Onyx Grow Bloom vs Area 51 RW-150 Gorilla Glue #4 Grow

epicfail

epicfail

Well-Known Member
Aai Captain.

Your PAR meter; did you get the whole meter of just the sensor with multimeter?, also is yours calibrated for electronic light or sunlight. I just purchased the Apogee SQ-120 Sensor from rapidled which is calibrated from electronic lights, I will use it in my fish tanks also. I was just wondering so I can compare PAR numbers. Thanks alot

dbkick said:
Could have been some other factor, the weights are fairly close. Mike at rapid seems to think the light is spread more even with the diffused lenses .
I look forward to your results and good luck.
Click to expand...
Mike is correct that the diffused lenses will spread the light that gets through them better but a lot of photons will never make it thru the lenses, even less than if they were optically clear lenses. This might be acceptable for fish tanks but not for growing cannabis. Reflectors are a better option for sure but I would just go bare and get the panel closer to the canopy, but then the onyx footprint might be too small. Its worth testing though.
 
dbkick

dbkick

Well-Known Member
epicfail said:
Aai Captain.

Your PAR meter; did you get the whole meter of just the sensor with multimeter?, also is yours calibrated for electronic light or sunlight. I just purchased the Apogee SQ-120 Sensor from rapidled which is calibrated from electronic lights, I will use it in my fish tanks also. I was just wondering so I can compare PAR numbers. Thanks alot



Mike is correct that the diffused lenses will spread the light that gets through them better but a lot of photons will never make it thru the lenses, even less than if they were optically clear lenses. This might be acceptable for fish tanks but not for growing cannabis. Reflectors are a better option for sure but I would just go bare and get the panel closer to the canopy, but then the onyx footprint might be too small. Its worth testing though.
Click to expand...
I dunno, the 10 watt xml2 help I'd say.
I'm happy with the performance of the Onyx.
 
captainmorgan

captainmorgan

Well-Known Member
epicfail said:
Aai Captain.

Your PAR meter; did you get the whole meter of just the sensor with multimeter?, also is yours calibrated for electronic light or sunlight. I just purchased the Apogee SQ-120 Sensor from rapidled which is calibrated from electronic lights, I will use it in my fish tanks also. I was just wondering so I can compare PAR numbers. Thanks alot



Mike is correct that the diffused lenses will spread the light that gets through them better but a lot of photons will never make it thru the lenses, even less than if they were optically clear lenses. This might be acceptable for fish tanks but not for growing cannabis. Reflectors are a better option for sure but I would just go bare and get the panel closer to the canopy, but then the onyx footprint might be too small. Its worth testing though.
Click to expand...
I got just the SQ-120 sensor direct from Apogee and use it with my multimeter. I'd like to find some 90 to 100 degree reflectors for it but I haven't had time to look.
 
epicfail

epicfail

Well-Known Member
dbkick said:
I Yunno, the 10 watt xml2 help I'd say.
I'm happy with the performance of the Onyx.
Click to expand...
Sorry if I seem like I don't like the Onyx, I do I just see room for improvement as it is the first horticulture light they have released. It doesn't matter what diodes are shone through the lens, whether they are 8mm chinese crap or top/mid bin CREE XM-L2's. The lenses will absorb 10-15 percent of the photons, frosted lenses being worse than clear ones. Their Mk-II should be a little larger to spread out the diodes more providing better coverage without needing the frosted lenses. Reflectors could be used or at least optically clear lenses if they are a must (to protect connections and diodes?), a larger unit should help with the heat issues some people have experienced also. You should try a run without them for comparison DB maybe just on half of your panels, I can't see you being disappointed.
 
