Philips 315w CDM Elite (CMH)

[Beta Test Team]

Good post spleebale.

I would like to summarize the findings for the sake of clarity (please correct if wrong):

-There are actually two different Philips 315W "930" bulbs (spectrum wise, as each come in multiple base options).
-One of the two 930 (meaning 3000K range) bulbs is branded the "Elite Agro," often mislabeled on websites as "Argo," and is also known as (and called on the same box) the "Green Power." This bulb has a monster spike in the 670-685nm and seems to quite clearly be the best choice for bloom.

Yup, but the Kevlin is often listed differently, like 3100K in some specs. Which is odd and I can't explain.

Also, we would have to take as prima facie that having more red is better for flowering. Something I wouldn't necessarily agree with if that's the only difference. That seems based on the idea that MH (blue) is for veg and HPS (red) is for flowering; a long held but not completely correct hypothesis. Things aren't that black and white.

-The other 930 bulb seems to have a good bit more valuable 630-660nm radiation than either other bulb, but also has FAR less blue than the 942 and none of the monster red spike of the Agro, and most of the territory where it throws more light than the other bulbs is in the 525-610 range, which is less desirable than the red or blue, making it probably worse than either of the other two bulbs for growing.

I wouldn't agree 525-610 is less desirable than red or blue as a rule, though I would suggest yellow is not something to increase if it can be avoided (about 560-590 nm; simply due to photodamage issues).

For example, these graphs may interest you. They show approximate likely effect of wavelengths on Cannabis (like photosynthesis, stomatal opening, etc.):
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?p=6718314

And these absorptance spectra for veg to harvest for Cannabis may interest you as well. While these are approximate, they do show only very minor changes in spectral absorptance as the plant ages and flowers form:

(early veg) https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=6572204&postcount=92
(late veg) https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=6572215&postcount=94
(early flowering) https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=6572226&postcount=95
(late flowering) https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=6572233&postcount=96

-There is only one flavor (spectrum) of 942 bulb in 315W CDMs, and it has the most blue/the highest blue to red ratio, while also having excellent mid-range red, so it is probably the best veg bulb (depending on what sort of structure you are looking to develop; the higher blue should keep ladies bushier and nodes tighter, which is generally desirable for indoor growing).

I would suggest to accept this we would have to take as prima facie that more blue means the lamp is better for veg.

I personally think there's no need to change spectra for veg to flowering, because it's possible to provide a very good spectrum for all growth stages from one lamp. Generally, like rives and Jhhnn pointed out, any CMH will do the job well, certainly better than MH or HPS in terms of spectrum. Although having a choice, we choose the 942 out of all CDM(CMH) options thus far.

The only thing the Green Power (MasterColor Elite Agro 930) has over the 942 is photosynthetic efficiency (PAR range umol per joule/s), due to the greater red % output. So on paper that could lead to lower operating costs in terms of powering the lamps to provide the goal irradiance levels. Although the difference is quite minor.

...Although after looking at the graphs BTT provided, I am skeptical as to whether the 50 micromoles of extra blue (~28%) + extra green in the 942 is worth sacrificing 120 micromoles of red (from the Agro). It's funny, looking at the spds convinced me that the 942 was a better VEG bulb, but the bar graphs seem to make the information clearer. I guess in the end only a good test will really settle it.

It's more than just about extra blue and green with less red range (and your umol/s values seem a bit off), it's also about the ratios of various wavebands, and about less NIR (from 942), as well as more UV (especially UV-B).

For what it's worth, I know of a few different growers that started with the Green Power for veg and flower, then went to the 942 for veg and flower, and they all have said the 942 gave better quality (taste, smell, etc., which makes sense considering what wavebands have greatest affects on terpene biosynthesis). They (about 3 at last count) all are now using only the 942.

In terms of irradiance there's no meaningful difference between any of the CDM lamps (Elite 930, Elite Agro 930, or Elite 942), because irradinace is more a factor of fixture (reflector) choice, fixture placement, and room design, than lamp choice.

