Stevehman's LED Buyer's Guide

[ratatattooey]

Ok. great. I figure this first grow is all a learning experience anyway. Hoping the 2 get me by until next time. I had planned on trying to add lights for the 2nd grow. I agree, I'd rather have PLENTY, then just enough. sort of like my life philosophy... "Go Big, or Go Home!!"

 

[Bassman59]

I only looked for 10 secs at that link, but it doesnt appear they are grow lights in the 1st place.

My temps in tent can hit 91 with my 600w led IF tent is entirely closed up and only the exhaust fan, room tent is in is closed up, household AC doesnt kick on.

But generally speaking it's easy to keep area 81-84 degrees.

Lights off temps drop 10 degrees commonly in the 71-75 area, in the nevada desert, 20 yr old home, no ac on, this time of year.

 

[TorturedSoul]

I only looked for 10 secs at that link, but it doesnt appear they are grow lights in the 1st place.

<COUGH>Spammer<COUGH>

 

[Magic beans]

<COUGH>Spammer<COUGH>

No, this cannot be!!

I take posts like that as a direct insult to our intelligence. How much time and effort us growers have put into testing and trying these lights and a spammer comes in trying to sell us flood lights. For real? And even worse: this isnt the first time. You might as well go try and sell an oxygen tank to a fish.

 

[ledbudz]

Hey 420 mag, long time lurker, new member, first post.
been reading this forum for years, and steveHman, other members, and the internet in general has gotten me interested in LED's

Of course before i make an expensive purchase, i want to know my shit lol.
I want to say SteveHman ive been following your LED grows and i think you are doing great work and a large part in the LED revolution

now a little about me,

my setups are 1000W switchable digital ballasts ontop of 4x4 flood trays on castors.
each flood tray has 9 5gal buckets with hydroton. and small holes drilled in the bottom.
running a top feed recycling drip system controlled by a timer.
air cooled hoods
and a scrog screen over top thats about 4.5' x 4.5'

I know mmj is light greedy, and needs more light than say.. lettuce or other veggies which seems like what the lights stevehman uses are for(their website says the extreme flower 360 core coverage is 4x4)

is this true? will the extreme flower 360w produce results similar to my 1000W over an area of 4x4?

and when you compare the watts/sq ft of the core covereage of their different lights, the larger lights have WAYY higher watts/sq ft than the smaller ones of core coverage. so would filling my 4x4 space with 4 smaller lights really be as effecient as one larger one? the core covereage is the same, but the total watts is way less?

im a confused old man
and i thought this might be a good place to start, thanks steveHman and all 420 members, i cant wait to hear your wisdom!

 

[SteveHman]

Hey 420 mag, long time lurker, new member, first post.
been reading this forum for years, and steveHman, other members, and the internet in general has gotten me interested in LED's

Of course before i make an expensive purchase, i want to know my shit lol.
I want to say SteveHman ive been following your LED grows and i think you are doing great work and a large part in the LED revolution

now a little about me,

my setups are 1000W switchable digital ballasts ontop of 4x4 flood trays on castors.
each flood tray has 9 5gal buckets with hydroton. and small holes drilled in the bottom.
running a top feed recycling drip system controlled by a timer.
air cooled hoods
and a scrog screen over top thats about 4.5' x 4.5'

I know mmj is light greedy, and needs more light than say.. lettuce or other veggies which seems like what the lights stevehman uses are for(their website says the extreme flower 360 core coverage is 4x4)

is this true? will the extreme flower 360w produce results similar to my 1000W over an area of 4x4?

and when you compare the watts/sq ft of the core covereage of their different lights, the larger lights have WAYY higher watts/sq ft than the smaller ones of core coverage. so would filling my 4x4 space with 4 smaller lights really be as effecient as one larger one? the core covereage is the same, but the total watts is way less?

im a confused old man
and i thought this might be a good place to start, thanks steveHman and all 420 members, i cant wait to hear your wisdom!

ledbudz,
I would go with more smaller lights in the 4x4 than one large. I will be doing a test next grow using four lights instead of the one big 800w unit. I think four 200s will produce much better results and a more even coverage. My personal opinion (based soley on my own experience) is that you want about 40~50watts of LED per square foot (not much different than the recommendations for HPS/MH), so a 180-200w in a 2x2. The better quality chips will make a huge difference.

As far as replacing a 1,000w with a 360w light, I don't think you will have the same results. I think maybe 600-800 watts of light should be your target to replace 1,000. The big advantages are reduced heat and power consumption.

The 360 could cover a 4x4 table, but I would go with at least a pair of them (or the four 200s). I know they're not cheap, but if you're paying almost $.25 a kwh like we do in San Diego it the ROI is pretty quick.

