Side by side grow. 630 CMH vs 1000HPS

[King Rat]

You have to be kidding? A 600w hps puts out 90,000 lumens whilst a 315w cmh only produces around 30,000.

Isn't there the possibility that even it only emits a third the lumens of a hps the light is used more "efficiently"? because of the PAR levels (micromols/sec) and spectrum?

by the way, does anyone know if the philips cdm-tp agro 315W 930 is suited for running in an open reflector?

 

[Natural high]

CMH are not miracle lights and they lack serious horsepower as a stand alone light.

I've personally hit 1gpw multiple times with multiple strains across the sativa/indica spectrum using CMH, that is about as good as most people are getting with any DE HPS systems.

Yeah I was specifically referring to the 315w in comparison to the 600w hps. For a small setup, maybe 2' x 3' they could be ideal.

 

[gh0stm0de]

King Rat, you touch on a very valid point.

People who use lumens as their primary reference point are effectively suggesting that 1 lumen fron Light A is equal to 1 lumen fron Light B. This is obviously false unless both bulbs emitted the same light(Spectrum, CRI etc), but of course if they did we would not likely be comparing them to one another.

Lumens are a measurement of light visible to the naked eye, which is not the same as light that is usable by the plant, known as PAR (photosynthetic active radiation).

 

[CannaRed]

You have to be kidding? A 600w hps puts out 90,000 lumens whilst a 315w cmh only produces around 30,000. I would not waste an entire grow cycle on this when I have alreasdy done it with the inclusion of supplemental LED, and it still failed to compete. Maybe it's your turn to show us what they can do?

CMH are not miracle lights and they lack serious horsepower as a stand alone light. A 600w hps is the most efficient hps size in terms of lumens/watt, and have many advantages over 1000w hps, especially in smaller setups or where height is limited. For example, because of the significant hotspot a 1000w hps produces, some of their output is wasted due to an over intensity directly below the light.

With all due respect for issack and his impressive growing skills, a proper controlled experiment would use identical shades on both sides, the same or very similar wattage for each shade, and a light screen to eliminate transfer of light between sides.

Another point about making comparisons between lights is that different strains have different light requirements. I have found personally that sativa's need a lot of light, whereas many indica's seem to prefer a lower intensity. I notice that the Pineapple chunk is described by Barneys as 80% indica, so it may have responded well to the cmh light, but others strains may respond differently.

I'm here to learn, so I'm just asking... But I thought plants can't see lumens. Only human eye.
Micromoles and such

 

[CannaRed]

Guess I should have kept reading
. king and gost answered me before I asked

 

[Natural high]

Isn't there the possibility that even it only emits a third the lumens of a hps the light is used more "efficiently"? because of the PAR levels (micromols/sec) and spectrum?

CMH is likely to be more efficient per watt than a hps given the spectral output. The thing is, PAR is a concept invented by humans and it isn't the whole story. HPS looks like poor quality light on paper, but it can still produce explosive growth and a high yield of flowers in minimal time.

by the way, does anyone know if the philips cdm-tp agro 315W 930 is suited for running in an open reflector?

No it is rated for enclosed reflectors only as it lacks an outer jacket.

 

[Scrappy-doo]

You have to be kidding? A 600w hps puts out 90,000 lumens whilst a 315w cmh only produces around 30,000. I would not waste an entire grow cycle on this when I have alreasdy done it with the inclusion of supplemental LED, and it still failed to compete. Maybe it's your turn to show us what they can do?

CMH are not miracle lights and they lack serious horsepower as a stand alone light. A 600w hps is the most efficient hps size in terms of lumens/watt, and have many advantages over 1000w hps, especially in smaller setups or where height is limited. For example, because of the significant hotspot a 1000w hps produces, some of their output is wasted due to an over intensity directly below the light.

With all due respect for issack and his impressive growing skills, a proper controlled experiment would use identical shades on both sides, the same or very similar wattage for each shade, and a light screen to eliminate transfer of light between sides.

Another point about making comparisons between lights is that different strains have different light requirements. I have found personally that sativa's need a lot of light, whereas many indica's seem to prefer a lower intensity. I notice that the Pineapple chunk is described by Barneys as 80% indica, so it may have responded well to the cmh light, but others strains may respond differently.

I've gone from 3x600 hps to 3x315 in a 4x8 tent and kept pretty much the same yields. I don't care what kind of rationale you use for why you think it's not possible. Results speak for themselves.

The side by side suggestion is for the rest of us to see what you people are doing to get inferior results.

 

[Americangrower]

I've gone from 3x600 hps to 3x315 in a 4x8 tent and kept pretty much the same yields. I don't care what kind of rationale you use for why you think it's not possible. Results speak for themselves.

The side by side suggestion is for the rest of us to see what you people are doing to get inferior results.

I can see it now Scappy, he prob grew some big producer like Jack of C99 under HPS.
Then grew some Cookie under CMH and it didn't produce the same so CMH are junk.

 

[King Rat]

HPS looks like poor quality light on paper, but it can still produce explosive growth and a high yield of flowers in minimal time.

The question CMH vs HPS doesnt render HPS useless. I just see people using it seeing improvements. Sure there are thousands of people on the "nutrients and fertilizer" section thinking they see improvements by using snake oil (placebo). But i have the feeling there is more on it this time.

And thats the whole point, like you said: "on paper"
CMH looks like poor quality in terms of lumens on paper...

No it is rated for enclosed reflectors only as it lacks an outer jacket.