 

[Beta Test Team]

rives, I just noticed this company http://www.autopot.nl/en/webshop/de...sse-lampen/philips-mastercolour-agro-315w/942 lists the 942 as an "Agro," but they have the Elite Agro 930 (Green Power) SPD on the web page.

They seem all mixed up.

 

[Jhhnn]

I bought two ballasts from Advanced and he errantly sent me one of the mogul 942 ED37 bulbs. I have no plans to use it, he let me keep it since he was MIA for a large part of my ordering process. I wish he would've taken it back because I truly have no use for it.

The first thing I would say is the bulb is quite large. It's 4.625" in diameter and 11" long. It would not fit in my lowrider hood without touching the top. It seems to eat up space in my blockbuster hood as well. Although it's open rated, it doesn't feel as safe to me due to not having a protective secondary glass like the PGZX18 versions come with. CMH bulbs operate at very high pressures and temps so I just feel better knowing that PGZX18 bulb has that extra layer to protect me.

I didn't fire it so I can't comment on how well it works or the performance. All of my hoods are now running PGZ18 sockets so I can't perform any tests for you, but I may be able to snap some pictures if needed.

This is the mogul lamp you received?

http://www.lighting.philips.com/mai...m-elite-mw-mogul-base/928601176601_NA/product

The pic shows an inner quartz sleeve. It's def open fixture rated. Even if Philips marketing is screwy, their engineering is solid. The bulb format, ed37, is bog standard for industrial MH lamps from 330w-1000w. It's a way to get 315 hardware into existing North American fixtures w/o having to change the lampholder. It puts the light emitter right where it belongs for those reflectors, too. Its place in horticulture is incidental to Philips purposes.

It won't fit in your lowrider hood because that hood was built specifically for HPS lamps in either e18 or e25 format. MH conversion lamps are built to a special format to fit as well.

 

[rives]

They seem all mixed up.

I think that they are probably in the same boat as the rest of us!

When I first started chasing this stuff, I was saving every data sheet that Philips released that related to the product line. The release dates on them showed that there would frequently be multiple versions for the same product within a given month. And this was before they started renaming things.....

I've always been curious how the "Argo" thing got started and how it spread as widely as it has.

 

[HorseBadoritiz]

I bought two ballasts from Advanced and he errantly sent me one of the mogul 942 ED37 bulbs. I have no plans to use it, he let me keep it since he was MIA for a large part of my ordering process. I wish he would've taken it back because I truly have no use for it.

The first thing I would say is the bulb is quite large. It's 4.625" in diameter and 11" long. It would not fit in my lowrider hood without touching the top. It seems to eat up space in my blockbuster hood as well. Although it's open rated, it doesn't feel as safe to me due to not having a protective secondary glass like the PGZX18 versions come with. CMH bulbs operate at very high pressures and temps so I just feel better knowing that PGZX18 bulb has that extra layer to protect me.

I didn't fire it so I can't comment on how well it works or the performance. All of my hoods are now running PGZ18 sockets so I can't perform any tests for you, but I may be able to snap some pictures if needed.

This is the mogul lamp you received?

http://www.lighting.philips.com/mai...m-elite-mw-mogul-base/928601176601_NA/product

The pic shows an inner quartz sleeve. It's def open fixture rated. Even if Philips marketing is screwy, their engineering is solid. The bulb format, ed37, is bog standard for industrial MH lamps from 330w-1000w. It's a way to get 315 hardware into existing North American fixtures w/o having to change the lampholder. It puts the light emitter right where it belongs for those reflectors, too. Its place in horticulture is incidental to Philips purposes.

It won't fit in your lowrider hood because that hood was built specifically for HPS lamps in either e18 or e25 format. MH conversion lamps are built to a special format to fit as well.

The only problem I have with this bulb is that it arrived with the filament broken, and I have not heard back from Tom about a replacement.

It's a little smaller, widthwise, than the other MH bulbs I have, and it will fit in the OG and the original Super Sun II hoods I was planning on using.

It was stretch for me to even buy this combo, but with my stash of retro CMH's dwindling, and reading of such good results from the 315's, I gotta make the move, LOL! I just hate to end up paying 220 bones for just the ballast, and then, just to cut my losses, having to get a PGZ based bulb and socket!

