LED Companies w/ LINKS

Jubilant

Jubilant

Well-Known Member
Hybridway said:
If you use a good light then I doubt you'll think they are any good for growing cannabis bud. Maybe it's just all you know? I recommend you save up a lil, buy a good light & compare your yields. After doing that, you might just be mad at Viper for ever selling those lights no matter how cheap they are.
Any light will effectively flower a plant. Seriously. A nightight you put in your hallway will flower a Pot plant if it's set to 12/12 homes.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying spending more money (or DIY) can't produce better results I am saying some people don't need to worry about MAXIMIZING their yields rather they want to supply their own fun/medicine in an easy and effective method.

Obviously if you custom build you can get WAY better results you are fine tuning your equipment and buying all the best parts but that takes a lot of time/research/and desire to actually undertake that kind of task. For instance I build computers any would NEVER buy a pre-built but there are a lot of users out there who either don't know how (even though I think it is very trivial) or don't want to and for easy. They will spend more money on a less powerful machine but in the end it does everything it will want them to do. Might not be enough for an enthusiast like me but for their needs/skills it is perfect.
 
Big smo

Big smo

Well-Known Member
Jubilant said:
I simply posted a cheap option for LEDs.

What do I love about them? Yeah they are affordable, generate next to no heat, my plants have been growing vigorously, very simple to set up multiple units if more are needed IDK what else you want out of a light.

Nothing was argumentative in my post just I am satisfied with this affordable, simple, effective option.

Not everyone who wants LEDs wants to DIY and I am not the only one who loves these lights for growing cannabis many people do and review their experiences very highly for what these lights are.

IDK if you are trying to call me unintelligent, but seems to me people argue because of statements like that. DIY and buying a pre-built LED rig are two different worlds and you clearly have your opinion on which is better for your grow. Not everyone has your needs/skills so DIY isn't always the best option.
Click to expand...
I apologize, your comment came at a bad time the led sections are always filled with arguments and you came right in the middle. Let me tell you that the actual wattage of that light is what you should consider. It's not a miracle that 100w of those LEDs equal 600w hps. So to equal 600w you would need plenty of those and the heat would be as high or higher than the hps. There is a lot to learn here on riu. First that cheaper LEDs are not better than hps. They have bolder claims and use less wattage.
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
Hybridway said:
I don't think you could make a similiar light for less & more efficient. From what I've heard from DIY experts, it's not easy, certainly not cheap & will look like a mess unless you put so much time into it, you'd have to count that time as labor cost.
Remember. It's not just cobs. They are made to mimic the sun on the Equetorial line. So, you're not just mixing K-Temps here. Check out the spectrum. The gaps provided by cobs are filled in, providing a true full spectrum.
From what I can see the plants respond bonkers. I'm willing to bet the THC & Terpen levels are higher then HPS or cobs.
Maybe I'll get the test done next run vs. plain cobs & we'll find out.
Click to expand...
I would like to see a side by side if you get the chance, Im just not seeing it compete with cobs alone. 61% Efficient, next light will be around 65%... Hard to beat IMO... unless you run the same amount of lights and drive them lower.
 
