Quantum or Lumatek?

[fish83]

Hello ICMAG PPL! lol...this is such and awesome site...anyway...what would you people choose as far as a ballast? The Lumatek Digi's or the Quantum Digi's? I had my heart set on the Lumatek, but this Quantum with the dimmer seems awesome...any feedback would be great! Thank you all!

 

[Pinball Wizard]

It's important to find compatible bulbs; with either brand...IMO.

 

[silent_lemon]

i dont know.

but i have a digital 400 watt lumatek and im happy with it - as far as 400 watters go, id really like a 1000 though

 

[fish83]

thanks all!

thanks all!

im dealing with 600's.

 

[fish83]

compatible bulbs...yeah...ive been reding alot of the bulbs burn out....

 

[fish83]

It's important to find compatible bulbs; with either brand...IMO.

The Ushio bulbs seem ok in the Lumateks...Have you heard anything about thesE?

 

[BRNEYDBVR]

I plan on purchasing a Quantum 600w in the near future....Check dchydro.com...$176 for the 600.

 

[fish83]

I plan on purchasing a Quantum 600w in the near future....Check dchydro.com...$176 for the 600.

Dude..thats cool...i just read that the Quantums are better....for every 10 lumatkes returned, only 1 quantum goes back, plus, they said it is 10% better anyway....dont know if this is true, but it seems like the Quantum is the one at this point....

 

[deepforest]

if u get lumateks run ushios and steer clear of horti eyes

quantum. galaxy, etc. i have no idea about

 

[America]

I've been running my quantum 600w for 4 months, not a problem so far. Can't say that for my 400w lumatek. Dead in the water a month in, so I got my money back for it. It was an older model lumatek.

 

[SergeantGod]

I've been using Lumetek 600 and 1000 for seven months and no problem at all. I use the dual 600s.

 

[BudGood]

I would say go with the Quantum, seems like they have less problems than Lumateks. Plus they were the first to come up with the dimmable ballast before Lumatek copied their design. I haven't heard of any bulb compatability issues like Lumateks with Quantums, and you can run them on a regular flipflop without needing to shut them off 5 minutes before the flip, like you have to do with Lumateks. Overall, they just seem better, I will be buying a few of them soon....And they're a nice orange color too! lol

 

[Seismic]

Galaxy....my 600w and 1000w have been working great

 

[BudGood]

Galaxy....my 600w and 1000w have been working great

ROFLMAO, did you not read the title of the thread?

 

[simba]

Neither
the higher the freq the worse they are..sunpulse suposeldy is made for high HZ but what hz range 400hz or 22khz..or in middle cant have all ways.
so in short matching up bulbs to ballasts is HORID..
to the EBallasts 1 vs 10 (said above) you can sell 100 mag core ballasts and not see one come back. and u can sell 10 Eballasts any brand and at least one will fail in 60 days.

Reference this thread..
http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=111885

i just said this there
a good e ballast will not Hot restrike if the power outs for a minute it allows for proper cool down before restriking not horti ballasts..

Eye did a report found here
www.eyehortilux.com/EYELU600.pdf

GE says.
3.2 Electronic Ballasts
Electronic Ballasts use solid-state electronic components to start and operate the ballasts.
Electronic ballasts often use IC chips and feedback to implement better controls, and safety
features into ballasts. Electronic ballasts typically operate much more efficiently than similar
Electromagnetic Ballasts. A few other benefits are small size, lightweight, improved lumen
maintenance, fault mode protection and better power regulation, which results in better color
consistency.
3.2.1 Low Frequency Lamp Operation
GE analysis of internal and competitive HID lamps suggests that the most compatible driving
waveform for an electronic ballast is a Low Frequency Square Wave (L.F.S.W.) with low higher order
GE2012-5024 Rev 1
Page 11
harmonic content. L.F.S.W. has been long established as a dependable method of ballasting low
Wattage HID lamps with significant industry standards support.
Analysis of lamp data has shown that there are limited operating bands between 1 kHz to 200 kHz
in which an electronic ballast could operate a lamp wattage family without causing unacceptable
arc instability due to Acoustic Resonance. Trend analysis of the A.R. maps show that this range
extends well beyond 200 kHz. When the A.R. structure maps are overlaid there is no consistent
frequency band, which can be identified as a stable location for ballast operation. There are large
variations in the A.R. structure maps between multiple lamp vendors and from lamp type to lamp
type or burn position. A.R. may cause visual annoyance, lamp cycling, shorten lamp life, and in
extreme cases result in arc tube rupture.
Specific matched lamp – ballast high frequency systems can be stable, however they limit the
extent that the individual members can be modified for future improvements. Additionally, there is
no data on the long-term stability of the A.R. maps due to aging of the lamp. Future re-lamping may
also create an unstable system due to changes in lamp arc tube geometry or manufacture.
Lamp performance points to be considered:
Data on Electronic ballast technology has shown that it can greatly improve the lumen
maintenance of HID lamps over traditional EM reactor or CWA ballast systems. However, no data
are available to support improved lamp performance on High Frequency vs. Low Frequency Square
Wave driving waveforms
GE2012-5024 Rev 1
Page 12
Conclusions:
GE recommends operation of its high wattage CMH® and PulseArc® QMH HID lamps on electronic
ballasts that use a Low Frequency Square Wave output such as the UltraMax® HID ballast, GE-MH-
250-400-MAX-208-207 or similar for optimal lamp performance.
3.2.2 High Frequency
GE does not make high frequency HID ballasts due to reasons described in the Low Frequency
Lamp Operation section above. However, high frequency operation is applicable for matched lamp
ballast systems. Caution must be taken when designing these systems for an application to make
sure that the ballast and lamp are compatible to avoid premature lamp failure and safe operation.

