A51 190 or A51'S rw75???

I asked my question already, but it was on someone else's thread and they were in the middle of a dispute so I never got an answer. Anyways never grown with led so thx ahead for the input.
My plan is to use a small tent 22x51x48 to do a small sea of green set up in using 4 of these small 8site hydro setups. I will be one new clone in each every week so at week 9 and every week after I will be harvesting 3 large colas. The 4th hydro system is for flushing. The goal is to get as close to an oz per cola as possible. Would the A51 190 be too much for this kinda space and if so would 2 of the A51 RW-75'S get me to my goal of an oz per cola. I know the 190's reach says 39" max so i'll just supplement over the flushing hydro system to cover the extra 12".

Thank you for any good input

Well, they told me 2xRW-75s for 18x36 Ao I feel like you should have a 3rd one.

TubeAndJar said:

Well, they told me 2xRW-75s for 18x36 Ao I feel like you should have a 3rd one.

Click to expand...

I agree. I'd do no less than 3. I love my XGS 190 but looking at the numbers vs the new RW if I were purchasing again I'd go RW I think. I run an XGS is a 2x3 space. I'm considering possibly in a few months once I've seen some other grows moving my veg cab and adding 2 RW75s or an onyx. So then it'd be a 2x4 with a 190 and either either the onyx or two RW75s one on each side of the XGS.

What r u talking about when you say "after looking at the rw's numbers"?
Are you saying the 190 is too much for your space? And what about the rw 150? Im sorry if I sound illiterate, but I just dont want to shell out this kinda money for the wrong one. So what is it about the rw's that would make you reconsider your 190 purchase?

Wheres your rez? I hope not under those buckets. If so GL changing when your plants are big.

jpbeach28 said:

What r u talking about when you say "after looking at the rw's numbers"? Are you saying the 190 is too much for your space? And what about the rw 150? Im sorry if I sound illiterate, but I just dont want to shell out this kinda money for the wrong one. So what is it about the rw's that would make you reconsider your 190 purchase?

Click to expand...

The rws have more red light along with less green/yellow and blue. He posted umole for different wavelengths for all the lights. With the 75s you have more control with light spread. For your space I'd do no less than 3 75s, 4 would be cool or 2 rw 150s. Also like yoda said you should really look into a remote reservoir. You will hate yourself later if you don't. Lol

There is an h2o pump inside the res that pumps it out. So changing water is as easy as Turning that knob that you see on that black tube coming out of the system. So no issues there whatsoever.
But given the size of the grow area, 22x51x48 would I be able to achieve my goal of an oz per cola using these RW75'S?

That has as much to do with the growing conditions and genetics as the lights.. The 75 will produce plenty of light, but it's not like you can say "buy this light to get half ounce per cola, and this light for 2 oz..."

If it were my tent, I would get 3 75's going and get a 2 or 3 zone perpetual going.. Good luck with whatever, and you can't go wrong with the A51's bro.

The 190 is really a great light too and more powerful than the 75's so take that into account ,and not to mention look at grow logs on the forum about the 190 you will see some nice buds. The 75 is untested but might be as good or better we will see.

Yodaweed said:

The 190 is really a great light too and more powerful than the 75's so take that into account ,and not to mention look at grow logs on the forum about the 190 you will see some nice buds. The 75 is untested but might be as good or better we will see.

Click to expand...

Not exactly according to the numbers. the 150 is slightly more geared for flower, and a little better numbers than the 190 other than total umole. The 190 has a lot more yellow green light than the 150. Also, if the numbers are correct then 2-75s would be just a little more output than a 150. But yeah either way both should get the job done. No complaints about my 190.

