Apache AT600 led vs 1000w HPS Blue Dream Grow

Greengenes- great thread n grow...very informative...

my only problem is why run the Hps in a 4x4 ?
You could have ran it in a 6x6 =36 sqft. instead of the 4x4-16sqft space ...that extra 20sqft would have yielded another 6-10 zips ...I'm very impressed with your Apache but in a true comparison the 1k watt hps would have kinda left that apache in the dust.

Eh^ I think the evidence that quality with LED is better had been supported really well. Quantity is what you want, but quality is what you pay for

Corso312 said:

Greengenes- great thread n grow...very informative...

my only problem is why run the Hps in a 4x4 ?
You could have ran it in a 6x6 =36 sqft. instead of the 4x4-16sqft space ...that extra 20sqft would have yielded another 6-10 zips ...I'm very impressed with your Apache but in a true comparison the 1k watt hps would have kinda left that apache in the dust.

Click to expand...

that doesn't make any sense. measurements with the par meter show similar amounts of light in the 4x4 squares for both sides. Idea is to keep all variables the same with the only difference being the type of light. if Your raise both lights up to cover a 6x6 area you just get light spread over a larger area, and it probably would have been worse for hps light since it's foot print is heavily centered biased.

or were you actually asking for a handicap ?

No...maybe I'm explaining myself wrong..

I RUN 1ks ...Two 6" aircooled xxxls in a 11 1\2 ' x 6 ' Limiting that Hps to a 4x4 is doing it a diservice .

1k per 4x4 is pretty standard.

sorry must be toking too much I didn't see any disservice to either of the lights in this impartial side by side test grow.
LOOK AT THE PAR FOOTPRINT IN THE BEGINNING OF THE THREAD

vitamin_green_inc said:

Yes I understand the price part, which is why I said it takes awhile, and tbh as a human being, I do love my hobbies and my MJ, but 1-2-3-4 years for a small again I stress the word "hobbyist" the initial startup cost even with the savings etc. will take a long time to balance out. I, as someone who needs to remain stealthy, know all bout the electrical savings as well as the lack of noticible growing on my bill...but really we are just agreeing with each other, and I still want you to give me a code

Click to expand...

Apache's were not designed with the hobbyist in mind...it is a commercial light. I don't make the lights...all I can do is show you guys what works. I'm yet to see another pre-made light do what the at600 can do...on paper or in reality.

Nuecoyote said:

So as I understand it you have not tried any of the other LED systems out there? I'm curious if you've looked into BML? It would appear they deliver greater efficiency (more PAR per watt) and perhaps good value (more PAR per dollar) but I'm not sure if they deliver enough intensity (PAR μmol/m2/s). Curious to know your thoughts...
Thanks for the videos and the thread. Great work.

Click to expand...

I aam assuming you saw a "study" from university of utah...stating that the spyder has the highest µmol/w...
If so the apache they used was an at120 given to them in 2011, designed pre 2010. They did not test the at600 or at200 which are the current model.
If you are not referencing that "study", than I don't know where/how you got that conclusion.
I have only used a stealth602, at120's, at200, and at600 and an indagro induction system. As well as using the cree cxa 3K cobs right now.
I also go to many hydro shows all year, and get to do some "consulting" for some other companies that will be coming out soon. I have seen and tested in person with my meters... illumitex(DS), BML(600 and 1000), indagro, advanced, cidly, evergrow, blackdog, mars2, sunlight systems, flextronics, LTC, lumigro(650), kessil, solis tek, plus several new comers that I don't know the name and aren't worth looking up right now.

Apache is using better chips than any company on the market. Nichia's. And they use more of them in their unit than any company. Meaning that not only do they have the best engine...but the run them at the best current to maximize output, longevity, and efficiency. Combined with their superior lens to bml.
BML has a heat problem, and that is the 600...the 1000 is way worse on the heart(literally 2X as much...that's not a guess). It is going to cause not only environment effects(hot room), but possible technical issues like longevity, and output issues like lower µmols/w because of the operating temp.
I should note Apache uses the best everything...drivers, heatsinks, chips, fans(a little loud, but will never break). You name it in there and it's pretty much the best available.

