Inflating LED output - has it became a standard?

Growroom Design
#1

I’ve lately checked multiple LED producers to find out whether or not they are misleading consumers by labelling their products incorrectly. It seems to me that (with rare exceptions) it has became an industry standard… :confused:

https://www.mars-hydro.com/ Multiplier 6,6x (at least they are not using letter W in their labels)

https://www.ledtopplus.com/ Multiplication factor 5x (using W in their labelling system)

https://easygrowlighting.eu/ Multiplier 1,65 - 2,5x (not using W in their labelling)

https://www.viparspectra.com Multiplier 2,3x (using W in their labels)

https://fluence.science/ very rare exception - not using numbers or watts in product labels, input power is very prominent in tech description

12 Likes
Add giixer to sf2000?
#2

retrofitting is new.

#3

Out of that list, there is only one that would fall outside of the low-cost category. E.g. Fluence.

Should do a survey across the board for different bins of fixtures: low-cost, pro-sumer, professional or something along that line. The low-cost units seem to be the most likely to use some form of misleading marketing. They come up with their own metrics with lots of missing detail on how they’ve actually determined that. e.g. 9.7 g/W.

Best to bring the reproducible measurements front and center and verify against that.

Metrics of concern that all manufacturer’s should provide at minimum: Spectra, PPF, PPFD(with details), and wall PPE (efficacy). Efficacy being the strong link toward cost/W today (better LEDs).

6 Likes
#4

Yes it’s extremely common. Yet it doesn’t really bother me all that much. When i bought my 1st led 10+ yrs ago. They didn’t even tell you the wattage or type of diode. You basically had to research every type of diode. Trying to zoom in on stock pics to look at any sign if it’s a 0.5 to 2 watt diode. You couldn’t ask bc they didn’t know or lied. Or you could spend 900$ on the “legit” 120 watt led lol. Now it literally takes 10 mins of research. They post it in their specs just not in the marketing name. If that’s to much for people they get what they deserve.

4 Likes
#5

They are still doing that as far as I can tell…

e.g. fortunately, we have folk such as MiGro and others that appear to be independently testing and verifying claims. There are some lower costs fixtures that seem to be catching up with the traditionally more expensive manufacturers. With the advances in LED tech, it’s not rocket science to do so. Marketing, on the otherhand, is still stuck in the past.

8 Likes
#6

I haven’t researched it much as of late. I did a lot when i bought my 2 meizhi 900. It seemed like most were posting the actual wattage draw reliably. Maybe I just give them a pass bc it has improved by leaps and bounds. Granted it always could be better.
Another market that was notorious for the same strategy was car sub woofer amps. If it’s that way still I’ve no clue. I just remember people would ask what the wattage on my 2000$ Orion amp was. They’d talk shit when I’d say 500 watts. Saying ohh ya mines 3000 watts. Till it rattled the fillings out their fucking head.

8 Likes
#7

Amplifier wattage specs, that is the perfect analogy.

6 Likes
#8

We are overgrow.
We should send each of the “leading” manufacturers a 10pack and a memorandum.
That’d sort it pretty quick.
Unfortunately, everyones everything would read different and it’d end it tears, or worse.
Lets just say fark it, OG the world!

3 Likes
#9

Exactly.
Who can state where led tech came from precisely?
Roswell wont cut it :wink:
This gift can unite the world, if we help it a little.
Jay

2 Likes
#10

Huh, pretty stoned.
That doesn’t happen nearly enough lol.
I actually meant our plant there, not the light source.

2 Likes
#11

I’m pretty sure “horticultural LED lighting” came about after NASA reported to have had good results growing lettuce in space using blurple lights. Which seems odd that we would as growers follow suit for something that was used on vegging not fruiting plants.

I could be way off. But I’m sure that’s the conclusion I came too when I started building my first light

6 Likes
#12

NASA?
I preferred when it got passed up out of a little hole under a tree myself.
It was much simpler then.

1 Like
#13

I thought so too. Its exactly tge same.

1 Like
#14

Led lights where being promoted in aviation circles just after challengers reentry fail. I’m only a pup, but I remember reading boeings paper about them in grade 9.

3 Likes
#15

The first led I remember seeing was the original ufo. In hightimes mag at crazy expensive prices. In no way would I call that a horticulture led. It was mostly a marketing scheme yet people bought em. That’s what the led market has been based on till recently.

1 Like
#16

That’s still predominant at the cheaper end of the market unfortunately. Like some folks believing 9.6 gpw is possible :joy::joy::joy::joy:

1 Like
#17

Who knows we might be getting close. With a vertical circular fogphonics setup and some of the new crazy diodes out. Not to mention how far breeding has come in such a short time too.

1 Like
#18

I have a report of 2.5 lbs from a 4x4 witha fluence. GG iirc …unverified and not sure the flowering time.

I intend to build anything I use since you get so much more value. OTOH appliances usually list the amp draw and voltage on the back regardless of “claimed wattages”

2 Likes
#19

There’s not enough data here for me to work out a GPW from that. 1.13kg from a 4x4 is impressive either way though.

And completely agree DIY is the way forward for good light cheap

1 Like
#20

Efficiency data (PPF/w) and PPFD data are the important metrics. Most manufacturers don’t even provide this information. The ones that do are clearly inflating these numbers. I can’t wait for quantum meters to be more accessible so we can check for ourselves that our plants are getting the photons the manufacturers state they’re getting. I think people would be surprised to know that even their high end panels are falling shy of mfg specs in many cases. Even the terminology is wrong. I cringe when I see a light advertised as “Full Spectrum” but it only has blue and red monochromatic LEDs… how in the hell could that cover the full spectrum?

I want to be like Migro and @Northern_Loki and really put this stuff to the test. I’ve been nerding out a little too much lately on the science behind all of this and am starting to get passionate about it. But the more I learn the more I despise the misleading tactics of many of these manufacturers.

9 Likes