BML Spyder600 Review

FauxRoux said:

keep in mind I don't have a spyder to compare with, And I'm not saying that one is better than the other. I'm merely saying that my choice was made at least partially due to my particular setup and so far I'm quite happy with them. The real test will of course be what will my flower results be using 2 of them in leu of the 1000 hps that the amares replaced. Im at day 9 and feeling optimistic. I am documenting the progress and will likely post it later.

For posterity.


P.S. also last i checked the spydel 1200 was $2400 ....the amare 880 was with discount dropped from $2800 to $2400...so it was NOT $1000 more...so to cover the same space i would have needed to buy 2 spyder 1200's or downgrade to the 600 which would be 330w each instead of the 440 with 2 amares.....also the spectrum was made for cannabis specifically....i wasnt as impressed with BML's

Click to expand...

Thanks for the update, you're the first person I have read that isn't impressed with BML. I know guys who are running them in their Medical grows 1x1200 for each plant and they say that they are doing awesome. Where do I find that Amare 880 for $2400? I don't see it anywhere on their site. I was reading the 260 pricing.

Its not that im not impressed with BML (they look awesome and i nearly went that route). Its that i wasnt AS impressed with BML's spectrum....to get the discount i emailed amare and said i was interested in the solorsystem880....they then issued me a coupon code which dropped the price to $2400 before tax and shipping....i do think that for the price they should cover shipping but with the discount its kinda hard to complain.

P.s. I have to say though, using a spyder 1200 per plant? They BETTER be getting amazing results cause from a commercial ag standpoint the overhead cost for that is......disproportionate . And given that a 1200 is more effective then a 1000hps...i cant say getting amazing results over 1 plant is all that impressive. With that much over 1 plant you should be killing it as long as everything else is dialed in

Yeah, not sure what you mean, but lots of guys do a 4x4 scrog with 1 plant. This is his setup. Claims he's getting about approximately 2lbs per scrog. Seems like a good way to go if you're feeding lots of nutes and teas. You only have to water 1 plant.

5suns said:

Yeah, not sure what you mean, but lots of guys do a 4x4 scrog with 1 plant. This is his setup. Claims he's getting about approximately 2lbs per scrog. Seems like a good way to go if you're feeding lots of nutes and teas. You only have to water 1 plant.

Click to expand...

Not that is epic

Looks like a lot of photons bouncing all over the fucking place to me....
I don't understand why these larger grows never put reflective curtains up along side their canopy and keep as much light concentrated on the plants as possible?

5suns said:

Yeah, not sure what you mean, but lots of guys do a 4x4 scrog with 1 plant. This is his setup. Claims he's getting about approximately 2lbs per scrog. Seems like a good way to go if you're feeding lots of nutes and teas. You only have to water 1 plant.

Click to expand...

Are those all soil grown?

I see what you mean. VERY nice. My setup is also scrog but i add a few more plants per light to cut down on veg time thus resulting in more rounds per year. Like i said...its not that you CANT do well with 1 plant per 1200...i was just saying im not SUPRISED they are killing it. Kind of hard not to. its alot of light. If hes pulling 2lb a light obviously thats impressive and shows the quality of the light.

It just may not be optimised from a commercial point of veiw. Keep in mind this is pretty much the ONLY crop that garners these prices.....Try growing any other crop with these price overheads and all of a sudden every little bit makes a huge difference. And as the LEGAL markets continue to establish themselves (not to mention corperations getting into the mix) the days of garage growers shilling out $75 for a gallon of premixed liquid nutes at 3% solution are over. I imagine within 10 yrs we may be back to $10 lids. If your old enough to know what that is is.


Aaaanyway....i digress.

I think if your heart is set on BML go for it. They look like great lights and id love to see more grow journals showimg what they can do. For those interested I am quite happy with the amares and (so far at least) attest to their quality.

P.s. hey 5sun...could you throw a link to that thread? I would love to read it over.

I used to pay 20 a lid, but that was a long long time ago for mex and no charge for the seeds

PurpleBuz said:

I used to pay 20 a lid, but that was a long long time ago for mex and no charge for the seeds

Click to expand...

Even better when it was compacted with that awesome moldy center and inner tire smell

FauxRoux said:

P.s. hey 5sun...could you throw a link to that thread? I would love to read it over.

Click to expand...

No, it's funny, my heart was set on Mars for the cost alone (by way of medgrower1 on youtube), after researching I realized they weren't using the most dependable LEDs/chips and another grower that was using the 1600w told me the penetration just wasn't there, so I moved on... I found Illumitex was about to pull the trigger and found the comparison study by a College that said BML Spydr won in pretty much every category... and now you got me looking at Amare. I can't make my mind up. lol. I hit up BML to see what kind of deal they could offer me. (not hoping for much)

About the thread... It's actually from a private group. Sorry, can't share it without catching flack for it. I like the group and want to stay.

5suns said:

No, it's funny, my heart was set on Mars for the cost alone (by way of medgrower1 on youtube), after researching I realized they weren't using the most dependable LEDs and another grower that was using the 1600w told me the penetration just wasn't there, so I moved on... I found Illumitex was about to pull the trigger and found the comparison study by a College that said BML Spydr won in pretty much every category... and now you got me looking at Amare. I can't make my mind up. lol. I hit up BML to see what kind of deal they could offer me. (not hoping for much)

About the thread... It's actually from a private group. Sorry, can't share it without catching flack for it. I like the group and want to stay.

Click to expand...