Is anybody even using this bulb to grow cannabis?

I'm sorry if this has already been answered, but I'm just an old geezer, with a waning attention span, and a retirement home that need frost, LOL!

Thanks for shedding any "light" on this!

 

[Beta Test Team]

I've always been curious how the "Argo" thing got started and how it spread as widely as it has.

This may not be correct, but I think this is what happened:

Flip (Cyclotpics), possibly along with Dr. Albright and/or Dr. Bugbee, contacted Philips and had a small batch of new lamps created with greater umol/watt in PAR for horticulture (possibly for testing at Cornell Controlled Environment Agriculture, originally, where Dr. Louis Albright works), which Philips called the "Agro."

At this time Philips was only doing small batch production runs, and the Agro was not sold by any retailers like it is now, only though luminaire companies, such as with the AllBright fixture from Cycloptics.

Then Philips realized there's a serious market for this type of CMH, so they started producing it in earnest and other companies started selling it retail. Then it got popular, and at the point Philips renamed it to the Green Power.

I think I recall Flip saying years ago that Philips couldn't continue to make the Agro just for Cycloptics, because the costs were not worth it for Philips, which is why Philips started marketing it much wider.

(The above my not be correct. Flip could verify, and correct me if that's not right.)

 

[Jhhnn]

The only problem I have with this bulb is that it arrived with the filament broken, and I have not heard back from Tom about a replacement.

It's a little smaller, widthwise, than the other MH bulbs I have, and it will fit in the OG and the original Super Sun II hoods I was planning on using.

It was stretch for me to even buy this combo, but with my stash of retro CMH's dwindling, and reading of such good results from the 315's, I gotta make the move, LOL! I just hate to end up paying 220 bones for just the ballast, and then, just to cut my losses, having to get a PGZ based bulb and socket!

Is anybody even using this bulb to grow cannabis?

I'm sorry if this has already been answered, but I'm just an old geezer, with a waning attention span, and a retirement home that need frost, LOL!

Thanks for shedding any "light" on this!

I haven't dealt with Tom, but he's an honest guy with some problems from all accounts. It may take awhile, but he'll very likely do right by you. That's his rep, anyway.

Somewhere in this thread or the other massive CMH thread members report using the 315 mogul lamps w/ solid results. They should work particularly well in conventional fixtures because the light emitter is in the right place to make best use of the reflector. It's basically a 942 emitter in a different wrapper.

Geezer? You've arrived when attractive young women call you "Sir". It beats dying, anyway.

Edit- google "315w mogul" for more lamp sources.

 

[Jhhnn]

I've always been curious how the "Argo" thing got started and how it spread as widely as it has.

I wondered too. I think it comes from confusion by people who don't use English as their first language. "Agro" is a variant of the english "Agri" prefix which is probably something entirely different in other languages. It also plays on the word "grow" which is different in other languages as well. Hell- it might be traceable to a typo by a Philips authorized wholesaler.

 

[rives]

This may not be correct, but I think this is what happened:

Flip (Cyclotpics), possibly along with Dr. Albright and/or Dr. Bugbee, contacted Philips and had a small batch of new lamps created with greater umol/watt in PAR for horticulture (possibly for testing at Cornell Controlled Environment Agriculture, originally, where Dr. Louis Albright works), which Philips called the "Agro."

At this time Philips was only doing small batch production runs, and the Agro was not sold by any retailers like it is now, only though luminaire companies, such as with the AllBright fixture from Cycloptics.

Then Philips realized there's a serious market for this type of CMH, so they started producing it in earnest and other companies started selling it retail. Then it got popular, and at the point Philips renamed it to the Green Power.

I think I recall Flip saying years ago that Philips couldn't continue to make the Agro just for Cycloptics, because the costs were not worth it for Philips, which is why Philips started marketing it much wider.

(The above my not be correct. Flip could verify, and correct me if that's not right.)