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
I would like to see a side by side if you get the chance, Im just not seeing it compete with cobs alone. 61% Efficient, next light will be around 65%... Hard to beat IMO... unless you run the same amount of lights and drive them lower.
Click to expand...
Did a side by side against another light that had Burple Cobs & surrounding monos. The Amare crushed it. You can view the thread here on RIU.
As far as vs. cobs, I've ran them against each other for just a week by turning off the monos n running straight cobs with added cobs to even out the wattage. It appeared to provide more overall growth from the Amares using the enhanced spectrum. But that's not solid conclusive evidence. I'd have to do a run w/ plain cobs vs. the enhanced cobs in full to determine for sure.
If o do this, I will also get the THC & Terpen profile tested as well. I know for sure the enhanced spectrum causes more potency & smell then my HPS by allot. You can easily tell.
Remember, efficiency is not entirely what grows pot.
What needs to be taken into account is the R+D that was done with Burple. There really is Chlophyl peaks. Making a grow light based on just them will not do the trick though. Combine them with what we know about white. Now what you have is the best of both worlds in a full, sun mimicking spectrum.
The monos used in the Amare light recipe are everybit as efficient as the cobs aside from the 630 reds which provide more radiometric efficiency then 660's & are driven soft to equal It all out.
I may do a direct side by side using plain cobs vs Amare this upcoming run. If so, I will deffinetly do a thread on it.
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
Hybridway said:
Did a side by side against another light that had Burple Cobs & surrounding monos. The Amare crushed it. You can view the thread here on RIU.
As far as vs. cobs, I've ran them against each other for just a week by turning off the monos n running straight cobs with added cobs to even out the wattage. It appeared to provide more overall growth from the Amares using the enhanced spectrum. But that's not solid conclusive evidence. I'd have to do a run w/ plain cobs vs. the enhanced cobs in full to determine for sure.
If o do this, I will also get the THC & Terpen profile tested as well. I know for sure the enhanced spectrum causes more potency & smell then my HPS by allot. You can easily tell.
Remember, efficiency is not entirely what grows pot.
What needs to be taken into account is the R+D that was done with Burple. There really is Chlophyl peaks. Making a grow light based on just them will not do the trick though. Combine them with what we know about white. Now what you have is the best of both worlds in a full, sun mimicking spectrum.
The monos used in the Amare light recipe are everybit as efficient as the cobs aside from the 630 reds which provide more radiometric efficiency then 660's & are driven soft to equal It all out.
I may do a direct side by side using plain cobs vs Amare this upcoming run. If so, I will deffinetly do a thread on it.
Click to expand...
"Recommended height above canopy: 30"-48"; Amare does not recommend to place the COB panel less than 30" above the canopy with lenses installed."

We will use the 36" numbers to get the PPFD since thats one of the only "usable" number they give you. for a 4x4 that would be 905PPFD (not bad) and a 5x5 would be 579PPFD... so a bit better than a DE HPS. ( Not great IMO)

Im aware about the efficiency, but I still dont think that monos are worth it.. Ive never seen anything that says otherwise except peoples opinions.. as for the cobs.. its all about the PPFD which is why they rock... obviously spectrum is a big part of that but raw output is also still good since it is white light... Yes more blue less red or vice versa but its white either way you look at it. You can make a 400W 660mn light for like $400 thats driven at 50W each (half the rated power) and 8 5000k crees around $1200 total... boom over 1000W of light blasting with a solid red for flower... But that said @The Dawg is doing great with his 5000k and a bit of far red for a short amount of time.

If youre interested Ill run one of those lights to test how they fair... But I dont think theyre worth the money by far because they dont has a good spread of light for the area compared to the DIY. For instance... This would be that light assuming it was just the cobs in a 4x4.

I would guess at best the COBS are in one of these configs... Both of which are not impressive to me. If you know the specific config I would like to see the output as thats not found anywhere.... Only PPF which like I said does come down to multiplying the total by the meters^2 to get PPFD.

I have readings in my signature (DE HPS, HPS, and COBS) to compare if you have some for your light I would like to see them.

