Apache Tech LED Grow... 8x12...1900w

WOW...!!!! (no other words...) (except those...) (and those....) (and those....etc)

I can be honest and say I am not a fan of LED. But I love science and I love testing and I love facts so I will see how far this grow test goes.

I do not believe for a second that LED lights achieve more THC % than HPS or any other type of light. Potency is a genetic factor. Theoretically one could lose potency of a specific genetic by having a negative environment or other factors, but the different light type or spectrum does not effect potency in any way.

12 Apache AT120w's? So close to $12,000 in lights. Hmmmmm. I understand the idea of saving money on electricity, but I do not believe one, that you will yield more then your 6-600 watt setup. And two, the start up cost in lights alone(12k compared to 1,200 maybe with only about 350 a year after the first year in bulb replacement cost) is a great setback short-term. But if one could actually get the same yields as with hps lighting and the equipment actually has some longevity and doesn't lose it's effectiveness or have maintenance issues, then maybe. But only then. I admit I don't look at many LED threads because I've seen LED production up close and personal and I'm just not impressed.

But I will sub this thread and watch the results because I care about facts and not myths. Good Luck!

Subbed up, the RW Apache panel is the way to go. Great size room!

Oh hell yeah, this is going to be an awesome run. I'm subbed up, got my front row seat and popcorn ready. Good luck tags

Subbed, that's allot of Apache's and will be fun to watch..........good luck grower

Originally Posted by Rancho Cucamonga

I do not believe for a second that LED lights achieve more THC % than HPS or any other type of light. Potency is a genetic factor. Theoretically one could lose potency of a specific genetic by having a negative environment or other factors, but the different light type or spectrum does not effect potency in any way.

I have to disagree. There has been A LOT of research put into what types of light best feed photosynthesis... there's a lot more going on under the surface of growing plants than we ever knew.... accessory pigments, hormone response, immune response, and much more. As we figure out how plants respond to specific wavelengths of light, we can tailor spectrums to specifically meet those requirements. I, personally, think a tailored spectrum based on extensive research is going to far and away outperform an outdated spectrum based on a limited understanding of photosynthesis.

At OP, nice video. Subbed.

I'm with mamakush on this one. Regardless of all other factors, LED's have proven their potential as a growing light. All those other factors are hopefully under control of the grower, but those aren't all created equal.

Subbed to see results, I really like those panels, but they neither suit my need nor my budget.

Originally Posted by Rancho Cucamonga

I can be honest and say I am not a fan of LED. But I love science and I love testing and I love facts so I will see how far this grow test goes.
I do not believe for a second that LED lights achieve more THC % than HPS or any other type of light. Potency is a genetic factor. Theoretically one could lose potency of a specific genetic by having a negative environment or other factors, but the different light type or spectrum does not effect potency in any way.

12 Apache AT120w's? So close to $12,000 in lights. Hmmmmm. I understand the idea of saving money on electricity, but I do not believe one, that you will yield more then your 6-600 watt setup. And two, the start up cost in lights alone(12k compared to 1,200 maybe with only about 350 a year after the first year in bulb replacement cost) is a great setback short-term. But if one could actually get the same yields as with hps lighting and the equipment actually has some longevity and doesn't lose it's effectiveness or have maintenance issues, then maybe. But only then. I admit I don't look at many LED threads because I've seen LED production up close and personal and I'm just not impressed.
But I will sub this thread and watch the results because I care about facts and not myths. Good Luck!

Yes they have higher potency in the final flowers, and this is cause with the right wavelengths the plant increases resin/trichome production to basically make it's own sunscreen. This happens with HPS and the sun too, but while under the led's they don't suffer the negative effects like heat thus retaining the potency from the extra protection. You may say that is an environment, but that environment was produce by your lights. It could be looked at as LED's don't increase potency...more like HPS destroys some thc.
Listen to Mamakush, she knows what's up.

I was lucky enough to run into the right people while playing golf one day and they got me setup with original two. I bought them full retail. First grow was with 2 AT120's in a 4x4...did literally just over 1lb...same thing on the next run...then I became a believer. But after my first run I have been in contact and built a relationship with apache and they gave me a price break for my bigger order.
It cost about 1600 to set it up for hps and thats with friends discounts at monsterG.
Here is the cost run down...
HPS 4000w on 12/12 @ $0.30/KwH= $432.00/month...5,184/year
LED 1884w on 12/12 @ $0.30/KwH= $203.47/month...2,441.64/year

That's $2,742.36 in savings a year. LED's last for up to 50,000hours...thats over 10 years of 12/12. Assuming that it last for 5yrs @ 12/12 that's $13,711.80 over the life time in electricity compared to running hps for 5yrs. With a perceptual system, HPS don't last as long, and bulbs get changed more often than average users. New hps ballast every 2 years isn't unrealistic.

HPS for 5 years
$1,600(startup) + $25,920(5yrs Electricity) + $1,800(bulb replace 2/year) + $1,000(new ballast over 5yrs) = $30,320
Apache LED's for 5 years
$10,000(startup) + $12,208.20(5yrs Electricity) = $22,208.20

I have been giving apache some feed back and recently convinced them to change the housing on the AT120 from high grade aluminum to a cheaper steal. This will bring the price down to about $600 retail! For the same light. It was originally designed for NASA and need to be extremely durable; and it did survive 8 foot falls, but some growers would rather pay less and just not let it fall. That will be coming out this year. That 12,000 investment just became $7,200 full retail. They will still offer the aluminum versions but honestly I think that should fade out or special order only maybe for practicality.

The initial investment and skepticism is what keep most away from LED's. After this project, people will be able to see the results for what they are, and can choose for themselves if if is worth it. A lot of people will be like, "Wow, I had no idea LED's could be so good!" and that's what I am here to show. And then there will always be haters. But this is my grow and my cash so everyone keep watching and we will see what happens.