LED vs. HID test grow

[green_tea]

Amazing that there was only 90 grams off of a 400w... .29 gpw. Sorry this is a skewed experiment, he should have yielded at least .50 gpw with a 400w.

except that the plants were under the same conditions (for the most part)

- same strain
- same nutrients
- same time when they started flowering

only thing that differed was the type of light source used for veg and flower, sounds like a pretty controlled experiment to me

(besides the trimming, and possibly the fact he used seeds instead of clones)

 

[dontstepongrass]

the led plant also took longer to flower.

 

[Mr Celsius]

except that the plants were under the same conditions (for the most part)

- same strain
- same nutrients
- same time when they started flowering

only thing that differed was the type of light source used for veg and flower, sounds like a pretty controlled experiment to me

(besides the trimming, and possibly the fact he used seeds instead of clones)

It was controlled in that sense, but any competent grower can get .50 gpw under a 400w. If I recall correctly, a person by the name of NGB, grew 1 plant with a little more veg time and yielded 1 pound; thats 1 gpw and still a higher gram per watt hour then this.

Maybe this strain was a complete piss poor yielder, and if so then it was foolish to use it for an experiment in which we desire to see yields of efficiency.

He did use clones.

 

[blackone]

Let's see this light vs a 400 in a 3*3 SOG

 

[Microwido]

This was Flo strain right? I grew 2 flo plants outdoors and yeilded 2 ounces dry. And the plants were 6 feet tall, yes it was only 2 ounces dry. Flo is a notorious low yielder, but man that Sativa high is 2nd to none. I would get high and want to do things!

I would like to see this experiment with a larger producing plant. Still this is a great experiment! Well done!

I will go LED when there not retarded expensive.

 

[iRokz]

I'm amazed that so few posters mentioned the difference in the amount of days in the flowering period. I think the results the OP gave were misleading (intentionally or not) on this part and others.

The final result he gave was in g/Kwh, the only figure in which the LED supposedly beat the HID. He totally disregarded how potent the buds were in comparison. The LED buds could easily contain less/more THC than the HID buds in which case comparing the yields between these two plants is totally pointless.

This experiment started out well but went sore all of a sudden. After claiming objectivity in the start it seems like the OP broke his vows (by pending the LED plant and flowering it 2 weeks more than the HID) and tried to showcase LED in a better way than the majority of posters here would see it.

 

[Lumen]

- He cut the top of the LED plant at some point, for me thats the most promising part of a plant. ¹ Isn't topping a plant known to stunt grow for a time like up to 2 weeks? Maybe those weeks the LED plant took longer?
- What did he do after the HID harvest, the LED plant does nothing for two weeks, after it couldn't be stopped till then.
- LEDs are colder, so leaves evaporation is less. A HID plant sucks more water to make up for the evaporation. Sideeffect: it gets more nutrients that way, than a LED plant. So it isn't the best for a LED plant to get water/fert. from the same hydrosystem. At least the temp on the leaves would have to be the same. But what is wrong about a grow taking 10 days longer but saving 75% energy over all? This guy wanted to make it an even test, but I think without knowing he favored/followed the HID plant grow pattern. LED grow will have some variables changed for sure.

EDIT: ¹

 

[Wooderson]

What happen? looked ok..... Any other good LED grows?

 

[Mr Celsius]

Spectrum and intensity weren't there. These LED's suck. Look at Luxeon brand LED's and you'll see the right kind to use.

 

[wantaknow]

what about the procyon 100 it claims 70% higher out put than a ufo led ,it also claims a 5 buck a month habbit,with 3 wattled