CXB3590CD36V3500K 4 COBS @2.8A ON 1.813 PROFILE HEATSINK
16 SQ.FT. CANOPY 92% EFFICIENT DRIVER @15 CENTS PER KWH
Total power watts at the wall: 452.17
Cobs power watts: 416
Total voltage forward: 148
Total lumens: 58144
Total PAR watts assuming 10% loss: 162
Total PPF: 753.3
PPFD based on canopy area: 506.78
PAR watts per sq.ft.: 10.13
Cob efficiency: 43.14%
Power watts per sq.ft.: 26.0
Voltage forward per cob: 37.12
Lumens per watt: 139.77
Heatsink riser thickness / number of fins / fin's length: 0.3in/6/0.95in
Heatsink area per inch: 100.94 cm^2
Total heat watts: 237
umol/s/W / CRI: 4.65 / Estimated
Heatsink length passive cooling @120cm^2/heatwatt: 282 inches
Heatsink length active cooling @40cm^2/heatwatt: 94 inches
COB cost dollar per PAR watt: $1.18
Electric cost @12/12 in 30 days: $24.92
Electric cost @18/6 in 30 days: $37.13
Cost per cob: $47.62
Heatsink cost per inch cut: $0.66
Total cobs cost: $190
Total heatsink passive cooling cost: $186
Total heatsink active cooling cost: $62


CXB3590CD36V3500K 4 COBS @1.4A ON 1.813 PROFILE HEATSINK
16 SQ.FT. CANOPY 92% EFFICIENT DRIVER @15 CENTS PER KWH
Total power watts at the wall: 211.96
Cobs power watts: 195
Total voltage forward: 140
Total lumens: 35595
Total PAR watts assuming 10% loss: 99
Total PPF: 460.35
PPFD based on canopy area: 309.7
PAR watts per sq.ft.: 6.19
Cob efficiency: 56.34%
Power watts per sq.ft.: 12.19
Voltage forward per cob: 34.89
Lumens per watt: 182.54
Heatsink riser thickness / number of fins / fin's length: 0.3in/6/0.95in
Heatsink area per inch: 100.94 cm^2
Total heat watts: 85
umol/s/W / CRI: 4.65 / Estimated
Heatsink length passive cooling @120cm^2/heatwatt: 101 inches
Heatsink length active cooling @40cm^2/heatwatt: 34 inches
COB cost dollar per PAR watt: $1.92
Electric cost @12/12 in 30 days: $11.95
Electric cost @18/6 in 30 days: $17.67
Cost per cob: $47.62
Heatsink cost per inch cut: $0.66
Total cobs cost: $190
Total heatsink passive cooling cost: $67
Total heatsink active cooling cost: $22
 
