserve.

EDIT: Agree with you about CMH. I can use one about 6 months of the year. I wish I got one 3 months ago.

az2000 said:

As far as I've seen, that's exactly what everyone (you're complaining about) are saying. There is a presumption that the average grower would like to do that with the least electrical, heat and up-front costs. That's why the "decision tree" for imported Chinese epi-whatever lights is so short. It's not that epi-whatever is orders of magnitude worse, just that (assuming someone can accept the heat) it's not the best use of up-front dollars and electrical cost.

IMO, that's the easy branch. So far, the only responses to it seem to stray off in different directions about "well, if you have a fortune to spend, buy plasma." I agree, we may not conclude the Plasma vs. efficient-LED question as conclusively as the Chinese epi-whatever question. But, the latter seemed to have more importance because that's what gets people upset that their lights don't get the respect they deserve.

Click to expand...

You are still confused about up front dollars. Lets put it this way.
Upfront:
Epistars: $13 per sqft for ideal lighting 2400w (total $415)
CMH: $78 per sqft for ideal lighting 1500w (total $2500)

Operating costs based on 12/12 and 11c per KWA. (adjust as needed to your local)
CMH: $1.98 per day.
Epistars: $3.17 per day. That is $1.19 more per day.

Making break even be at 1752 days. If you run for 1753 days the CMH will be the better deal.

I have an opinion that LED is Present and future! HID is the past and the sooner everyone gets on board the better for everyone! Now its just a matter of whos research and development you support!