What exactly are they saying when a LED is equivalent?
- Thread starter smokajoe
- Start date
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
I would say that these comparisons are more aimed at selling you a equivalent,more like coverage and penetration. A 60 watt bulb can have the same spectrum as a 1000 HPS but it wont grow as much plant matter. HPS actually has a narrow spectrum but makes up for it by shear horse power. With the best LED's now with far superior spectrum's and efficiency you can get the same growing power of a 1000 watt HPS with much less electricity. The problem is a HPS set up is cheap and LED has a big up front cost but if you look at the long view your using much less electricity and no replacement bulbs along with reduced cooling costs too because LED runs much cooler.
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
If I remember right,the summer sun at mid day puts out about 2000 micro-moles of light energy and a 1000 watt HPS at 12" puts out about the same.I thought I heard that Apache Tech is coming out with a LED unit that will do 3000 micro-moles,haven't heard the cost tho.
djwimbo
Well-Known Member
Most of the time the "compares to" is not a valid argument.
A good LED company will tell you what their PAR output is, and umole's of energy at a specified distance. Most LED's don't cover much more than their own footprint, but are usually tuned per spectrum/PAR.
Basically, don't listen to the advertisements. Shoot for 40-50 watts per square foot (general rule) or >700umole for a foot print. It might push big numbers on the umole or PAR reading, but the footprint of the actual output is what you're shooting for. 300-500umoles veg, 600-1200umoles flower (again, a general rule).
People claim that 175W LED will out perform a 400W HID, and I would say 98% of the time that's flat out bogus. The conversion isn't a factor of 1/3, it's more like 2/3-3/4. A good 300W LED can out perform a 400W HID, but not guaranteed. There are too many other factors, and too many companies trying to push some BS, to really back up a XXX vs XXX comparison.
A good LED company will tell you what their PAR output is, and umole's of energy at a specified distance. Most LED's don't cover much more than their own footprint, but are usually tuned per spectrum/PAR.
Basically, don't listen to the advertisements. Shoot for 40-50 watts per square foot (general rule) or >700umole for a foot print. It might push big numbers on the umole or PAR reading, but the footprint of the actual output is what you're shooting for. 300-500umoles veg, 600-1200umoles flower (again, a general rule).
People claim that 175W LED will out perform a 400W HID, and I would say 98% of the time that's flat out bogus. The conversion isn't a factor of 1/3, it's more like 2/3-3/4. A good 300W LED can out perform a 400W HID, but not guaranteed. There are too many other factors, and too many companies trying to push some BS, to really back up a XXX vs XXX comparison.
tags420
Well-Known Member
They say it is equivalent because it is the same peak intensity. But very rarely do they cover a whole grow area with superior intensity. Lots of led's are as powerful as a 600w hps in the center...but very few of them are even as good as a 400w at outer parts of a 3x3.
They really should be saying is, it has the power of a 600w in a 2x2 area and only a 200w outside that.
But as new tech advances led's are starting to be able to spread out the light over the whole area and maintain intensity.
As said the sun is 2000umol...but that is everywhere...on the ground or 30ft in the air...still 2000umol. That's why even if we match umols at the canopy the sun will still dominate.
They really should be saying is, it has the power of a 600w in a 2x2 area and only a 200w outside that.
But as new tech advances led's are starting to be able to spread out the light over the whole area and maintain intensity.
As said the sun is 2000umol...but that is everywhere...on the ground or 30ft in the air...still 2000umol. That's why even if we match umols at the canopy the sun will still dominate.
