Choco Loso

For you Sativa lovers here is one I ran under LED's. 133 days in flower and was 6'6 tall which is why I am posting the entire plant in 2 pics. I couldn't get close enough catch the whole plant in one shot and show any detail.

So yeah we all see the "LED's don't penetrate argument, and yeah some don't, but some do.

This particular plant went 2.8 GPW which is currently the best I have done.

great ceiling height---why don't the led's penetrate the canopy---do they have hot spots or is it cause they are low intensity---seems if some do and some don't maybe a light mover is in order :hubba:

orangesunshine said:

great ceiling height---why don't the led's penetrate the canopy---do they have hot spots or is it cause they are low intensity---seems if some do and some don't maybe a light mover is in order :hubba:

Click to expand...

Couldn't tell ya brother. I don't have that issue.

2.8 gpw is much respect---would you share your experiences---what would you guesstimate your %$ decrease in your power bill was by using the led's---how bout the other factors---safety, heating and cooling, life span of the led, what was the gpw w/ your prior light

:ciao: :48: growing the Sats might be where the LED's shine. Sat ain't as bushy as indys so penetration aint needed as much.

PJ do you have the light mounted or was you raising it as needed?

orangesunshine said:

2.8 gpw is much respect---would you share your experiences---what would you guesstimate your %$ decrease in your power bill was by using the led's---how bout the other factors---safety, heating and cooling, life span of the led, what was the gpw w/ your prior light

Click to expand...

Well power stayed the same as far as overall wattage for the lights as I was expanding when I updated a couple of years back so that is moot here, but light saving would have been cut in half watt for watt.

Cooling the room is quite a bit cheaper but I couldn't put a total on that in a dollar amount. I no longer have to run any fans for venting through the lights to cool them however. There was an issue in the light it's self which was more of a design flaw, and I was losing LED modules for a while, but that seems to be all fixed now, knock on wood.

I flower 6 plants under 356 watts that average about 1.5 a piece.

ozzydiodude said:

:ciao: :48: growing the Sats might be where the LED's shine. Sat ain't as bushy as indys so penetration aint needed as much.

PJ do you have the light mounted or was you raising it as needed?

Click to expand...

But for the most part are Sats are quite a bit taller so it is part of the equation. It really comes down to proper training and not allowing the canopy to get too large, unless you are running for tops only which I do on a few strains.

The light is fully adjustable and it's more about keeping plants the same height under each fixture than dates of said plants. With my fixtures I need to stay at least 16" above the canopy so with 9 foot ceilings, was not too tough and yes I just adjusted as needed but once she was done with stretch it sat there for what seemed months.

I also run perpetual so it makes it easier for me to move plants as needed based on height alone.

Your the second person I talked to that was using the LEDs higher and not 2 or 3 inches from the plants. that maybe the key the light peak spectrun wise might not be close to the diode

thanks for your input PJ---could you tell a bit more on why you be 16" from the canopy if these leds do not need to be air cooled---is that for light foot---how bout growing any indys or do you only run the sativas---what about time frame---does it take longer grow under the led or can you expect the same weight for the same time growing under a led vs. the same time and watt hps

Hey hey PJ... :48:

orangesunshine said:

thanks for your input PJ---could you tell a bit more on why you be 16" from the canopy if these leds do not need to be air cooled---is that for light foot---how bout growing any indys or do you only run the sativas---what about time frame---does it take longer grow under the led or can you expect the same weight for the same time growing under a led vs. the same time and watt hps

Click to expand...

As far as time frames I have seen no difference although I have seen this question asked several times. And if I am just keeping it real, not quite sure where the logic is behind that at all? If a plant takes x-days to flower under HPS, what would cause a plant to change it's times under any other "High Intensity" light?

As far as "Why 16" minimum?" In a word Bleaching. While the main sun leaves will fry like nobody's business, before that ever happens if you have flowers it will turn them white, and I mean snow white. I had reports from a grower that this was just major trics. Couldn't have been further from the truth. It will make the smoke taste like burnt wood and pretty nasty. Potency is also compromised ten fold.

I have some plants that require I am closer to 2 feet above the canopy, and some will let me get within 12", but as a rule I am generally at 16 or so inches.

