Switching to CMH on 3x6 trays... advice??

Sailormoses said:

Sun systems, unless you are on a budget

Click to expand...

NugHeuser said:

Sun systems are good and go vertical with the the Philips 3100k. Best bang with that bulb.

I have both the de 630 by growers choice and the 315 by sun system. The par readings are higher with the 315, they were actually surprisingly high.

And if you have the space a 3x9 for 3 lights would be good. If you don't and want the max yield go with 3. If you don't care as much about yield and want to save some electricity then two would do that area fine.

Click to expand...

jronnn said:

the sun system comes with the 3100k Philips CDMT9 Elite 315W/930, only thing that sucks is sun system is like 200 more per fixture than say nanolux... but my trays are 6x3 so id have to put 3 over each tray and I definitely care about yield. the 3 315w should definitely outperform 2 600w HPS both in yield and quality, correct?

Click to expand...

theinhibitor said:

Just going to ask the obvious: who told you to move to CMH? For cannabis, HPS outperforms CMH in flowering every day of the week...its supported by oodles of evidence, just ask any long time grower on here. Look at Sedan's grow in Ukraine: he uses 600W HPS. If CMH boasted better quality and yields, everyone would already have them installed.

I grow in the Emerald Triangle and have a bunch of buddies who are true masters in the field, like Subcool, whose been breeding cup winners for decades. They all use HPS indoors, and only recently have been looking into LEDs more as supplements or for veg. CMH isnt even on their radar because metal halides just dont have a good spectrum for flowering cannabis, as it has to do with the physics/wavelengths. If CMH boasted better quality and better yields, these guys would be the first to switch. The amount of free, new tech stuff they get is unbelievable.

From the few talks I've had with them on CMH, CMH is basically a slightly better MH for veg. In flowering, it does that same thing every MH does: more leaf, less flower, for an overall more chlorophyll (spicy) tasting weed, which is considered worse. Also, internodal distance increases - ever noticed how CMH grows always have tall skinny weed? That's not a desirable trait. The buds down below will get no light.

And if you want to spend money on a new light, getting a 600w/900w LED would be best from every angle. In fact, I would combine the LED with the HPS...

Click to expand...

theinhibitor said:

Just going to ask the obvious: who told you to move to CMH? For cannabis, HPS outperforms CMH in flowering every day of the week...its supported by oodles of evidence, just ask any long time grower on here. Look at Sedan's grow in Ukraine: he uses 600W HPS. If CMH boasted better quality and yields, everyone would already have them installed.

I grow in the Emerald Triangle and have a bunch of buddies who are true masters in the field, like Subcool, whose been breeding cup winners for decades. They all use HPS indoors, and only recently have been looking into LEDs more as supplements or for veg. CMH isnt even on their radar because metal halides just dont have a good spectrum for flowering cannabis, as it has to do with the physics/wavelengths. If CMH boasted better quality and better yields, these guys would be the first to switch. The amount of free, new tech stuff they get is unbelievable.

From the few talks I've had with them on CMH, CMH is basically a slightly better MH for veg. In flowering, it does that same thing every MH does: more leaf, less flower, for an overall more chlorophyll (spicy) tasting weed, which is considered worse. Also, internodal distance increases - ever noticed how CMH grows always have tall skinny weed? That's not a desirable trait. The buds down below will get no light.

And if you want to spend money on a new light, getting a 600w/900w LED would be best from every angle. In fact, I would combine the LED with the HPS...

Click to expand...

Crab Pot said:

Lol... It’s obvious you haven’t had any real experience with LEC. It’s really disappointing to see these kinds of posts. Why do growers without any practical experience always have to chime in with their opinion? It just makes for a lot of confusion.

I respectfully disagree with your entire post. First of all, all of the commercial indoor/greenhouse facilities that I am aware of have been exclusively using LEC lighting except for a couple facilities that are using high end LED lighting. I’m not aware of any commercial ops installing hid/hps these days. If you know of any I would be interested to know. That would be an extremely poor business decision.

Why do you think LEC has a problem with penetrating the canopy? That’s just not the case at all.

Internodes are shorter with LEC compared to hps, not longer.

LEC produces higher quality, along with more terpenes, cannabidoids and potency than hid/hps.

“More leaf, less flower” - Not from my experience.


LEC produces healthier plants compared to hid/hps. You would do yourself a big favor if you would pick up an LEC, grow some plants and then you could see for yourself bro...

View attachment 4027855

Click to expand...

Crab Pot said:

Lol... It’s obvious you haven’t had any real experience with LEC. It’s really disappointing to see these kinds of posts. Why do growers without any practical experience always have to chime in with their opinion? It just makes for a lot of confusion.

I respectfully disagree with your entire post. First of all, all of the commercial indoor/greenhouse facilities that I am aware of have been exclusively using LEC lighting except for a couple facilities that are using high end LED lighting. I’m not aware of any commercial ops installing hid/hps these days. If you know of any I would be interested to know. That would be an extremely poor business decision.

Why do you think LEC has a problem with penetrating the canopy? That’s just not the case at all.

Internodes are shorter with LEC compared to hps, not longer.

LEC produces higher quality, along with more terpenes, cannabidoids and potency than hid/hps.

“More leaf, less flower” - Not from my experience.


LEC produces healthier plants compared to hid/hps. You would do yourself a big favor if you would pick up an LEC, grow some plants and then you could see for yourself bro...