Long story short...compare the PAR footprints of any led to the apache at600

Corso312 said:

Greengenes- great thread n grow...very informative...

my only problem is why run the Hps in a 4x4 ?
You could have ran it in a 6x6 =36 sqft. instead of the 4x4-16sqft space ...that extra 20sqft would have yielded another 6-10 zips ...I'm very impressed with your Apache but in a true comparison the 1k watt hps would have kinda left that apache in the dust.

Click to expand...

You are talking like the apache couldn't have used more room too...
We here in my area run 1000w in 5x5 if running multiple lights...4x4 if running just 1. That is because at those coverage zones the whole canopy is receiving the required intensity for the best growth. The fact is that apache has measure the lights all the way out to 6x6 and the PAR foot print matches all the way out. there are 50* lenses for max coverage and running them low to the canopy.
I have said this before...what ever YOU do with a 1000w, is what YOU can do with an AT600. What I do is what I do. Be your self and keep doing you.

As for my testing...they ended up being a 5x5 for the 1000w and a 4x5 for the apache. The led couldn't expand as much because it was in the corner confined on 3 sides...while the 1000w only was constricted on 2 sides, allowing it to expand more. And still the yields were equal.

Good stuff...i didn't know that the hps had a 5 x 5 to fill.

I'm already knew Led could produce better quality than any hid...few of my friends been running the chromes for fee years ..think they are called blackdog... I was goin to purchase a couple leds after i harvest my outties n was leaning towards area 51 ...might have pursuaded me to go Apache

They stated out initially as 4x4's but weren't very confined as the grow progressed and I sure wasn't cutting any colas off to make them stay in the space. The idea being 4x8 tables as a good comparison to how it would be used. Usually 2 1000w or 3 600w hps would do a 4x8. That wasn't my first 1K grow. I have been a major hps user in the past. I/we used to run 9 4x8 tables with 2K over each. It used to be 9 3gals per light instead of 4-6 7gals like I do now, but same canopy in the end. We lasted about 1 1/2 years then shut it down. I never got to run led's on that scale, but you never know what the future holds. It was our plan to go led's before we shut down. Good thing we went down, because it has taken till the is last years generation of the best in the led industry to truly give a 1K hps a run for it's money. But my interest in led's continued warehouse or not. And now I have a fully operational and productive led garden, using less power to produce as much product but of super quality.

a51 is a good light. You need 4 if you want them to compare to an at600. But it's an option.

PetFlora said:

Personally, I do not trust the FDA as far as I can throw them

And yes it IS toxic. It's fucking engine coolant

Fluoride was passed off as a cavity fighter.

It's a fucking residue from making aluminum.

Some POS got a lot of money to fund some BS studies.

Best studies dirty money can by

Sound familiar? FDA has supported it from day one

It's taken 30 years of battling, but FINALLY, people are winning.

Dallas just got it eliminated from their water supply.

Click to expand...

Dallas water still has large amounts of chlorine, its fucking disgusting.

ODanksta said:

Dallas water still has large amounts of chlorine, its fucking disgusting.

Click to expand...

Get ya Rain catcher...thats what I do..whats going on pm me plz.

SOMEBEECH said:

Get ya Rain catcher...thats what I do..whats going on pm me plz.

Click to expand...

Well my ol lady stays in Dallas and we would rather die of thirst before drinking that trash! But i have a RO 200 that i drink its the same that i use for the garden. I use to use collected rain water but i think it was the reason i couldn't get rid of the spidermites

never had a single insect prob in 8yrs.

SOMEBEECH said:

never had a single insect prob in 8yrs.

Click to expand...

Ive been bug free for a long time too, only gnats buts that's normal for organics.

pm plz dont wanna bomb his thread.
Sry GG if you want cant delete.