No worries, I respect keeping peoples confidence, its a must. And I know what you mean, I saw that university of Utah study with the 1/4mill spectrometer and nearly climaxed...I was all ready to buy BML but then research led me to Amare. Between what I found out about amare/the spectrum difference/the need to have the BML top bar special ordered to 30" (which they will do i believe..in all fairness)/ and I may be wrong but I think the first price break for BML is at 10 units......it just leaned towards Amare. And for my space in particular the modular nature of 4 individual Amare SE-220's that each have a veg/flower function just made it the right choice for me.

This is the info Amare sent me:

Hi ------,
Thank you for your interest and inquiry in our canna-specific HI-LEDs. A well-balanced spectrum should carry the full veg to flower cycle like natural sunlight. Our spectrum is over 60% red, with 46% from the 630/660/740 monochrome diodes and another 22% from the 6500k CW. Our spectrum is very close to your stated requirement The results are coming in and growers are experiencing better than HID performance with our panels. The SolarEclipse220 delivers 1831umol@12", 1095umol@24", 596umol@36".

FauxRoux said:

No worries, I respect keeping peoples confidence, its a must. And I know what you mean, I saw that university of Utah study with the 1/4mill spectrometer and nearly climaxed...I was all ready to buy BML but then research led me to Amare. Between what I found out about amare/the spectrum difference/the need to have the BML top bar special ordered to 30" (which they will do i believe..in all fairness)/ and I may be wrong but I think the first price break for BML is at 10 units......it just leaned towards Amare. And for my space in particular the modular nature of 4 individual Amare SE-220's that each have a veg/flower function just made it the right choice for me.

This is the info Amare sent me:

Hi ------,
Thank you for your interest and inquiry in our canna-specific HI-LEDs. A well-balanced spectrum should carry the full veg to flower cycle like natural sunlight. Our spectrum is over 60% red, with 46% from the 630/660/740 monochrome diodes and another 22% from the 6500k CW. Our spectrum is very close to your stated requirement The results are coming in and growers are experiencing better than HID performance with our panels. The SolarEclipse220 delivers 1831umol@12", 1095umol@24", 596umol@36".

Click to expand...

Preorders for BMLs new fixture start early NOV

BM9AGS said:

Preorders for BMLs new fixture start early NOV

Click to expand...

Which is an EXTREMELY good point. Im very interested in seeing what the new model looks like. If you have the option of waiting that long I would. At some point ill need to replace my other lights and im sure they will be out by then.

Its not like we're shopping for new slacks here.

Yeah, I think I'll wait and see what happens with BMLs new lights. Any idea what the Amare 880 quotes for coverage? is it 4x4 or 5x5 or?

As far as I understand it, cannabis needs just two wavelengths in the red band and two wavelengths in the blue band to provide over 95 percent of the light needed for all phases of plant growth. My problem with Spydr was that they didn't have two of these bands. Specifically blue. My problem with Amare Tech is that they haven't been around that long, and their warranty used to be better according to what I have read from those who were early adopters. They have since dropped it to a limited warranty. I can't find much for their PAR or stated coverage or anything like that. California Lightworks 880 looks promising. I'm going to keep researching.

5suns said:

As far as I understand it, cannabis needs just two wavelengths in the red band and two wavelengths in the blue band to provide over 95 percent of the light needed for all phases of plant growth. My problem with Spydr was that they didn't have two of these bands. Specifically blue. My problem with Amare Tech is that they haven't been around that long, and their warranty used to be better according to what I have read from those who were early adopters. They have since dropped it to a limited warranty. I can't find much for their PAR or stated coverage or anything like that. California Lightworks 880 looks promising. I'm going to keep researching.

Click to expand...

CLW and BML use the same Osram SSL80 diodes. Amare isn't in the same league if what I read is correct.

Coverage for amare 880 is 5x5. The university of utah video showed pretty poor performance with the CLW solorstorm 880....i have yet to see any reports of poor performance with amare...from anyone that actually has 1, but then again i never tried the earlyer models either...only the SE-220's..which are great so far.....5 year warranty on amare as well, and lifetime warranty on labor...after 5 years they will pay to repair it if you pay for the parts is how it was explained to me

FauxRoux said:

Coverage for amare 880 is 5x5. The university of utah video showed pretty poor performance with the CLW solorstorm 880....i have yet to see any reports of poor performance with amare...from anyone that actually has 1, but then again i never tried the earlyer models either...only the SE-220's..which are great so far.....5 year warranty on amare as well, and lifetime warranty on labor...after 5 years they will pay to repair it if you pay for the parts is how it was explained to me

Click to expand...

Can you link the Utah State video about the 880? I've only seen the pdf. Nothing mentioned the SolarStorm 880, just the Solar Storm 400.

I can't even find the stated PAR output of the SolarECLIPSE SE220 anywhere. They have a really lousy setup on their site. Hardly any information given. I'm actually starting to look at the LSG VividGro V2. LSG was rated right up there with BML in the Utah State study.

[/QUOTE]

The SolarEclipse220 delivers 1831umol@12", 1095umol@24", 596umol@36".

oops...This is the video I was calling the utah video....it is not at that Uni...my bad...cant remember why I transposed that...sounds like you watched it.....the CLW 880 is in it and gets very poor marks. If I had to pick LSG or BML based on this study clearly the BML comes out on top for light/watt ratio.

Yeah, I don't understand that video. BML Spydr 1200 was 1163umol and you're saying a Solar Elipse 220 delivers 1831umols. The LSG VividGro V2 'CLAIMS' theirs at 1081 umol at 24"-30" and a PAR Efficiency of 1.838 μmol/J delivered. The VividGro that they tested was V1, but I'm starting to think that these manufacturers are completely overstating these numbers. I wonder if AmareTech is also bullshitting with 1095@24" with the 220. Did you mean with the 880?