View attachment 4027855

Click to expand...

theinhibitor said:

You say shorter, and yet, your picture shows longer. Way longer. All everyone here shows is basically first few weeks of bloom and veg, and obviously, that's where CMH shines. Show me your week 8 with pure CMH all throughout next to LED next to HPS, same strain and everything.

And I've got a ton of experience lol. More terpenes and CBN? Show me the lab results side by side. I would find it incredible if a light moved anything more than 0.5%, as genetics accounts for 99% of the terpene profile. That shows me you dont really get your weed tested...or you would know these things. Things like the sample you send will show a different %THC based on where you take it from the plant, but terpene profile is locked to genetics.

Which commercial facilities do you know? I dont know who you're talking about when you say that that "all have been exclusively using LEC". It is honestly just laughable. Top growers grow in a greenhouse outdoors anyways, and use supplemental lighting to simulate seasonal shifts. Been that way for the last decade, so shows how much you know about commercial cannabis cultivation...im talking hectares of weed. You would think, that if CMH had such amazing results, they would be using it no?

Click to expand...

jronnn said:

Ive gathered most of this info from my research as well, im just curious if you have any advice or input in regards to my original post? thank you

Click to expand...

Crab Pot said:

Even though two would be adequate for most growers, I’d probably go with three 315w LEC’s over each 3 x 6 table since you’re used to a lot of light. You might want to pick up a light meter to help you dial them in.

As far as ballasts and reflectors go, there are many good options. I could make a case for three Sun Systems reflectors with Galaxy ballasts and Phillips bulbs over each table. I recommended the SS reflectors to you for the quality, price point and that the bulbs are positioned vertically. I thought the Galaxy ballasts with the dimming fiction might be nice since you are going to be dealing with a lot of light. Obviously some plants can handle more light than others. I run 4200k in veg and flower and love it!


Katsu Bubba

View attachment 4027944
View attachment 4027951

Soulmate

View attachment 4027961
View attachment 4027969

Click to expand...

Haze the maze said:

If this is any help.
I m growing in a 3.5 x 3.5 screen with ONE 315w CMH and I could not believe how well some of the lower buds came out on My last plant This is stuff that normally would amount to nothing and was solid.
These lights are set to 20 inches above the tops and give a great spread at that distance.
3 would be great for what you are talking about.
I don't need the light to go past 12" into the plant and that's about as big as My tops grow anyway.
And don't forget that we get the UV light so more T H C
and they run super cool
They get a first grow impression of 10/10

My current grow...

View attachment 4027881
Peace

Click to expand...

theinhibitor said:

Just going to ask the obvious: who told you to move to CMH? For cannabis, HPS outperforms CMH in flowering every day of the week...its supported by oodles of evidence, just ask any long time grower on here. Look at Sedan's grow in Ukraine: he uses 600W HPS. If CMH boasted better quality and yields, everyone would already have them installed.

I grow in the Emerald Triangle and have a bunch of buddies who are true masters in the field, like Subcool, whose been breeding cup winners for decades. They all use HPS indoors, and only recently have been looking into LEDs more as supplements or for veg. CMH isnt even on their radar because metal halides just dont have a good spectrum for flowering cannabis, as it has to do with the physics/wavelengths. If CMH boasted better quality and better yields, these guys would be the first to switch. The amount of free, new tech stuff they get is unbelievable.

From the few talks I've had with them on CMH, CMH is basically a slightly better MH for veg. In flowering, it does that same thing every MH does: more leaf, less flower, for an overall more chlorophyll (spicy) tasting weed, which is considered worse. Also, internodal distance increases - ever noticed how CMH grows always have tall skinny weed? That's not a desirable trait. The buds down below will get no light.

And if you want to spend money on a new light, getting a 600w/900w LED would be best from every angle. In fact, I would combine the LED with the HPS...

Click to expand...

jronnn said:

yeah the 600 always giving me fluffy ass lower bud i cant stand it, i just hope if i get a fixture like sun system that has the ballast attached to the reflector that it doesn't get super hot. thanks for the response man

Click to expand...

jronnn said:

I have two 6x3 flower trays with 2 a/c 600w HPS over each tray and Im thinking about replacing them with three 315w lights per tray

My question is would three 315w per tray be ideal? I should expect more yield and better quality with 945w CMH vs 1200w HPS, correct? I just want to make sure the switch is a good one and worth it

also should i use reflectors that have the bulb horizontal or vertical?? for CMH brands my hydro shop has nanolux, ss lec, greenpower horizontal, sunburst, phantom and sun systems, any recommendations?
thank you

Click to expand...

jronnn said:

that soul mate looks insane they both look super covered in trichomes.... so i guess you recommend vertical bulbs for cmh.. after looking more in depth into the sun systems vertical i think im probably going to go with that one, the ballast is built into the reflector and it comes with a phillips brand ballast and bulb which seems ideal to have matching brands. Only thing that sucks is it comes with an only 6 foot power cord and idk how id make that work with where my light controller is.. but yeah my main concern is the cmh at the very least matching the yield of my 600s, it should right? i was under the impression to use 4200 in veg and 3100 in flower any particular reason why you use 4200 for both?

Click to expand...

jronnn said:

yeah the 600 always giving me fluffy ass lower bud i cant stand it, i just hope if i get a fixture like sun system that has the ballast attached to the reflector that it doesn't get super hot. thanks for the response man

Click to expand...

Carolina Dream'n said:

No need for 3 lights. Use 2. They cover a 3x3 space perfectly.

Stick with sunsystem and Phillips bulbs.

3100k from start to finish.

Click to expand...