You misunderstood - I was referring to the widespread misspelling of "Agro" to "Argo" by vendors. It seems to be getting better, but it was all over the 'net a while ago.

I think that you are probably pretty accurate with the backstory on the Agro. I know that when I spoke with Flip early on, he mentioned that he had contracted with Philips to provide a lamp with an enhanced red spectrum.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Ah, I see. Yup, I misunderstood what you were referring to, my bad.

Funny, I didn't even notice the spelling error you cited, "Argo," I guess I should read more closely next time.

 

[HorseBadoritiz]

I haven't dealt with Tom, but he's an honest guy with some problems from all accounts. It may take awhile, but he'll very likely do right by you. That's his rep, anyway.

Somewhere in this thread or the other massive CMH thread members report using the 315 mogul lamps w/ solid results. They should work particularly well in conventional fixtures because the light emitter is in the right place to make best use of the reflector. It's basically a 942 emitter in a different wrapper.

Geezer? You've arrived when attractive young women call you "Sir". It beats dying, anyway.

Edit- google "315w mogul" for more lamp sources.

Thanks Jhhnn!

I've been dealing with Tom for over 4 years, and he's always done me right... as a matter of fact, he's done me better than right by throwing in extra bulbs for sticking up for him when he was getting bashed on another forum.

I'm just antsy to get my 315 trip going, LOL!

I also have a neuro-cognitive issue, or three, and sussing out the subtle differences with these bulbs is a bit of a challenge.

And, attractive young women can call me whatever they want, or whenever, lol!

Thanks again!

 

[rives]

Horse, that lamp has the highest UV of any of the 315 family by a substantial margin (2x-3x) if that is of interest to you.

I think that any of them will work very well. I'm impressed with the design advances of the bi-pin PGZ-18 base over the Edison, but the real benefit of it is pretty marginal. Use whatever works best for you.

 

[nr nodes]

For what it's worth, I know of a few different growers that started with the Green Power for veg and flower, then went to the 942 for veg and flower, and they all have said the 942 gave better quality (taste, smell, etc., which makes sense considering what wavebands have greatest affects on terpene biosynthesis). They (about 3 at last count) all are now using only the 942.

Still not sure what I think of all the assumptions (being taken as prima facie), especially re UV as being so important compared to other factors. With your group of farmers polled (n=3), what scale are they operating on, and how many lamps burning to make their comparisons?

Am I the only one who finds statements such as these entirely suspect? I mean every time I'm able to backcheck a story claiming "better quality, taste, smell" with one lamp versus another, the methods used to compare were totally subjective or downright rubbish. And why are those who tend to brag most about quality, typically the same ones whose finished meds don't back it up?

BTW those pics I posted were all from the same case pack (to display multiple terms being used on the same package). And no offense, but I don't understand the confusion, as the product numbers and lamp models have been the same since Philips introduced the first protected 315 Agro. The story just got confabulated here throughout hundreds of posts in the CMH thread, often conflicting and restating each other.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Nothing I wrote about spectrum is based on assumptions, nor taken as prima facie (it's all well proven science I can reference). It's all based on the action spectra of various wavebands on C3 plants, adjusted with Cannabis absorptance spectra (so, "quantum efficiency" of various wavebands to elicit various plant response).

For example, see this thread with lots of graphs of exactly this topic:
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?p=6718314

And if you like numbers, see this topic (where the graphs' data comes from):
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=295933

The example of the people I know that used the Green Power and 942 wasn't intended to be anything more than the experience of growers who used both. Something people asked about in this thread. Their criteria were subjectivity qualified to be sure, as is the case when using the "smoke test." Two of the three growers are commercial medical growers, with decent sized operations; they are experienced. Nothing I wrote is based on their experiences, other than stating what they think about Green Power vs. 942.

You may not understand the confusion, but I assure you many people do understand it all too well.

 

[nr nodes]

I'm enjoying all your references, but stressing the point it's mostly theory on paper for our purposes until reliable data is collected. I know humans all share a penchant for confirmation bias, but largely our group seem to be connoisseurs of it.