Couple of facts about LED lighting, and again I am not talking ALL LED products. I am talking about the ones that I have. LED's produce roughly four times the "Usable" light per watt as compared to traditional grow lights. Many LED suppliers argue that a 200watt LED is equal to 800 watts of traditional grow light power . A more realistic rule of thumb however is 1:2

JustAnotherAntMarching said:

Hey hey PJ... :48:

Click to expand...

What up Nephew.

ozzydiodude said:

Your the second person I talked to that was using the LEDs higher and not 2 or 3 inches from the plants. that maybe the key the light peak spectrun wise might not be close to the diode

Click to expand...

I went in to some detail about why you have to keep these higher above, but you do have a point here as far as the spectrum. "Most" not all LED in the past have been built with single color diodes under each lens, or glass. Mine are that way myself. That said, good chance I will be testing some new 15watt "mixed" spectrum single diodes made by another company here in the US within the next year, and I "think" this will be the next big break-thru in the Tech and future of LED's for growing.

I feel like when that happens HPS will fade away in to the past forever, except for all the stick in the muds who know better that want to settle, "If they have ever reached it at all" a GPW.

Personally, I'm striving for 3GPW myself and I'll do it at half the cost.

As far as time frames I have seen no difference although I have seen this question asked several times. And if I am just keeping it real, not quite sure where the logic is behind that at all? If a plant takes x-days to flower under HPS, what would cause a plant to change it's times under any other "High Intensity" light?

that ^^^^ is a pj quote----

same as it would if it were shaded---had less intensity---vegging 18 instead of 24---lower lumens---different spectrums---would this not slow the growth rate when comparing led to hps

if i understand correctly---you are saying all factors being the same except the light---you are busting out the same #'s w/led as you would w/hps?

i am all about learning more about growing our favorite plant---just trying to wrap my head around led's

thanks

orangesunshine said:

if i understand correctly---you are saying all factors being the same except the light---you are busting out the same #'s w/led as you would w/hps?

Click to expand...

No I am saying I am doing better now than I ever did with HPS square foot for square foot.

Better Harvest with LED then HPS????:ignore: What was ya doing wrong when you grew with HPS,,, that would cause you to get a better result with LED? If that was the case,,The big growers would be using LEDS instead of those stupid old HPS thingys,, dont ya think?

You are the only person that I have ever heard say this

I am saying I am doing better now than I ever did with HPS square foot for square foot.

Click to expand...

Ive found running less plants for me has upped my yeild. Simply overcrowding will drop yeild.

Pj what strains ya running all bohdi still?


Id like to get some leds for a small area I have but ive been waiting till the price levels off.

are you doing one light per plant? Or is the array spread out?sorry I havent seen the setup pics or your space so idk...

Btw- The island says hello!

I also found the same thing TOA. I like giving my plants plenty room to grow,,and a better chance for light penetration.I dont have a problem with LEDS,,I have a problem with claims that they are better then HPS at this time.

trillions of atoms said:

Pj what strains ya running all bohdi still?


Id like to get some leds for a small area I have but ive been waiting till the price levels off.

are you doing one light per plant? Or is the array spread out?sorry I havent seen the setup pics or your space so idk...

Btw- The island says hello!

Click to expand...

I still test for Bodhi, but have never just run his stuff. Just finished some Apollo 11 crosses, Cherry Mountain, Super Snow Lotus, etc etc. Same thread you posted in over at TSD.


I run Apollo 10's in flower which are 356 watts total and I run six plants under one fixture.

This was taken over the weekend of three plants on the back side of one light. Strain is California Orange and runs over 3 GPW on a bad run.



Apollo 10 for flowering.


Apollo 4's I use for veg, which cover a 2x4 table. Total cost around 300 bones for the setup.



Not sure who or what the Island is TBH, but I am sure I'll find out huh?

WeedHopper said:

I dont have a problem with LEDS,,I have a problem with claims that they are better then HPS at this time.

Click to expand...

Now thats funny PJ. Ya made me laugh.


Just smoked a bowl of Sweet Island.Was Sweettttt.

as i said before good to see yah pokin yer head back in around here P Jammers, always nice to see what you got going on under those LEDs

How much are those apollos now? Could I get one for 400 bux? Im a cheap ba$tard lololololol