What Caused This??

NoDrama said:

HPS doesn't cause plants to stretch, old wives tale. Internodal spacing might be a bit tighter with the MH bulb, but the overall yield would be less. If less is more in your book, then have at it.

Click to expand...

How would it be less? Is that how it worked out for you... It was the opposite for me... I mean your just using it to veg if u used mh to flower then I would agree with you..u agree the nodes would be closer together with mh.. I seen your pics but those nuggs were still on the plant and you can see the spacing at week 9 the nuggs got smaller at the internodes because they were a little spread if you used mh to veg those nugs would be solid with no thinning out at the internodes...but don't get me wrong that's bomb.. I guess we can agree to disagree on the mh/hps thing . But when it comes to LEDs you're off!

mr sunshine said:

If you want to save cash and use less energy buy a solorstorm 880.. It still produces heat but it's much less then hps... U can run your ac less often.. U save about 40 percent on your bill.. But it cost about 2500.. If you want to save money you gotta spend money!

Click to expand...

teh fux?

880watt LED uses the exact same amount of energy as 880 watts of HPS. The exact same amount of energy as 880 watts of CFL and the EXACT same amount of energy as 880 watts of Incandescent bulbs.

Its like asking what weighs more? A ton of feathers or a ton of stone.
Neither weighs more, they both weigh a ton.

mr sunshine said:

But when it comes to LEDs you're off!

Click to expand...

I already linked all the scientific evidence that shows LED lights are less efficient than HPS lights. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

NoDrama said:

Watt for watt HPS puts out less heat than LED, CFL, MH. Fact, incontrovertible fact, scientific fact backed up by tons of evidence and measurements.

Click to expand...

Yes but LEDs work with less watts and can get the same results.. They use half the watts with half the heat.. You're paying more per watt o we'll your using less of them and getting practically the same shit... So your scientifically right but as it applys to growing your so wrong..

NoDrama said:

teh fux?

880watt LED uses the exact same amount of energy as 880 watts of HPS. The exact same amount of energy as 880 watts of CFL and the EXACT same amount of energy as 880 watts of Incandescent bulbs.

Its like asking what weighs more? A ton of feathers or a ton of stone.
Neither weighs more, they both weigh a ton.

Click to expand...

Yes but it replaces a 1000 watt and it actually pulls 600and something watts I believe it may even be less then that.. And it produces less heat..so you save cash all around..

Features:

• 160 High Quality 5 watt LED bulbs for 800 watts of intense lighting for your plant canopy
• Provides high PPF (photo-synthetic photon flux) that penetrates the plant canopy and exceeds the PPF of a 1000 watt HPS grow light system
• Dual color spectrum design to switch between Vegetation and Flowering to give you the plant perfect light spectrum for high quality yield
• Two built-in 15 watt T8 Fluorescent light tubes for the UV-B plants require to boost crop potency
• SolarStorm LED plant grow lights will give you a 50% power savings over a HID lighting systems
• Covers a 4' x 4' plant growing area for flowering plants, and a 5' x 5' area for non-flowering plants and vegetables
• You will receive a 3 year limited warranty

Specifications:

• Operating Voltage: Universal Voltage: 90-277 VAC AC / 50-60HZ - CAN BE USED IN ANY COUNTRY!
• Total Power Consumption: Veg Mode-450 Watts, Bloom Mode-620 Watts, Bloom Mode & UVB-650 Watts
• Maximum current at input: 5.5 Amps
• Plant coverage: from 18" to 24" distance, 16 sf for flowering, and 25 sf for non-flowering plants
• Color Spectrum: Deep Blue 450nm, Blue 470 nm, Deep Red 665nm, Red 620nm, Warm White 430-700nm, and UVB 280-315nm
• Durable powder coated 6063 aluminum and sheet metal construction
• Sealed electronics section
• Large 18" x 18" LED panel area for improved, more uniform light spread
• Eight fully integrated high efficiency switching mode power supplies, 80 watts each
• Highly effective heat management via 2, 92mm integrated fans and large heat sinks
• Dimensions and Weight: 24" L x 18" W x 4" H, 32 Pounds
• LED Expected Life Span: 50 to 80,000 Hours (8+ years) under a typical 16 hour day operation
• LED Expected Output after 50,000 Hours of Use: >90%
• Cooling Fan Life Span: 50,000 Hours MTBF
• Operating Temperature: Between 5 and 104 Degrees Fahrenheit
• Operating Position: Light facing down at plant canopy

It's a pretty awesome light...Chinese LEDs are not comparable to this!! This is a different beast!!