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
Wow! You're a good mathematician hu! Cool!
My last grow I used the Pro-4 which uses x3 100 watt 3590's w/ lenses only 27" off my canopy & did great. Differant strains can handle different levels of intensity. I was surprised that my plant was still happy this low though cuz 3590's @ 100 watts are brighter then anything I've ever seen. One thing I noticed was deep down I had nice big juicy buds w/ the higher wattage cobs. Serious canopy penetration.
I really like that Amare offers different levels of "efficiency". Now I can open her up & rest assure that I can utilize father down into the plant n not have to worry about useless popcorn n flarf.
As far as #'s given by the company, all you have to do is e-mail & you'll have them all. I do, just buried in e-mails. Pretty sure you'll be impressed. Watch out for haters posting false #'s in attempt to discredit the company. They are the highest I've seen from any light on the mkt. per watt. Yes, DIY allows multiple configuration options. As does Amare though. They send H-brackets w/ each light so you can create the configuration of your choice, called a Solar-System. They're the first company to mention the "Inverse Square law" to my knowledge which is why you heard everyone talking about it for awhile in reference to the advantages of DIY.
The Monos are cool-white, 470nm, & 630nm. All of which are driven to be equally as efficient as cobs ran @ 1/2 their rated power load. (I talk in watts not MA cuz I don't DIY) So, it boils down to bud quality after you take into account more raw power/output then other lights using the "PowerPar Technology". Nice name for the reflector/lens combo I think. One major reason why they can't be compared to standard cob lights & why most existing/known mathematical equations are incorrectly applied when trying to compare to regular cob lights. I guess if you knew the #'s you could equate them but you couldn't just guess based on pre-existing #'s on cob data-sheets, know what I'm sayin!
Just about everyone knows about the ridiculous frost they get from their Burple lights when compared to their HPS. I know I noticed a huge differance between my LEDs & HPS. Yes, cobs are a much broader spectrum then HPS, hence creating frostier nugs. Now, take that a step farther by increasing the CRI to 95 w/ Chloro peaks included. It's the next level of quality bro. I will be getting the lab analysis to see if my theory is correct. Pretty sure it is though, just common sense based off existing common knowledge.
Basically, Amare has increased the raw output of a standard cob & raised the bar on quality. I for one am majorly impressed that they did all this while making a solid built product that looks amazing, have prices less then if you were to DIY, and the best Warrenty available. Not to mention the owner is a cool cat & grower who's done all the testing, not just biting off the next mans hard work.
What do you grow with? How big is your grow? Have you ever used Burple or HPS?
You said you have readings in your signature, but do you have hands on experience?
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
Hybridway said:
Wow! You're a good mathematician hu! Cool!
My last grow I used the Pro-4 which uses x3 100 watt 3590's w/ lenses only 27" off my canopy & did great. Differant strains can handle different levels of intensity. I was surprised that my plant was still happy this low though cuz 3590's @ 100 watts are brighter then anything I've ever seen. One thing I noticed was deep down I had nice big juicy buds w/ the higher wattage cobs. Serious canopy penetration.
I really like that Amare offers different levels of "efficiency". Now I can open her up & rest assure that I can utilize father down into the plant n not have to worry about useless popcorn n flarf.
As far as #'s given by the company, all you have to do is e-mail & you'll have them all. I do, just buried in e-mails. Pretty sure you'll be impressed. Watch out for haters posting false #'s in attempt to discredit the company. They are the highest I've seen from any light on the mkt. per watt. Yes, DIY allows multiple configuration options. As does Amare though. They send H-brackets w/ each light so you can create the configuration of your choice, called a Solar-System. They're the first company to mention the "Inverse Square law" to my knowledge which is why you heard everyone talking about it for awhile in reference to the advantages of DIY.
The Monos are cool-white, 470nm, & 630nm. All of which are driven to be equally as efficient as cobs ran @ 1/2 their rated power load. (I talk in watts not MA cuz I don't DIY) So, it boils down to bud quality after you take into account more raw power/output then other lights using the "PowerPar Technology". Nice name for the reflector/lens combo I think. One major reason why they can't be compared to standard cob lights & why most existing/known mathematical equations are incorrectly applied when trying to compare to regular cob lights. I guess if you knew the #'s you could equate them but you couldn't just guess based on pre-existing #'s on cob data-sheets, know what I'm sayin!
Just about everyone knows about the ridiculous frost they get from their Burple lights when compared to their HPS. I know I noticed a huge differance between my LEDs & HPS. Yes, cobs are a much broader spectrum then HPS, hence creating frostier nugs. Now, take that a step farther by increasing the CRI to 95 w/ Chloro peaks included. It's the next level of quality bro. I will be getting the lab analysis to see if my theory is correct. Pretty sure it is though, just common sense based off existing common knowledge.
Basically, Amare has increased the raw output of a standard cob & raised the bar on quality. I for one am majorly impressed that they did all this while making a solid built product that looks amazing, have prices less then if you were to DIY, and the best Warrenty available. Not to mention the owner is a cool cat & grower who's done all the testing, not just biting off the next mans hard work.


What do you grow with? How big is your grow? Have you ever used Burple or HPS?

You said you have readings in your signature, but do you have hands on experience?
Click to expand...
I have grown with DE HPS as my starting blocks, now Im using DE HPS, HPS and COBs. Ive also made my own 300W (at the wall) Blurple light and drove them softer with a PWM (screw that noise soldering). Ive made a 1000W ebay cob light as well and have seem much better quality just from that compared to hps (terrible efficiency I might add.) My first from was 25sq/ft and only one DE HPS, I hit .8g/room watt. My current grow is a 150sq/ft area and im dividing it up into 4x4 areas... 9 to be exact, currently Im prepping clones for my hps dehps, cob side by side grow off, after that ill be selling my hps lights and getting more cobs in different colors (currently running 4000k DB) like 5000Ks, maybe some reds.. we will see.