Damn, then i'd probably need to go with the 630 DE as it has an explosive proof outer bulb. I'd never trade safety for convenience.

 

[King Rat]

People who use lumens as their primary reference point are effectively suggesting that 1 lumen fron Light A is equal to 1 lumen fron Light B.

thats exactly what i'm questioning.
My guess: lumens emitted is not equal to lumens used.

 

[Natural high]

I've gone from 3x600 hps to 3x315 in a 4x8 tent and kept pretty much the same yields. I don't care what kind of rationale you use for why you think it's not possible. Results speak for themselves.

The side by side suggestion is for the rest of us to see what you people are doing to get inferior results.

Sorry but I have already completed my observations and unfortunately they don't seem to fit the cmh fanboy consensus.

Jack Herer under a Phillips 315w cmh, plus 200w of cob LED in a 4' x 3" grow room. Plenty of frost but a bit leafy and lacking in size and weight. No cigar..

The same Jack Herer clone under 2 x Phillips 315w cmh in the same 4' x 3" grow room. Bigger but quite leafy, especially down low. Still no cigar..

The same Jack Herer clone under a 600w Sunmaster single-ended hps bulb in the same 4' x 3" grow room. I think this one gets the cigar.. By the way, this plant had about 20 branches similar to this one and yielded 22 ounces with three weeks of veg and seven weeks of flower. As you say, I think the results speak for themselves.

.

 

[Lost in a SOG]

Did you use a PAR meter natural high?

So you know how high to hang the cmh/hps to achieve comparable PAR so the test is fair.

 

[Natural high]

Did you use a PAR meter natural high?

So you know how high to hang the cmh/hps to achieve comparable PAR so the test is fair.

No I don't have a PAR meter but my box is 2.1m high and I always adjust my lights to their optimal distance whenever possible. They start high, then are brought down and back up again as the plant grows - I usually just grow one big plant, and sometimes two if I'm testing a new strain or cross.

 

[Dirt Bag]

CMH is likely to be more efficient per watt than a hps given the spectral output. The thing is, PAR is a concept invented by humans and it isn't the whole story. HPS looks like poor quality light on paper, but it can still produce explosive growth and a high yield of flowers in minimal time.

No it is rated for enclosed reflectors only as it lacks an outer jacket.

This bulb is NOT designated as "agro" and has no jacket, so it needs to be in an enclosed fixture. (it also costs a small fortune)

However, THIS bulb IS designated "Agro", jacketed, and suitable for open fixtures. (and is only $55 on Amazon)

PLEASE NOTE: Philips bulbs that are not designated as agro utilize a special kind of glass called Fadeblock® that blocks UV, intended for indoor retail applications to help alleviate fabric color fading.
And NO, the one is NOT just the other without the jacket!

 

[Natural high]

This bulb is NOT designated as "agro" and has no jacket, so it needs to be in an enclosed fixture.

It is nice to see we agree with each other..

 

[CannaRed]

Sorry but I have already completed my observations and unfortunately they don't seem to fit the cmh fanboy consensus.

Jack Herer under a Phillips 315w cmh, plus 200w of cob LED in a 4' x 3" grow room. Plenty of frost but a bit leafy and lacking in size and weight. No cigar..

View Image

The same Jack Herer clone under 2 x Phillips 315w cmh in the same 4' x 3" grow room. Bigger but quite leafy, especially down low. Still no cigar..
View Image

The same Jack Herer clone under a 600w Sunmaster single-ended hps bulb in the same 4' x 3" grow room. I think this one gets the cigar.. By the way, this plant had about 20 branches similar to this one and yielded 22 ounces with three weeks of veg and seven weeks of flower. As you say, I think the results speak for themselves.

View Image

.

Ok so.... I said earlier that it was environment dependent. Maybe, just maybe this is strain dependent.

Different lattitudes get differing spectrums and amounts. So maybe our poly hybrids are reacting differently based on their genetic disposition to quality of spectrum.

We could be arguing for no reason. Every other variable is strain dependent, why not type and quality of the light source?

 

[Natural high]

Ok so.... I said earlier that it was environment dependent. Maybe, just maybe this is strain dependent.

Different lattitudes get differing spectrums and amounts. So maybe our poly hybrids are reacting differently based on their genetic disposition to quality of spectrum.

We could be arguing for no reason. Every other variable is strain dependent, why not type and quality of the light source?

Yes we can say with a high degree of confidence that this Jack Herer clone only is significantly more productive under hps than cmh, and I have seen similar results with Ghost train haze. Maybe Cookies or OG Kush for example may show a different response.

 

[King Rat]

This bulb is NOT designated as "agro" and has no jacket, so it needs to be in an enclosed fixture. (it also costs a small fortune)
View Image
However, THIS bulb IS designated "Agro", jacketed, and suitable for open fixtures. (and is only $55 on Amazon)
View Image
PLEASE NOTE: Philips bulbs that are not designated as agro utilize a special kind of glass called Fadeblock® that blocks UV, intended for indoor retail applications to help alleviate fabric color fading.
And NO, the one is NOT just the other without the jacket!

Thanks for your input.
So do I understand it right?

315W CMH IS suitable for open reflectors as long as its the original Philips AGRO ?

 

[bigtacofarmer]

I did not do actual side by sides and only have a single 315. I also ran a few of those gw 630 de for a few runs. I also felt performance depended on strain. Watt per watt I think my more sativa leaning strains did way better under cmh. Other strains I did not think improvement was much.

 

[sturgeongeneral]

I've got some forum cookies under a 1k hps and under a 630 cmh.
Cmh

Hps