 

[ratatattooey]

just thinkin' out loud here... what about 2 DS200's on a light mover over the 4x4 tables?

 

[SteveHman]

just thinkin' out loud here... what about 2 DS200's on a light mover over the 4x4 tables?

You could do that as well, have them move about 12 inches back and forth. I have a mover I've used in the past and like using it because it spreads the spectrum out more evenly and the leaves get coverage from several angles that way.

 

[ledbudz]

thanks for the quick reply, and i agree multiple 200's would be best for me.

lets say got 4 ds200's(92W actual draw each), and used them to cover a 4x5 area(20 sq ft)
thats a pathetic 18.4 w/f

but the ds 800(710 actual draw) has a core coverage of 3.5 x 4.5 (15.75) = a much more impressive 45 watts/foot

thats what i dont understand, am i just outta luck that they dont make a light tailored to my grow dimensions? the spots considered as "core coverage" have more watts/foot on the higher powered lights?

i understand you are not an LED expert, but i cannot find any other brain to pick with as much knowledge as yours lol
i hope you dont mind

 

[SteveHman]

thanks for the quick reply, and i agree multiple 200's would be best for me.

lets say got 4 ds200's(92W actual draw each), and used them to cover a 4x5 area(20 sq ft)
thats a pathetic 18.4 w/f

but the ds 800(710 actual draw) has a core coverage of 3.5 x 4.5 (15.75) = a much more impressive 45 watts/foot

thats what i dont understand, am i just outta luck that they dont make a light tailored to my grow dimensions? the spots considered as "core coverage" have more watts/foot on the higher powered lights?

i understand you are not an LED expert, but i cannot find any other brain to pick with as much knowledge as yours lol
i hope you dont mind

the 200s should draw 190~210 watts, my 800 draws 794 watts. The actual draw varies depending on how much they are driving the chips. They are trying to balance out power and longer life. If they drive a 3w chip at 3w it will b every bright, but last a fraction of the time if they drive it at 2.4w.

You may have been looking at the draw for the 100 w, it is in the 92 range.

I have the 800 in a 4x4 tent and it covers nicely, but I think that four 200s would be much better coverage due to the 3rd off effect. The space between the lights where each light drops off to about 50% effective. If you have two lights covering that space it is like having a 3rd light in the space. With four of them you would in effect have five 3rd off lights. That is what my next grow is going to be demonstrating/testing.

 

[ledbudz]

yes that was my mistake, i was looking at the specs for the 100 not the 200, so now that were on the same page, would 4 ds100's be adequate for a 4x4 or a 5x4? now that seems a little skimpy, but is still within their "core coverage" claims

 

[SteveHman]

I think that in a 4x4-5x5 space that four 200s is the ticket. Here's a quick graphic I put together to show the 3rd off effect:

Now if you have four of them in there, you can get them a little closer to the edges and get an even coverage with very little wasted side light. That is the downfall of all lights and LEDs are no different. The side light that is reflected back off the walls loses so much that it isn't really effective, if you can get that side light to double up (and in the center you'll have it X's 4) you will maximize the total output of the lights.

My recommendation for any type of grow is to go with multiple smaller lights than with a single larger unit. The other advantage with the DS lights is, one cord. Daisy chain them together and you have a single cord to run to your timer.

 

[ratatattooey]

yes that was my mistake, i was looking at the specs for the 100 not the 200, so now that were on the same page, would 4 ds100's be adequate for a 4x4 or a 5x4? now that seems a little skimpy, but is still within their "core coverage" claims

I'm interested to hear what SteveHman has to say about this. But..... I have one of the DS 100's and 2 of the DS200's. The 100 came in a few days before the 200's. When I plugged in the 100.. I was amazed at how bright it was. But... if you want to use car engine terminology then I'd say the 200's have more than double the "torque" of the 100's.

So.. you ask if 4 of the DS100's would be adequate.. I'd say "yeah..." they'll get you down the track, but you ain't gonna set any land speed records.

What I'm really curious about is the difference between 4 of the ds200's and 2 of the ds 400's (I think the 4 DS200's wins that battle as well??)

 

[SteveHman]

I'm interested to hear what SteveHman has to say about this. But..... I have one of the DS 100's and 2 of the DS200's. The 100 came in a few days before the 200's. When I plugged in the 100.. I was amazed at how bright it was. But... if you want to use car engine terminology then I'd say the 200's have more than double the "torque" of the 100's.

So.. you ask if 4 of the DS100's would be adequate.. I'd say "yeah..." they'll get you down the track, but you ain't gonna set any land speed records.

What I'm really curious about is the difference between 4 of the ds200's and 2 of the ds 400's (I think the 4 DS200's wins that battle as well??)