NoDrama said:

teh fux?

880watt LED uses the exact same amount of energy as 880 watts of HPS. The exact same amount of energy as 880 watts of CFL and the EXACT same amount of energy as 880 watts of Incandescent bulbs.

Its like asking what weighs more? A ton of feathers or a ton of stone.
Neither weighs more, they both weigh a ton.

Click to expand...

mr sunshine said:

Specifications:

• Operating Voltage: Universal Voltage: 90-277 VAC AC / 50-60HZ - CAN BE USED IN ANY COUNTRY!
• Total Power Consumption: Veg Mode-450 Watts, Bloom Mode-620 Watts, Bloom Mode & UVB-650 Watts
• Maximum current at input: 5.5 Amps
• Plant coverage: from 18" to 24" distance, 16 sf for flowering, and 25 sf for non-flowering plants
• Color Spectrum: Deep Blue 450nm, Blue 470 nm, Deep Red 665nm, Red 620nm, Warm White 430-700nm, and UVB 280-315nm
• Durable powder coated 6063 aluminum and sheet metal construction
• Sealed electronics section
• Large 18" x 18" LED panel area for improved, more uniform light spread
• Eight fully integrated high efficiency switching mode power supplies, 80 watts each
• Highly effective heat management via 2, 92mm integrated fans and large heat sinks
• Dimensions and Weight: 24" L x 18" W x 4" H, 32 Pounds
• LED Expected Life Span: 50 to 80,000 Hours (8+ years) under a typical 16 hour day operation
• LED Expected Output after 50,000 Hours of Use: >90%
• Cooling Fan Life Span: 50,000 Hours MTBF
• Operating Temperature: Between 5 and 104 Degrees Fahrenheit
• Operating Position: Light facing down at plant canopy

It's a pretty awesome light...Chinese LEDs are not comparable to this!! This is a different beast!!

Click to expand...

Are you saying a 1000 watt hps cost as much to run per month as this led?sure I would play more per watt but which light would leave you with a smaller bill each month?

i think hes talking about actual wattage, not compared wattage.
really confusing but if you are saying hps puts out the least heat, i don't understand how that has to do with wattage input to lumen output ratio, which is what i think matters
also what matters is the color temperature. The reason LED's are so awesome is you are formulating the right diet of light colors, to give the plant exactly the right ratios of what kind of light. LED's lack penetration so it is good to trim down the bottoms of the plants before flower, and to try for a scrog type of grow. the downside to MH/HPS is you are using an Arc to produce light, so the color on the chart you will see it spike in a few places. People have recently found you actually wanna use MH as well as HPS in flowering. It produces much denser, stronger bud, with a little less yield, but it's worth it.
I agree HPS is fine for veg, but i rely on t5's because they are so easy to use, and require much less space.


heat output can be compensated by air flow , so i don't take that into consideration when choosing what type of light to use unless i think there's going to be a heat issue

and yes, 1000w of led will cost exactly as much as 1000w of HPS, is what he's saying. What you're saying is you will need much less wattage when running LEDS to get the same output as a 1000w of HPS, so you are paying less because you dont have to use as much wattage to get the amount of light a 1000w HPS gets

another point i want to make. You must pay top dollar to get LEDS that will outperform HPS. When it comes down to it it's really not worth it to go LED yet because of that. Once LED's get cheaper and still outperform the HPS, is when they will be better. Sure your expensive 2500$ LED outperforms the 150$ 1000w HPS, but it is really a better investment?