The trade off between intensity and CRI isnt known yet but I know that there will be a grow showing this in the future. If youre into buying a light from a store thats fine, but it wont beat a DIY in cost to performance and saying otherwise without any data isnt going to prove much.

I would like to see your g/room watt if you have it for that light.

Im growing GG#4, OG Kush, Pineapple Express (tested at 28%THC) currently
 
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
I have grown with DE HPS as my starting blocks, now Im using DE HPS, HPS and COBs. Ive also made my own 300W (at the wall) Blurple light and drove them softer with a PWM (screw that noise soldering). Ive made a 1000W ebay cob light as well and have seem much better quality just from that compared to hps (terrible efficiency I might add.) My first from was 25sq/ft and only one DE HPS, I hit .8g/room watt. My current grow is a 150sq/ft area and im dividing it up into 4x4 areas... 9 to be exact, currently Im prepping clones for my hps dehps, cob side by side grow off, after that ill be selling my hps lights and getting more cobs in different colors (currently running 4000k DB) like 5000Ks, maybe some reds.. we will see.

The trade off between intensity and CRI isnt known yet but I know that there will be a grow showing this in the future. If youre into buying a light from a store thats fine, but it wont beat a DIY in cost to performance and saying otherwise without any data isnt going to prove much.

I would like to see your g/room watt if you have it for that light.

Im growing GG#4, OG Kush, Pineapple Express (tested at 28%THC) currently
Click to expand...
Awesome! Sounds like you're underway for some major testing. Hope to see you do a thread on it.
Maybe you can help me figure some #'s soon if you're up to it? Got a par-meter & Pro-9 coming shortly. I'll be doing PPFD mapping for all my lights but I'm no mathematical intellect. Lol!
There shouldn't have to be a trade off for intensity to have high CRI. That is only in refferance to cob tech. Amares are high output w/ high CRI. No trading one for the other. There's no compromising as there is with plain cobs.
Yes, we have seen what higher CRI does for our plants. It increases quality in drastic amounts. This is why your 70-80 CRI cobs produce higher THC & Terps then your 22-32 CRI HPS. I do believe the IR in HPS is responsible for the bud size differance though.
The data is all there for everyone to see in regards to purchasing an Amare light being comparable to a DIY in price & exceeding the performance. Price tags of the components are what they are. The time it takes & labor should also be considered. Stats if not made exactly the same will show a decrease in performance as well. W/o the Power-Par design the DIY would fall short on intensity. W/o the circle of monos right around the cob a DIY wouldn't have as good spectral composition or mixing. I see people mixing all types of lights in attempt to replicate their spectrum but will never get them to blend w/o the circle. I mean, these lights are even balanced within an ounce or so. So, you can bust your hump trying to replicate an Amare for the same cost & an unfair amount of time or you can buy one & rest assure you are providing your plants with the best, be backed by a 5 yr Warrenty, & be notified by the owner himself every time they're upgrading do to new tech availability.
Really, what's there not to like unless of course you're a competitor. Haha! Not that you are, just a point, get what I'm sayin!
I will be doing a side by side soon for us all to see how much of a differance there really is.
Looking forward to seeing your tests too. Keep us posted. Guys like you whom are making side by side contributions are much needed. So many of the manufactures continuously make false claims w/o doing any side by side testing. Even worse, so many guys here on this very forum make claims about cobs n such w/o even ever using the standard HPS.
Peace!
 
