What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Sun Pulse Pulse Start Metal Halide

ItsAllOver

ItsAllOver

Devil's Advocate
picture.php


I am still digging my 3k in veg. It works very well in comparison with my experience with standard EYE HPS bulbs. Not sure which takes the cake between those two, but I bet the 6.4k would be much better than either. No switching around the ballasts.
I bought it as what is listed by the manuf. as the best for "all-around" growth, because that was my intention for it. I wanted to flower, and I guess they just choose the bulb catered to flowering when you're trying to use one bulb all the way through. It has become a veg-only bulb, for now.

I wish I had the opportunity to really see what's up with these bulbs, but that's a couple months away!
I'll be using them all the way through according to the chart above, including the 10k for the last bit of flowering. I'm interested to see if the UV-B increasing resin production hype is true. I've looked into it a bit and still don't know which side of the fence I believe. I'm also working out a DIY light mover, which I'll be able to add into the mix...
I have been taking pretty good notes about my results vegging with the 3k and flowering with a standard 1000W hps bulb, so I'll have something to base my comparison on.
 
C

crippled1

Member
I just finished a 23 minute phone call with Dan from Sunpulse.
Here are some things I have learned.

HPS lamps are only around 22% of the sun
They have no UV
They suck for growing plants
over time an eballast will destroy 100% of them
are not high frequency
the reddish light has very little energy

Pulse Start Metal Halide lamps are between 75% - 90% of the sun
They have UV
They are optimal for plant growth
they are high frequency similar to natural sunlight
The inventor understood that the frequency was important,
he designed the first high frequency eballast and a bulb to match it.
Like an amp to a speaker.

He also told me that energy savings is a main concern.
We're spending alot of money on lights and you want to get the most
light for the money.

I was very interested when first hearing of these lamps and the more I
learn about the technology, it sounds like I need some for my lumateks.

Like the dude said, it's like comparing a typewriter to a computer.
(HPS - PSMH)
HPS is outdated technology.

Here's his number he'll talk your fuckin ear off, barely give you a chance to interject and generally sound a bit pompous but he knows his photobiology and will be glad to share it with you.

(510) 552-7632 - cell - PST
 
D

dongle69

Now if only we could see some actual results.
It is funny that he says hps suck for growing plants.
If the stuff that I have been producing for the past 25 years sucks, I can't wait...
 
habeeb

habeeb

follow your heart
ICMag Donor
Veteran
well business is to sell a product, so everyone is gonna push these..

where's knna ? he'll clear up alot of this and get to the point
 
C

crippled1

Member
Just like the old-timer in the very first post of this thread,
Dan told me that after using these,
I would not want to use anything else.
There is so much more light that plants can actually use.
I will be running these in a month or so.
 
U

UltraSupersonic

New member
I'd tend to agree with him on the hps actually. The big reason why people chose HPS was because back in the day its was the best HID option for flowering. Technology has evolved, and this is no longer the case.
 
D

dongle69

Earlier in the thread you said you hadn't actually tried a PSMH bulb yet.
How are you able to judge that they are a better option than HPS?
CMH are only available currently in lower wattages, so they have limited use.
Have you used any of the bulbs that you say are a better option?
 
anikas88

anikas88

Member
This technology looks promising but i have not really heard any feedback, on them. I do want to try this out though. I mean the concept is pretty well founded in theory but whether it actually works is an other thing.
 
zenoonez

zenoonez

Active member
Veteran
crippled1 said:
http://www.urbangardenmagazine.com/index.php?id=130

This product has me tumescent with excitement!
I am getting 3 6.4K lamps for my scrog and will report.
They run much cooler and can be much closer.
Although this may be a bad thing cause right now with nighttime temps in the 40s I can shut off my hood fan and just use the heat of my hortis to keep my room warm.
Click to expand...

Interesting info in the link. I have to say I would like to read more about the lamp and about their preference when it comes to ballasts. Another interesting thing was him mentioning leaf temp as a limiting factor... gonna have to do some more reading tomorrow.
 
Y

YosemiteSam

The truth will reveal itself once some trusted independent sources run trials. Personally I hope it works out exactly as advertised...lower temps and make me wonder why I ever used HPS, but those kind of break throughs are few and far between in the real world.

In the mean time I will tend to ignore posters who have not even tried a product or magazines that sell advertising (could not possibly be any bias there) and keep on using HPS.

For the record, I too would love to see Knna's input.
 
ItsAllOver

ItsAllOver

Devil's Advocate
Yea, I have read that article, too, and usually don't anything (about products) that hydro magazines publish. I often find ideas for techniques, but don't bother paying any attention to their product recommendations. However, the science behind this one seems legitimate...
I am excited to get a side-by-side experiment going, but funds are limited now. ARGH! I've got the experimental conditions written down, though...

Who is Knna, where is that mentioned?
 
habeeb

habeeb

follow your heart
ICMag Donor
Veteran
the thing with CMH is that the ballast creates so much heat compared to a electronic ballast. only thing I don't like about CMH, but CMH is awesome because you can see your plants in "color" meaning you can see a def or how the plant is doing unlike the hue the HPS bulbs give your plants.

my opinions anyways
 
U

UltraSupersonic

New member
I will be running a 1000w trial very soon with these bulbs, and in a week when I receive my replacement bulb I will post some photographs and temperature information for those who are curious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top