dbkick

dbkick

Well-Known Member
epicfail said:
Sorry if I seem like I don't like the Onyx, I do I just see room for improvement as it is the first horticulture light they have released. It doesn't matter what diodes are shone through the lens, whether they are 8mm chinese crap or top/mid bin CREE XM-L2's. The lenses will absorb 10-15 percent of the photons, frosted lenses being worse than clear ones. Their Mk-II should be a little larger to spread out the diodes more providing better coverage without needing the frosted lenses. Reflectors could be used or at least optically clear lenses if they are a must (to protect connections and diodes?), a larger unit should help with the heat issues some people have experienced also. You should try a run without them for comparison DB maybe just on half of your panels, I can't see you being disappointed.
Click to expand...
I'm gonna let the capt'n do that testing. If there's a notable difference I'll certainly be looking into reflectors and shit canning the lens. And to each their own, your opinion is valuable to me.
 
captainmorgan

captainmorgan

Well-Known Member
Finally got time to work on the Onyx panel and put in some nuts and bolts to hold it together without the cover and lenses,it's blinding bright without lenses. It worked out so I'll have two closely matched GG#4's to start into flower so I'll be starting another side by side with the RW-150 and the bare Onyx very soon.
 
P

PurpleBuz

Well-Known Member
captainmorgan said:
Finally got time to work on the Onyx panel and put in some nuts and bolts to hold it together without the cover and lenses,it's blinding bright without lenses. It worked out so I'll have two closely matched GG#4's to start into flower so I'll be starting another side by side with the RW-150 and the bare Onyx very soon.
Click to expand...
I'd appreciate some pics on what you did to hold it together without the cover and lenses.
Very interested to see the diffs in the spread / par footprint. Might do that with my Onyx if its worth it.
 
DANKSWAG

DANKSWAG

Well-Known Member
captainmorgan said:
Finally got time to work on the Onyx panel and put in some nuts and bolts to hold it together without the cover and lenses,it's blinding bright without lenses. It worked out so I'll have two closely matched GG#4's to start into flower so I'll be starting another side by side with the RW-150 and the bare Onyx very soon.
Click to expand...
Hey Captain,

I too am using the Onyx and having reliability issues have you had any? How many do you have? I have 4 currently.
Thinking of going with RX now seeing your results with the two, can't wait to see PAR ratings with everyone else with those lens covers removed and reflectors added. A how to would be great if it improves these panels.

Anywise can you tell me the difference between the RW-150 and the XGS-190?

Thanks appreciate your testing and your time..

DankSwag
 
SupraSPL

SupraSPL

Well-Known Member
Awesome lens free experiment CAP!

GroErr said:
Thanks for the show and test run captain. Surprised at such a wide margin, not surprised that the RW won, but wow, that's a significant gap, specially considering the draw. imo the spectrum likely has the biggest impact. Those onyx panels use quality components but I'm not sold on 2700k when it's the only spectrum nor single-spectrum light sources in general. I think the only lights than can get away with that right now are the Cree COB's as they're so efficient/intense.
Click to expand...
Mike told us that the first model had 3000-3200K T4 bin. Might be a good idea to update their website. That said though, wow I am shocked at the results, great test CAP thanks again!
 
DANKSWAG

DANKSWAG

Well-Known Member
ozdude said:
i took the covers off my lights and it makes the fans work more effectively ie the air coming off the heat sink is cooler due to better flow and it is also a little quieter...not that they are noisy
Click to expand...

Anyone have detailed instructions on this and has anyone confirmed how effective they are removing the lens covers and if anything like reflectors need added and how to do so?

I have four of these units and I want to get the best performance from these Onyx bloom panels.


DankSwag
 
DANKSWAG

DANKSWAG

Well-Known Member
DANKSWAG said:
Anyone have detailed instructions on this and has anyone confirmed how effective they are removing the lens covers and if anything like reflectors need added and how to do so?

I have four of these units and I want to get the best performance from these Onyx bloom panels.


DankSwag
Click to expand...
Also can anyone tell me what the amperage draw is on a single Area 51 RW-150?

DankSwag
 
DANKSWAG

DANKSWAG

Well-Known Member
DANKSWAG said:
Also can anyone tell me what the amperage draw is on a single Area 51 RW-150?

DankSwag
Click to expand...
I've been informed by eraserhead 1.5a for 110 .65 @ 220.
Nonetheless hoping captain to demo removal of those lenses and what if any testing had it done with that fancy meter he has?

DankSwag
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top