Last edited:
MeGaKiLlErMaN

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
Hybridway said:
Awesome! Sounds like you're underway for some major testing. Hope to see you do a thread on it.
Maybe you can help me figure some #'s soon if you're up to it? Got a par-meter & Pro-9 coming shortly. I'll be doing PPFD mapping for all my lights but I'm no mathematical intellect. Lol!
There shouldn't have to be a trade off for intensity to have high CRI. That is only in refferance to cob tech. Amares are high output w/ high CRI. No trading one for the other. There's no compromising as there is with plain cobs.
Yes, we have seen what higher CRI does for our plants. It increases quality in drastic amounts. This is why your 70-80 CRI cobs produce higher THC & Terps then your 22-32 CRI HPS. I do believe the IR in HPS is responsible for the bud size differance though.
The data is all there for everyone to see in regards to purchasing an Amare light being comparable to a DIY in price & exceeding the performance. Price tags of the components are what they are. The time it takes & labor should also be considered. Stats if not made exactly the same will show a decrease in performance as well. W/o the Power-Par design the DIY would fall short on intensity. W/o the circle of monos right around the cob a DIY wouldn't have as good spectral composition or mixing. I see people mixing all types of lights in attempt to replicate their spectrum but will never get them to blend w/o the circle. I mean, these lights are even balanced within an ounce or so. So, you can bust your hump trying to replicate an Amare for the same cost & an unfair amount of time or you can buy one & rest assure you are providing your plants with the best, be backed by a 5 yr Warrenty, & be notified by the owner himself every time they're upgrading do to new tech availability.
Really, what's there not to like unless of course you're a competitor. Haha! Not that you are, just a point, get what I'm sayin!
I will be doing a side by side soon for us all to see how much of a differance there really is.
Looking forward to seeing your tests too. Keep us posted. Guys like you whom are making side by side contributions are much needed. So many of the manufactures continuously make false claims w/o doing any side by side testing. Even worse, so many guys here on this very forum make claims about cobs n such w/o even ever using the standard HPS.
Peace!
Click to expand...
The trade off it the amount of light quality that comes out relative to intensity some more than others . As I said you can do what you like, Ill stick with my almost 10 year life on the DIY and higher PPFD for cheaper. took like 30-45 mins to put together for me.

You calculate PPFD by taking multiple readings at the same height with a par meter... At least every sq/f if not more. you add them all up and divide by the number that you took. boom thats PPFD. If you shoot over all your readings ill do the math because im curious to know the what the price to PPF is as well.
 
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
The trade off it the amount of light quality that comes out relative to intensity some more than others . As I said you can do what you like, Ill stick with my almost 10 year life on the DIY and higher PPFD for cheaper. took like 30-45 mins to put together for me.

You calculate PPFD by taking multiple readings at the same height with a par meter... At least every sq/f if not more. you add them all up and divide by the number that you took. boom thats PPFD. If you shoot over all your readings ill do the math because im curious to know the what the price to PPF is as well.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I'm familiar with how to do the mapping, just thought you might be able to help me out when I get into deep math. Thanks!
DIY is awesome. I agree & will be getting into soon enough myself. I was only talking about how it would be trying to replicate that specific companies lights. As far as cobs go, Hell yeah, DIY all day over buying a pre-built! No question about it!
Hope to see you do a thread on your comparison testing. I've seen like 5 HPS vs. cobs. All by different people on different forums. The results were always the same from each one. They all seemed to be good growers too.
Good talking to ya!
Happy growing bud!
 
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
"Recommended height above canopy: 30"-48"; Amare does not recommend to place the COB panel less than 30" above the canopy with lenses installed."

We will use the 36" numbers to get the PPFD since thats one of the only "usable" number they give you. for a 4x4 that would be 905PPFD (not bad) and a 5x5 would be 579PPFD... so a bit better than a DE HPS. ( Not great IMO)

Im aware about the efficiency, but I still dont think that monos are worth it.. Ive never seen anything that says otherwise except peoples opinions.. as for the cobs.. its all about the PPFD which is why they rock... obviously spectrum is a big part of that but raw output is also still good since it is white light... Yes more blue less red or vice versa but its white either way you look at it. You can make a 400W 660mn light for like $400 thats driven at 50W each (half the rated power) and 8 5000k crees around $1200 total... boom over 1000W of light blasting with a solid red for flower... But that said @The Dawg is doing great with his 5000k and a bit of far red for a short amount of time.