Nizza said:

i think hes talking about actual wattage, not compared wattage.
really confusing but if you are saying hps puts out the least heat, i don't understand how that has to do with wattage input to lumen output ratio, which is what i think matters
also what matters is the color temperature. The reason LED's are so awesome is you are formulating the right diet of light colors, to give the plant exactly the right ratios of what kind of light. LED's lack penetration so it is good to trim down the bottoms of the plants before flower, and to try for a scrog type of grow. the downside to MH/HPS is you are using an Arc to produce light, so the color on the chart you will see it spike in a few places. People have recently found you actually wanna use MH as well as HPS in flowering. It produces much denser, stronger bud, with a little less yield, but it's worth it.
I agree HPS is fine for veg, but i rely on t5's because they are so easy to use, and require much less space.


Iheat output can be compensated by air flow , so i don't take that into consideration when choosing what type of light to use unless i think there's going to be a heat issue

Click to expand...

I agree.....but their is a lot to take into account....Less heat,means u don't need to run an ac as much the ac uses watts to.. The LEDs cost more to run per watt but u also use less watts so at the end you actually save money.. This led replaces a 1000 watt hps it only pulls 650 actual watts when your maxing it out.. Only pulls 450 actual watts during veg and in The end results are similar to hps if not the same ..hps pulls 1000 watts all day everyday..he's trying to be right and he is. His statement is true hps cost less to run wat per wat. But LEDs cost less to run period...we are talking about growing and for growing LEDs are more efficient in the long run!!!

This light should run for at least 5 years it says 8 but I'll just give it 5 in 5 years you will save a huge amount of cash.. Sure you spent a lot to get it but it will definitely pay you out...it just depends if your in it for the long run LEDs might be more practicall...

Interesting, but all of this is based on lumens to power, and as they say "lumens are for Humans" . The definition of lumen says that is a measurement of visible light, unfortunately rather than a fixed relationship between lumens and power, lumens is a scale to compensate for human light response. As such, green light (which has little to no effect on photosynthesis) scores up to 10X higher on the lumen scale than the same amount of power converted to red light which is used for photosynthesis. Throw on top of that, the fact that when comparing plug to power efficiency there is a wide range in what are available, ranging from 5-40%, while HPS is around 30% depending on bulb/ballast.

I personally use HPS/MH, but costs aside, it would be technically feasible to get the right LEDs that could outperform HPS from a PAR perspective.

hbbum said:

Interesting, but all of this is based on lumens to power, and as they say "lumens are for Humans" . The definition of lumen says that is a measurement of visible light, unfortunately rather than a fixed relationship between lumens and power, lumens is a scale to compensate for human light response. As such, green light (which has little to no effect on photosynthesis) scores up to 10X higher on the lumen scale than the same amount of power converted to red light which is used for photosynthesis. Throw on top of that, the fact that when comparing plug to power efficiency there is a wide range in what are available, ranging from 5-40%, while HPS is around 30% depending on bulb/ballast.

I personally use HPS/MH, but costs aside, it would be technically feasible to get the right LEDs that could outperform HPS from a PAR perspective.

Click to expand...

I also use mh/hps... When I can I'm buying the solar storm 880 tho..

http://dutchgardenint.com/docs/Utah-State-University_Lighting-Study.pdf

The Best HPS beats the Best LED at everything. The best 400 watt HPS will put out MORE ppf than the best 400 watts of LED.

The conclusion of this study? LED's are almost as efficient as HPS but cost 5 to 10 times more.

There ya go fellas, science.

hbbum said:

it would be technically feasible to get the right LEDs that could outperform HPS from a PAR perspective.

Click to expand...

Sure, if you compare a crappy HPS light to the best LEDs out there, but the Best HPS beats the best LED in PAR, Lumens, ppf and efficiency.

NoDrama said:

Sure, if you compare a crappy HPS light to the best LEDs out there, but the Best HPS beats the best LED in PAR, Lumens, ppf and efficiency.

Click to expand...

