Old Reviews LEDs, Anyone having problems with LED lenses melting over bulbs?

[Son of Hobbes]

I'll chime in for platinum. Run away. Any company with ridiculous claims like this is probsbly trying to rip you off.


View attachment 591109

P300, 180w led to replace 400w HPS? Let's break it down to PPF output for the 400w HPS, 682 unreflected, 20% loss to reflector, 5% average bulb age(replacing every 2000hours)ppf of 518 on the canopy. 2.87umol/j would need to be the efficiency of platinum, or around 60% wall efficiency...

Well let's check what data they provide to back this amazing claim up.... what a surprise, none. No specific on leds used, no total light output, whether calculated or put in a sphere. A classic single point par reading, some misinformation about cannabis spectrums(green light actually only has a 15% lower absorption rate). The spectrum they show looks great for growing algae though. Mcree action spectrum, energy weighted, is what the cannabis industry uses. Not DIN.
View attachment 591130

Have you ever thought to bring any of these questions or concerns to the representatives' attention we have on-site? I guess I'd be more interested in the answers than assuming everyone is hiding behind false claims or has ulterior motives.

 

[Atulip]

No need, and I try to stay out of the sponsors section. But with current mono technology that claim is impossible. Hitting those wall efficiencies are only found in DIY cob builds right now. (Specifically a top bin $45 cxb3590 ran at 23w each on mean well drivers and passively cooled barely hit 2.8umol/j)


The claim is so utterly ridiculous it's not even funny.

 

[namvet25]

What claims are you talking about? And what is wall efficience? I really don't see any claims except what hps they compare to.Go on you tube and check there video comparisons on other brands.

 

[Atulip]

What claims are you talking about?

That the 180w p300 is a 400w hps replacement. Broke down the math also, last post of page 1. You'd have to give a 400w hps a heavy handicap to make those claims true.


And pointed out that they provide no actual information, aside from a center single point par measurement. And the bad spectrum claims. Typical car salesman marketing, and priced at a premium, avoid like the plague.

 

[namvet25]

The p300 has been around for awhile with a few upgrades and i havn't seen to many bad reviews.We are testing six p300 lights and we will be evaluating them as each tester does a complete grow so we will wait and see the results good or bad.

 

[briman]

@Son of Hobbes, @namvet25, @Atulip 400w hps at the center has 305 micromoles, reading at center and the Platinum P300 has 680 micromoles at center. Both @ 24 inches from center. So the Numbers look good to me! @Atulip, if you have any questions, feel free to ask in the Platinum Q&A thread. Here is the link...
https://www.autoflower.org/threads/platinum-led-q-a.53196/

 

[Atulip]

A center reading comparison is useless unless they have the exact same spread pattern. Then of course there are quality hps bulbs and cheaper ones to compare, better reflectors, cheaper ones.

What I'm saying, is mathematically it's impossible with current led technology. I'm talking about the output of the source, not a single point reading. I can toss a lazer beam reflector and probably smoke a hole through a par meter with a 50w led. Doesn't mean anything for spread though.

50% output of a 400w hortilux is 341umol. This will be the ppf, or average ppfd over 1 meter of space, very different than single point ppfd readings. Even at a 50% handicap to that hortilux bulb(like running without a reflector), that 180w p300 needs to be outputting 1.9umol/j.... and that's maybe possible if they're using top bin Crees, and Samsung's, and osrams. Helluva handicap needed..

But I'm just some opinionated guy on the internet. I can show the math, but then again, having 3 staff jump to reply says more than I ever could. :smoking:

 

[geddy]

Yep seen it , checking it out right now, thank you.

 

[geddy]

lm going platinum , the way these numbers are reading , thanks for the advice.

 

[jingo]

Common problem with the mars II, company claims a bad lens supplier. Bought 3 all had burnt lenses in less than 800 hours.