If youre interested Ill run one of those lights to test how they fair... But I dont think theyre worth the money by far because they dont has a good spread of light for the area compared to the DIY. For instance... This would be that light assuming it was just the cobs in a 4x4.

I would guess at best the COBS are in one of these configs... Both of which are not impressive to me. If you know the specific config I would like to see the output as thats not found anywhere.... Only PPF which like I said does come down to multiplying the total by the meters^2 to get PPFD.

I have readings in my signature (DE HPS, HPS, and COBS) to compare if you have some for your light I would like to see them.

CXB3590CD36V3500K 4 COBS @2.8A ON 1.813 PROFILE HEATSINK
16 SQ.FT. CANOPY 92% EFFICIENT DRIVER @15 CENTS PER KWH
Total power watts at the wall: 452.17
Cobs power watts: 416
Total voltage forward: 148
Total lumens: 58144
Total PAR watts assuming 10% loss: 162
Total PPF: 753.3
PPFD based on canopy area: 506.78
PAR watts per sq.ft.: 10.13
Cob efficiency: 43.14%
Power watts per sq.ft.: 26.0
Voltage forward per cob: 37.12
Lumens per watt: 139.77
Heatsink riser thickness / number of fins / fin's length: 0.3in/6/0.95in
Heatsink area per inch: 100.94 cm^2
Total heat watts: 237
umol/s/W / CRI: 4.65 / Estimated
Heatsink length passive cooling @120cm^2/heatwatt: 282 inches
Heatsink length active cooling @40cm^2/heatwatt: 94 inches
COB cost dollar per PAR watt: $1.18
Electric cost @12/12 in 30 days: $24.92
Electric cost @18/6 in 30 days: $37.13
Cost per cob: $47.62
Heatsink cost per inch cut: $0.66
Total cobs cost: $190
Total heatsink passive cooling cost: $186
Total heatsink active cooling cost: $62


CXB3590CD36V3500K 4 COBS @1.4A ON 1.813 PROFILE HEATSINK
16 SQ.FT. CANOPY 92% EFFICIENT DRIVER @15 CENTS PER KWH
Total power watts at the wall: 211.96
Cobs power watts: 195
Total voltage forward: 140
Total lumens: 35595
Total PAR watts assuming 10% loss: 99
Total PPF: 460.35
PPFD based on canopy area: 309.7
PAR watts per sq.ft.: 6.19
Cob efficiency: 56.34%
Power watts per sq.ft.: 12.19
Voltage forward per cob: 34.89
Lumens per watt: 182.54
Heatsink riser thickness / number of fins / fin's length: 0.3in/6/0.95in
Heatsink area per inch: 100.94 cm^2
Total heat watts: 85
umol/s/W / CRI: 4.65 / Estimated
Heatsink length passive cooling @120cm^2/heatwatt: 101 inches
Heatsink length active cooling @40cm^2/heatwatt: 34 inches
COB cost dollar per PAR watt: $1.92
Electric cost @12/12 in 30 days: $11.95
Electric cost @18/6 in 30 days: $17.67
Cost per cob: $47.62
Heatsink cost per inch cut: $0.66
Total cobs cost: $190
Total heatsink passive cooling cost: $67
Total heatsink active cooling cost: $22
Click to expand...
Thank you for doing this work for us. I never got a chance to read that data outright like that. Much appreciated!
To answer your question, the SE-450 cobs run @ 48 watts so the second one being 1.4A.
The Pro-4 cobs are ran @ 100 watts each being the 2.8 unless it's possible to be 2.7 or 6 cuz I was told 100, not 104.
Further info. you may be interested in, is that the red monos are ran softer then the others. But I don't disclose that info. Specifically. Victor probably would though.