 

[Jhhnn]

Horse, that lamp has the highest UV of any of the 315 family by a substantial margin (2x-3x) if that is of interest to you.

I think that any of them will work very well. I'm impressed with the design advances of the bi-pin PGZ-18 base over the Edison, but the real benefit of it is pretty marginal. Use whatever works best for you.

Ever the voice of reason. Thank you.

I really like the way that the PGZ-18 system allows for smaller reflector hardware. The Cycloptics systems are really quite small for the horsepower. I'm sure that extends into the realm of commercial/ industrial lighting, as well.

Philips marketing strategy seems quite strange, even at cross purposes sometimes. The 315 mogul seems to be that way. It seems intended for retrofits, but they already have an easier & cheaper retrofit solution in their 330w CDM. Or maybe manufacturers asked for it so they wouldn't need to retool to market 315w systems. Likely the latter, I think.

Growers can exploit 315 moguls in a plug & play way with Wellthink ballasts & existing reflectors.

 

[HorseBadoritiz]

Horse, that lamp has the highest UV of any of the 315 family by a substantial margin (2x-3x) if that is of interest to you.

I think that any of them will work very well. I'm impressed with the design advances of the bi-pin PGZ-18 base over the Edison, but the real benefit of it is pretty marginal. Use whatever works best for you.

Ever the voice of reason. Thank you.

I really like the way that the PGZ-18 system allows for smaller reflector hardware. The Cycloptics systems are really quite small for the horsepower. I'm sure that extends into the realm of commercial/ industrial lighting, as well.

Philips marketing strategy seems quite strange, even at cross purposes sometimes. The 315 mogul seems to be that way. It seems intended for retrofits, but they already have an easier & cheaper retrofit solution in their 330w CDM. Or maybe manufacturers asked for it so they wouldn't need to retool to market 315w systems. Likely the latter, I think.

Growers can exploit 315 moguls in a plug & play way with Wellthink ballasts & existing reflectors.

Thanks rives! Sometimes I feel like I'm trying read Chinese trying to figure out the differences, LOL! I've always thought that the screw-in bases were the weak link in getting the power we're paying for to the lamp instead of going into the ether as heat!

I'm just going to get a pin base and socket, and wait til Tom sends me another mogul based bulb, then see the difference for myself.

Jhhnn, Ive tried the 330 CDM, and it didn't hold a candle to a 400W Retro. It supposedly has more red for better flowering, but the Retro put out much more in the trich department... just my 2¢!

You are definitely right about the smaller hood thing. I had to rework the OG socket by dropping it down about 6", just to work with a CMH... I'll have to drop it even farther with a 942. The old Super Sun II, on the other hand, should really shine, LOL!

Thanks for the help, this is the best thread I've found for real info on these lights and ballasts!

 

[rives]

Thanks for the help, this is the best thread I've found for real info on these lights and ballasts!

I'm glad that you've found it helpful, that's what I was hoping for! There's lot's of great information in the big thread, but trying to pick out the pertinent information for the 315 was getting to be a hell of a chore.

 

[Jhhnn]

Jhhnn, Ive tried the 330 CDM, and it didn't hold a candle to a 400W Retro. It supposedly has more red for better flowering, but the Retro put out much more in the trich department... just my 2¢!

I wasn't very clear. I was talking about the big market, the commercial lighting market. The 330 fills a money saving niche in that, being a screw in replacement for the ubiquitous 400w MH. Other than the 315 agro, all of the CDM & CMH lamps were created for that market. It's a happy coincidence that they work well for growers.

I figure that the reason they discontinued the 400 retrowhite is because it didn't find a big enough market. HPS in the commercial market was basically phased out of new construction over 20 years ago, more like 30 years ago, so there aren't a lot of fixtures it'll fit.

 

[Ultrahot_Grower]

Rives you linked to a 40A power relay that could be used in a light controller for these ballasts a few pages back, could I use that for a single 315w setup?

I have a 220v / 20A outlet that has 10-2 wire running from it to a 20A circuit breaker in my panel. I'm only looking to control one light right now and would like to use a power relay triggered by a standard 120v timer.

Thanks