Love the work, and info you are providing. Excellent yield and great test results!
Also thanks for the PPFD footprint of the Apache. Did you do the testing or find that somewhere? I haven't been able to find much on their site regarding this kind of info instead relying on you and growershouse.
I did look at that paper from Utah and saw a number of limitations in it. Graduate students these days!
thanks NC

Nuecoyote said:

Love the work, and info you are providing. Excellent yield and great test results!
Also thanks for the PPFD footprint of the Apache. Did you do the testing or find that somewhere? I haven't been able to find much on their site regarding this kind of info instead relying on you and growershouse.
I did look at that paper from Utah and saw a number of limitations in it. Graduate students these days!
thanks NC

Click to expand...

Thanks man.
The professional charts are form Apache. I did an a test on my original when I first got it...but once I showed it to apache they made their own professional charts and do it to every light now. Anyone can call/email them and ask for it from various heights and lenses.
Their website blows. But there is a reason for that, but is a different matter. Soon it will be updated...so they say.
But the best way to get the real and bets info is to call them. You'll probably get robert, the plant physiologist...super cool dude and will tell you everything you need to know.

The Utah paper is great...EXCEPT for they use an AT120(2010) in a 2013 test when both the at200 or at600 would have been available to Bugbee if he called/inquired about updated tech. But as you noted, it was the grad students work. Notice it's the only fixture under 300w. The facility already had an at120 that apache gave them(bugbee actually) in 2011; why go buy another fixture if the "name" is already here, is probably what happened. So that part was poor IMO. But the info on every product that is on the list is legit(even the at120). Just sucks that the light everyone is trying to catch up to isn't on there.

Check out my new thread to see two of them over the 4x8...day 40ish
https://www.rollitup.org/t/greengenes-garden.839682/

what a fucking beast of a thread!!!...congrats man!!..

out of curiosity can someone point me in the general direction of this UTAH uni study... would be interested in having a read..

Are you a Zappa fan greengenes?

120W array produces the equivalent of a 1000W HID lamp.

Click to expand...

Why does AT write that on their homepage?
lacking an update is one thing...

DOX420 said:

what a fucking beast of a thread!!!...congrats man!!..

out of curiosity can someone point me in the general direction of this UTAH uni study... would be interested in having a read..

Are you a Zappa fan greengenes?

Click to expand...

I just read it again...great paper besides the AT thing. The info on led vs hps is perfect.
http://growershouse.com/images/PDFs/BUGBEEpub__6441190.pdf

lax123 said:

Why does AT write that on their homepage?
lacking an update is one thing...

Click to expand...

Because it's from 2010 and that's how things were. The website has a few thing added to it(at200 and at600)...but nothing old/original has been changed.
Lets go back in time...when led's couldn't keep up with hps and had to use some "tricks" or show "highlights"...
Companies used vague terms to technically make them not lying. Was the ways of the market unfortunately and even AT is guilty of some things.
Company: "We can match a 1000w hps"
Educated consumer: "from how far and over how much space?"
Company: "You got us...at a foot and covers 2x2"

Now days we are all more educated and/or companies have to show real perforce if it's good(like full PAR maps) because of the false promises of the past. Even to the uneducated they have been hearing the generic led sales pitch and know most still suck so what more can a company show...
PAR map LED vs HPS it claims to replace...can't hide anything with that.
Performance is what truly separates AT from the rest and they have no problems showing it if someone asks for info.
Legal things with a old partner is why AT's website blows. Until that is resolved nothing will change with the site.
If someone wants to be sold by a website then AT is not the company for them. But if they want the best and know what the best is...then AT is their company. In the old days we would use this thing called a telephone to get info. The nice thing about AT is it's a plant physiologist on the other end not a sale guy/girl.

Another company that acts like apache is lighting science group(#1 led in the utah study). I talked with them in Washington.
On their website the grow light is in the high bay section... no info...yet they only deal with customers buying 20+ fixtures. And are in many professional MJ facilities. They have the product and someone educated enough to know what they need...will find them.

Is that a great business moto...probably not. But does it work for some...you bet.