LED vs Traditional Grow Lighting - Looking for input or case studies

I love studies. Folks here know this from my SECOES Microbial Bloom Study and my Harvest Gold Silica Performance Test (shameless plug? Maybe…)

I have used a variety of LED’s over the years and sometimes I find “the proof is in the pudding” is often a better benchmark of success than others. I has an HPS/MH lover for years. I may have been the world’s biggest skeptic of LED’s and sent many manufacturers packing who came to showcase their lights in my facility.

That was then. LED’s have come a long way and offer a grower a significant amount of control over their micro environment in a way we never have been able in the past - and in a way that HID’s never will be able unless you want to constantly change bulbs. They also help reduce the heat/power loads on a facility in a very significant way…this is important as energy standards and requirements are becoming LAW in many states.

I have used many different LED’s in the course of my career. I often test new fixtures for manufacturers and ultimately, for you here on GNET. I am happy to announce a new forthcoming study: The GrowFlux LED Study. I will explain the parameters of the study next week when I make the formal announcement. I have received my fixtures and I’m stoked to get growing!

Back to my point…

I snapped a pic this morning from a bloom space I use for testing and R&D. This is an ongoing silica study involving 9 different silica brands available on today’s market. The strain is Sprite. I am growing this crop under a 650 watt LumiGrow. I like this fixture a lot and as you can see it produces consistent crops, gets deep light penetration, and is extremely easy to tune the light spectrum. The light runs cool and I get fantastic results every time. I often use the LumiGrow 650 as a control light to test against others.

No white papers, just thick and sticky buds. Here are a few pics from this crop:

1 Like