Agree on height . I run my leds right on their heads . Let’s me lower wattage and put light where I want it . I’d need even my 640s at 100 percent power that high and would have 200 par at that low canopy . I have not had issues with my leds other than the learning curve which took a few weeks and much playing with them .
Cannot say if the potency is lower under them as I have NOT run the same plant under HPS AND LEDS . I do know I was happy with my first harvest under them and will not be looking to put up my Gavitas ever again
If I buy a $100 hps every year I spend $800 in 8 years and have a fresh bulb every year.
A led light has a average rating of 50-60000 hours which would be around 8 years at 16hrs day.
The led lights I’ve seen that offer comparable coverage to a 1000watt bulb cost on average about $700 dollers and require about 75% of the energy to run.
For me it’s not worth saving a small amount of electricity to invest in a light for that length of time, I promise something better will come out before that amount time goes by, also do you think the led is running at peak efficiency 6 years later.
Now if I was just getting started and had a large operation running multiple lights those savings and initial start up costs may be justifiable but still I’m counting on technology to evolve faster then the amount of time you would have to run the lights to get your money worth in bulb savings.
If you want to save electricity install solar.
I only flower indoors one or two times a year but if I could cut my veg bill in half that would be significant, there are veg specific led lights that replace t5 bulbs but the energy savings is only 6 ways per bulb so that not very significant. Other then those I have not seen a veg specific led light system 6000kelvin plus range and the uv light is still something to consider.
I’d love to replace 600 watts of t5s with 300 of led and still cover the same square footage with out having to have them more then 2ft above the canopy. Show me a veg specific led with a wide enough footprint and enough supplemental uv at a decent price.
That’s getting better but 5k is the bottom range of what’s recommended for vegetative growth , my t5s are above 6000 kelvin. 5k could also be considered the upper end of neutral.
I have found some 6500 kelvin t5 replacements that are 28watts instead of 54 but they lack uv I have also found some 28watt t5 replacements with us but they are 5500 kelvin.
Give me a 28watt t5 replacement with uv that is 6500kelvin.
The options are already much better then a few years ago , I’m glad I waited and am just now considering based on what’s becoming available.
There are plenty of solid led options others than basing your arguments on shitty Chinese led products. Anyone knows those lights are shit to begin with, and trying to back up your opinions against a $100 led light is like telling someone your lunch from McDonald’s was garbage. Well, no shit.
I have been growing under led lights for a few years now, and Ca Mg deficiency was the only issue I had to overcome when I made the switch from hps… I also built all of my lights using Vero 29 cobs, and taste/potency/yield never suffered from the switch…
So what nutrient profile, ratios, and elemental ppm does everyone run under they’re LEDs? Currently running,
K- 220
Ca- 153
Mg- 65
Temps are 85, Rh 65. Starting to get purple stems.
MH for example emits into and beyond the red spectrum, including FR (700-800mm) and IR (780-1000mm) light, which is THE big reason it’s so energy inefficient. It uses electrons to make light that we can’t see.
IR light is is used in heat lamps for bathrooms and to keep restaurant food hot, or in dry saunas. They heat things themselves, they don’t heat the air.
MH lights keep your plants warmer at the same PAR.
This isn’t related to the excess heat generated by the MH unit either, it’s IR light that is mixed with the visible that you cannot see that it heating your plant, and not the air.
Magnesium. It’s the center of the chlorophyll molecule.
The speed of chemical reactions (usually) depend on heat. Higher = quicker.
MH allows for quicker biochemical reactions to occur at the same PAR due to heat within the leaf tissue.
Remember LED’s and Mg? Colder leaf tissue at the same PAR, slower turnover of chlorophyll.
Does any of this have an effect on final smoke, terps/volume? How about how this all changes in flower, when the plant is closer to the fixture and in the case of LED, much warmer at that point.
LED’s are what you want them to be. They are but specific diodes pasted to a bar or plate. At least MH was cool gases and micro chunks of metal that glow.
Are you in coco coir? I’ve never ran K or Ca that high before. Most I ever ran K was 280 and Ca at 170 but, it looked like it was starting to antagonize Mg running them that high. Have you had any issues?
I use RO as well. The softness of the water poses an issue especially for coco growing but, if we mix our own salts we need a clean slate so Ro it is. I just watched an interview with Harley Smith saying to blend tap and RO 50/50 to give the RO some buffering capacity. I know that’s old news and not sure if it would complicate things more when mixing your own salts.
I haven’t had any issues last grow that weren’t caused by me . I switched from Jack’s to using salts+chelated micro mix for my most recent grow and it was my best one so far. EC of the solution is around 2.8. I’m running pro mix HP (peat moss with perlite). Don’t seem to have any issues with the K and Ca being pretty high. I just flipped my next grow and will be using it again after stretch.
. I switched from Jack’s to using salts+chelated micro mix for my most recent grow and it was my best one so far. EC of the solution is around 2.8. I’m running pro mix HP (peat moss with perlite). Don’t seem to have any issues with the K and Ca being pretty high. I just flipped my next grow and will be using it again after stretch.