 

[Dhude]

I was faced with same decision approx 6mo ago. Went with Lumatek after looking at Lumatek, Quantum, and Galaxy.

"Dimmable" setting is a joke, it still draws the same power on the "dimmed" settings, just puts a portion of it to the bulb. WHAT?! Yeah, that's what I said. WhyTF even have a dimmable if it doesn't reduce power consumption while in a "dimmed" mode? If want less light intensity, I can just raise the f-ing light, and have one less thing (dimmer switch/circuit) that could possibly go wrong.

Also didn't like the fan on the quantums. The ONLY way I'd go with Galaxy or Quantum over Lumatek was if you want to be able to run the same ballast on 120v or 240v (Luma is voltage specific, the others have a switch or multiple cords/inputs)

Anyway, got some Luma 600s on 240v, both single and the double 600s. I like em.

 

[Lazyman]

Yep I have 5 Quantums, my local shop was the one who talked me into it (been shopping there a long time, I trust them as they are all growers) and he was the one who told me that they get ten Lumateks back for every 1 Quantum.

I measured my Quantums vs my old Sunsystems analog ballasts, and with the same new bulbs and hoods, at the same distance, the Quantums were exactly 10% brighter (both MH and HPS) than the old coil ballasts. Can't beat that with a stick!

 

[etinarcadiaego]

I measured my Quantums vs my old Sunsystems analog ballasts, and with the same new bulbs and hoods, at the same distance, the Quantums were exactly 10% brighter (both MH and HPS) than the old coil ballasts. Can't beat that with a stick!

Really, wow that's cool. I'm glad to know that.

I went with Lumatek and haven't had any problems. I keep a small fan on the ballast at all times and it never rises above ambient. Glad to know the 10% isn't some marketing gimmick!

 

[Seismic]

ROFLMAO, did you not read the title of the thread?

Yeah, I read the title smartass, and if I thought either of those two were good I would have probably recommended them.

 

[jonezin]

I was faced with same decision approx 6mo ago. Went with Lumatek after looking at Lumatek, Quantum, and Galaxy.

"Dimmable" setting is a joke, it still draws the same power on the "dimmed" settings, just puts a portion of it to the bulb. WHAT?! Yeah, that's what I said. WhyTF even have a dimmable if it doesn't reduce power consumption while in a "dimmed" mode? If want less light intensity, I can just raise the f-ing light, and have one less thing (dimmer switch/circuit) that could possibly go wrong.

Also didn't like the fan on the quantums. The ONLY way I'd go with Galaxy or Quantum over Lumatek was if you want to be able to run the same ballast on 120v or 240v (Luma is voltage specific, the others have a switch or multiple cords/inputs)

Anyway, got some Luma 600s on 240v, both single and the double 600s. I like em.

Lumatek are the ones that say that it still uses the same amount of power when it is dimmed. Quantum claims the opposite. Quantum says theirs use less power when they are dimmed.

I just recently got a Quantum 1000 and I am using a Hortilux Eye Super HPS in it. I also just sold my 600 watt Quantum that I used for a while with the same bulb in it and never had any problems with it. Someone else on here said that they had problems with the Eye bulbs in these, but I haven't.