The higher output allows for deeper penetration, having more ability to actually match hps with taller plants.
With lower drive & more cobs spread out, I've seen the #'s drop allot more then the higher output 1/2 the cobs deeper down past the canopy. This is why so many suggest LST so much with led. The Burple doesn't have much depth output (lack of green) & neither does running whites soft for efficiency or coverage by having more les's. The overlapping is not so much creating higher #'s as it is maintaining the # at hand. Unless you put them close together which seems to be against common belief do to initial cost or coverage.
I grow fairly big plants so I prefer my #'s to be higher at 24" past the canopy top.
I feel that spreading them out at a low current is only replicating the existing problem with Burple led that prevents many hps growers from making the switch.
Personally, I would like to spread them out & drive them harder.
To me the Pro-4 & SE-450 are designed to match each other almost, aside from the extra monos on the 450. One has 6 cobs close together, the other, 3, farther apart. So, they pretty much equal out in regards to penetration/depth even if one is driven twice as hard as the other.
The SE-450 would have the upper hand on efficiency even using the 3070's I'd venture to guess, seeing how they are driven at less then 1/2 their total load capacity over the 3590's driven @ what, 2/3's? I forget the max for each.
Either way, the differences are minute to me & what turns me on the most is the high #'s maintained deeper into the plant.
The monos kick ass too.
Many seem to forget, mono/single diode based panels usually distribute higher par #'s then equal wattage cobs in white. That's also a slight edge or advantage to compliment the colors.
Those monos are allowing for a higher par then if you were to just add another cob.
So, the monos allow for a higher output as well as increasing the CRI, which I believe directly effects the quality & photosynthetic efficiency of the plants themselves.
I've said a this before though. No matter how many discussions, my views on this topic of efficiency remain the same.
 
Last edited:
sixstring2112

sixstring2112

Well-Known Member
@Hybridway i do not agree at all with your assessment of cobs run softer will not grow larger plants or get penetration like cobs driven at hi power like 100w.this is why i asked for ppf or ppfd or umol numbers on the amare because i know what crees do at 1050ma and 1400ma and even 76w each and its pretty even when you space the cobs according to wattage.
 
iampepe

iampepe

Active Member
sixstring2112 said:
@Hybridway i do not agree at all with your assessment of cobs run softer will not grow larger plants or get penetration like cobs driven at hi power like 100w.this is why i asked for ppf or ppfd or umol numbers on the amare because i know what crees do at 1050ma and 1400ma and even 76w each and its pretty even when you space the cobs according to wattage.
Click to expand...
SolarEclipse450UVB:

- 1207umol@24", 770umol@36", 546umol@48" (No lenses)
- 2118umol@24", 1523umol@36", 974umol@48" (With lenses)
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
sixstring2112 said:
@Hybridway i do not agree at all with your assessment of cobs run softer will not grow larger plants or get penetration like cobs driven at hi power like 100w.this is why i asked for ppf or ppfd or umol numbers on the amare because i know what crees do at 1050ma and 1400ma and even 76w each and its pretty even when you space the cobs according to wattage.
Click to expand...
They are not better than DIY its for the people that dont want to work and prefer burning more money for the same thing lol. Its all preference.
 
Big smo

Big smo

Well-Known Member
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
They are not better than DIY its for the people that dont want to work and prefer burning more money for the same thing lol. Its all preference.
Click to expand...
Dude shut up with DIY is better than pre built. No fucking kidding you can build a light for cheaper. Let's see what your working with cause man by the sound of things you should have atleast be a vendor for Cree. This is part of what I have and you know my room only has 5 Amares hanging in it. I'll run these bitches till the next big Cree cob comes out and probably hack them into my Amares if they are worth it. So much for keeping quietimage.jpeg image.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top