Can you show me a light that would cost less to run then the solar storm 880 per month I would like to buy it! I need a 1000 watt..and how much do these led efficient hps lights cost?i like that you can get the LEDs closer...but I also like the raw power of the hps..

mr sunshine said:

Can you show me a light that would cost less to run then the solar storm 880 per month I would like to buy it! I need a 1000 watt..and how much do these led efficient hps lights cost?i like that you can get the LEDs closer...but I also like the raw power of the hps..

Click to expand...

any light that uses less than 650 watts will use less power than that 880, not sure what you are getting at. The 880 people DO NOT CLAIM that it has the power of a 1,000 watt HPS, they only claim that the ppf is better than a 1,000 watt HPS, and for that to be true they must be comparing their nice LED light ( it is a damn nice LED rig) against one of the middle quality HPS lights or really crappy ones.

According to that university study I linked, the best HPS light is ePapillon with a digital electronic ballast ( not magnetic), it puts out ppf of 1,767 vs the best LED of 653 ( for 384 watts) convert the 1,000 watt to 384 watts of power to make a direct comparison = 1,767*.384= 679 679/653=.04 which means that the ePapillon bulb in a digital ballast is 4% more effective than the best LED in raw plant growing power.

the LED has some benefits in that the front of the LED's do not put out large amounts of heat, so the lights can get closer, but growing will involve more labor, plus the 5-10X expense over HPS for basically equivalent results just isn't enough for LED's to be a winner in my book. I have tested many LED setups since my brother is an engineer for a large LED company that is currently doing grow light testing. Just haven't gotten that cost factor down yet.

For some people, knowing they spent a ton more money on their setup = its better than anyone elses. My ex-wife was like that. If her Mercedes 500SL cost $8,000 more than the neighbors, hers was better, even though they were the same damn thing down to the black color. The other gal just got a better deal.

No one who just spent $1,800 on a solarstorm 880 wants to admit that it grows less bud than the guy who paid $250 for his 1,000 watt HPS setup.

I said cost aside, and if I got electricity for $.11 then it may be valid. Where I live, electricity is the biggest expense of my grow and I regularly pay 3x the rate used in the study.

I do think they are overpriced for now. But for the sake of this (now completely hijacked) thread, you need more light

White_Widow said:

Hey there guys, I was hoping to get some help... I got an oz of Reggie, found some good seeds, and planted them without knowing anything about growing pot.. that was mistake number one.. i put the plant in "Sta-green tree and shrub potting mix with fertilizer" it has a ph adjuster in it and seemed to be good in nutrients, i knew nothing about ph, and the effects it has on marijuana plants, so today i bought a tester for ph, N, K, P and the ph test read that the soil was 7.5 ph, which i now know is wayyyy too high. i bought some aluminum sulfate, and it has lowered the ph to around 6.2-6.5. my plant was in veg stage for a month, and has been in flowering stage now.for about a month what caused my plant to look like this?? i used led lights for veg, and a 150 watt hps light.for flowering. i put liquid cactus.in water when i water it. i have read alot online, and learned alot, i have 3 new sprouts coming.up in the last 4 days, ph on those are 6.0. i just need to know if anyone else has had a plant look like this, and why it happened?? and how often should i water seedlings vs watering flowering plants, also, for the new sprouts i have each one under a 60watt 6500k cfl light, and the.flowering plant is under a 150watt hps light and a 60 watt 2700k cfl light. i just want to learn as much as possible to have sucessful grows, any advice helps. i bought 6 feminized seeds online today and hope to have all my mistakes corrected by the time i germinate them. also, i have a humidifier in there to keep the grow room humid, and yemps are around 70-80°f. im watering all the plants every other day... too much?? and last thong, can anyone.verify that thos plant is a female? thank u everyone!

Click to expand...

Hey just thought I would add my 2 cents and say don't spend a lot of cash on seeds until you get a few grows under your belt with bag seed cause there is a lot of trial & error until you get the hang of things then go spend some cash unless u have plenty to throw away at first. I don't care who you are I think everyone has screwd up somthing at first but good luck anyway