2013 SGS 160
Umol'/s @ 12" center:
400-500nm 217 Umol'/s
500-600nm 413.5 Umol'/s
600-700nm 533.5 Umol'/s
700-800nm 19 Umol'/s
400-800nm 1183 Umol'/s
Wattage: 155w at the plug
Lenses: 80°


2014 rw-150
Umol'/s @ 12" center:
400-500nm 217 Umol'/s
500-600nm 371 Umol'/s
600-700nm 717 Umol'/s
700-800nm 15 Umol'/s
400-800nm 1320 Umol'/s
Wattage: 155w at the plug
Lenses: 80°

2014 rw-75
Umol'/s @ 12" center:
400-500nm 150 Umol'/s
500-600nm 233 Umol'/s
600-700nm 453 Umol'/s
700-800nm 9 Umol'/s
400-800nm 845 Umol'/s
Wattage: 77.5w at the plug
Lenses: 80°

2014 xgs-190
Umol'/s @ 12" center:
400-500nm 263 Umol'/s
500-600nm 607 Umol'/s
600-700nm 446 Umol'/s
700-800nm 33 Umol'/s
400-800nm 1349 Umol'/s
Wattage: 195w at the plug
Lenses: 95°

Here is a 400w HPS as well just for comparison:

400W HPS
12" from brand new bare bulb w/reflector
400-500nm 85 Umol'/s
500-600nm 517 Umol'/s
600-700nm 444 Umol'/s
700-800nm 85 Umol'/s
800-900nm 296 Umol'/s
900-1100nm 132 Umol'/s
400-1100nm 1559 Umol'/s

gk skunky said:

Also, if the numbers are correct then 2-75s would be just a little more output than a 150.

Click to expand...

Yeah I noticed the numbers on the A51 site the other day and I thought it was well worth it to get the 2x75s.
2014 rw-150
Umol'/s @ 12" center:
400-500nm 217 Umol'/s
500-600nm 371 Umol'/s
600-700nm 717 Umol'/s
700-800nm 15 Umol'/s
400-800nm 1320 Umol'/s
Wattage: 155w at the plug
Lenses: 80°

2014 rw-75
Umol'/s @ 12" center:
400-500nm 150 Umol'/s
500-600nm 233 Umol'/s
600-700nm 453 Umol'/s
700-800nm 9 Umol'/s
400-800nm 845 Umol'/s
Wattage: 77.5w at the plug
Lenses: 80°

That makes 2x75s = 1690 Umol'/s and the rw150 is listed as 1320 Umol'/s

The 190 has the wider lenses tho so you are right and I am wrong, reading the numbers you wrote. However if you look at the beam angle the rw150 and rw75 are 80 and the 190 is 95 so it should have more coverage and it is a good light like you said. The 75/150 might be great just untested.

One thing to keep in mind when deciding whether to go with multiple smaller panels or a larger, is that you will lose intensity with multiple smaller ones, but you will get more uniform coverage. So with the 75's, you won't ever hit higher umoles in your space (unless maybe all lights are pointed at same focal point, blasting one plant for example). But you will get solid numbers over a larger canopy. Hope that makes sense.

Also consider those readings were taken at 12" from the center of the light. Curious to know what the drop off is like. I'm sure their recommended height is actually higher than that too so be sure to consider that as well.

puffenuff said:

One thing to keep in mind when deciding whether to go with multiple smaller panels or a larger, is that you will lose intensity with multiple smaller ones, but you will get more uniform coverage. So with the 75's, you won't ever hit higher umoles in your space (unless maybe all lights are pointed at same focal point, blasting one plant for example). But you will get solid numbers over a larger canopy. Hope that makes sense.

Also consider those readings were taken at 12" from the center of the light. Curious to know what the drop off is like. I'm sure their recommended height is actually higher than that too so be sure to consider that as well.

Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying and yeah would be interesting to see more data. Even if just total umole for different heights like the XGS had posted up for a while. Because like you said I'm interested to see.

Though I think if I expand at all unless these tiny little ONYX lights are just badass I'll be getting either a 150 to put along side the 190 or what I think right now given the info I have what I think would be better is a RW-75 on the side of each.

Hi guys, I see I share the same dilema with you all.. I need some light to cover 2 tent (5'x5'), so..
First of all I'd get 2x XGS190 as shown in Ex 1.. However, its out of stock.. Then I thought it'd be better 4x RW75 as Ex 2...
Now I just think I can't miss any of both worlds.. (I mean, spectrum..) So I came with the Ex 3 idea, which will have all of them.. none will be missed.. The Ex 4 is just an idea if I had more money to spend..

What u guys think?

BTW, only the tent size and the units footprint are proportional, the units size itself is random..
And I pushed the XGS190 footprint a little from the 2,5x2,5 in the site..

How did A51 collect these numbers? They seem a bit ridiculous.