Agreed, that is why for my next grow I am using four smaller lights instead of two larger ones. My goal next grow is to get the maximum yield possible with an LED grow. I am shooting for the 1gpw target and think going with four smaller lights will get the job done. It is really hard to comprehend the power of these lights until you look into one (don't look too long, it hurts). In fact I seriously recommend wearing some uv protective sunglasses if you're going to be working in the grow for an extended period of time--like more than a minute!

 

[Bassman59]

Disclaimer: on 1st grow, using 600W Pro-Bloom LED Grow Light | Grow Stealth LED | 3W LED Grow Lights

I have a 4x4 tent as well. I am currently using the GS600 pro-bloom on 7 plants in RDWC in two tubs. My thought is to expand to 4 tubs in flower, 3 plants each in this tent. To do so I would buy a 2nd 600w from GS and as Stevehman mentions would also have the "3rd off" effect.

Now if I had not already purchased the 600w, AND was going for a larger grow like I mention above, AND had the spare $$ I would seriously consider 4 x 300w GS pro-bloom lights: 250W Pro-Bloom LED Grow Light | Grow Stealth LED | 3W LED Grow Lights

But I also believe, based on using the 600w thus far, that two of them would be an excellent choice. One will cover the tent very well, but two would give really good side penetration and excellent reflection off walls.

 

[ledbudz]

Ok I'm loving the idea of the third off effect, but steveHman you said you are still chasing the 1g/watt. With 4 ds200 thats approx. 800 watts. If I'm getting about 1g/watt with my current HID setup, would that mean my yield may go down if I make the switch to LED? Or is you ratio based on the wattage of fully driven LED panel and not the actual wattage?

Thanks for all the help, I hope I'm not asking too many questions in the wrong place, and that other people can learn from my lack of knowledge and excess of questions

EDIT** if I make the purchase I am going to do a side by side comparison between a 1000 and the LED's, I now feel obligated lol

 

[Bassman59]

I believe 1g/watt is achievable with both Advanced and Grow Stealth LED's. Presently I think the hold backs from achieving these have been:

1. mistakes causing less than optimal growth. ie: res temps in dwc for me, or other stress inducing mistakes.
2. Getting the optimal height down to a "t" for lights.
3. Flipping to 12/12 before plants have had good long veg. **granted we all do this for our own reasons, such as 12/12 from seed, or from clone transplant, 2 weeks veg, then flipping to get grow done sooner, etc.

If not for above I think 1g/watt is totally doable.

 

[SteveHman]

I agree with Bassman, the 1gpw is totally realistic. My limiting factor has been no veg time. Also I have been doing various test grows so max yield wasn't the goal. In my last grow I had over 1,000 watts in a 2x6 space, there's no way you could pull 1,000 grams in a 2x6x4 space, just not enough room. If I had 600 watts in there I would have had 1gpw. That grow was using three 360 watt Extreme Flowers to test the optimal height for bloom. Again, I think the footprint should be about 40~50 watts per sq foot, more light doesn't equal higher yield though. You have to consider the other factors, heat, nutes, CO2, actual grow space size. 500 gr per sq meter is the typical advertised yield from breeders, if you have 1,000 MH/HPS watts in that same 3x3 space you aren't going to get 1,000 grams, you lack the physical space for that much mass and will run into issues with heat an humidity (possibly bud rot). So in that grow you would most likely yield .5gpw and it would still be a successful grow by every other metric.

 

[ledbudz]

Great info, but I was sold as soon as you said its for sure possible, but you have always had limiting factors such as veg time, I understand you cannot grow more than what will fit in any given groW space, thanks for the info, 420 mag seems to have the most members knowledgable with info on LED

You guys are great
Thanks for allowing me to pick your brain steveHman and I hope my questions spoke for a few other people

 

[SteveHman]

Great info, but I was sold as soon as you said its for sure possible, but you have always had limiting factors such as veg time, I understand you cannot grow more than what will fit in any given groW space, thanks for the info, 420 mag seems to have the most members knowledgable with info on LED

You guys are great
Thanks for allowing me to pick your brain steveHman and I hope my questions spoke for a few other people

Ledbudz,
My feeling is this is first and foremost a learning and education site for the advancement of MMJ/cannabis awareness. Anything I can contribute to that end is my small part in the effort. I think you will find most members share the sentiment and are more than willing to help out where they can.

I truly think that LEDs will be the preferred light source in the next 3~5 years, once costs are inline with "traditional" lighting, although we don't get to that point without a few intrepid growers willing to take the leap and spend the money to prove the nay-sayers wrong. Welcome to the lightbright revolution.