i use to run mothers under t5s. keep the light weakish and on 18 or more hours/day. sometimes i left it on 24/7. works best with regs but can be done with a fem photo.
edit: agree you might like to flower better under the f1 light.
Medicgrow fold-8 V1 questions
- Thread starter The70’s
- Start date
i use to run mothers under t5s. keep the light weakish and on 18 or more hours/day. sometimes i left it on 24/7. works best with regs but can be done with a fem photo.
edit: agree you might like to flower better under the f1 light.
- Thread starter
- #22
The70’s
Well-Known Member
Ahhhh The Fold-8 now has a selector switch between V1/F1, plus a builtin dimmer avoiding the GLC-1…..nice, maybe they’ll do a trade in upgrade for me…
Fenderbender
Well-Known Member
How do you figure? they still have the choice between V1 or F1 to put in the bag?
The Flex 800 seems to have two spectra?
- Thread starter
- #24
The70’s
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #26
The70’s
Well-Known Member
Since i already have the fold-8, and the GLC-1 controller , and it covers vegging fine, i guess adding deep red might be the little added light that would help flowering, in a diy way…..
Any thoughts on how to go about implementing this just for flower ? Looks like the deep red 48” rails would work, but my guess there are good ones and bad ones
Any thoughts on how to go about implementing this just for flower ? Looks like the deep red 48” rails would work, but my guess there are good ones and bad ones
Delps8
Well-Known Member
I'd pass on that one. You're paying a lot for the variable spectrum but you're giving up quite a bit in PPFD. It's not as bad as the Kind lights but that 5' x 5' light has a serious drop-off outside of the 3' x 3' area. That's my bias of not growing cannabis at <800µmol. You're losing > 15% of your crop by growing at 800 vs 1k.Yup, its this one, my mistake…
Delps8
Well-Known Member
Yeh, the add ons are the way to go or are they?
4' add ons are $150±? And a whole new light is…$400.
One of the things that holds me back from adding more red to my flower light is that the add ons have such a low PPF (PPFD is how much light is hitting an area at a certain distance in one second) PPF is just how much light it can blast out.
The add ons are 30 watts or so and the only PPF value I've seen was 60µmol. I just don't know how much more light that really is and, lacking data from light testing, it's 100% conjecture.
Shane at Migro uses a spectroradiometer (Growcraft had that data on their site but they went belly up so I'm SOL there) so maybe you could send him and email.
this ^
actually the whole line looks a bit weak for the watts its supposed to consume. plus there's only a couple i'd ever consider after looking at the components.
for the cost though i'd probably just get another flower bias light and swap them out between veg and flower.
Fenderbender
Well-Known Member
How much do you think the few reds they put in the grow lights give? I don't think much is needed, 40 watt is already plenty for only red. the Mars VG 80 Red is two bars of 40 for a total of 80.
I can beam a crop to the ground from over 6,5 feet distance with 100watt of 660nm so don't think much is needed.
- Thread starter
- #31
The70’s
Well-Known Member
Im thinking now that in my past hobbies, i chase things that mite not be absolutely needed….im gonna sit tite for now, thanx for all the input, its always an educational process
Delps8
Well-Known Member
I poked around about a month ago and 30 watts comes to mind but if Mars says 40, let's run with that number.
It's unlikely that the major players would all market "something that does nothing". That's just not how the markets work today. With that in mind, I've can accept the postulate that the light that they're selling will be of a not insignificant benefit.
Your comment "I don't think much is needed," got me thinking more about the issue and, even though we don't have spectroradiometer data, we can still look at the picture of a spectrum and use the completely unrefined technique of counting up the square in the spectrum graph that
Given this spectrum, what % of photos are from the 660mm region?
I'd say there's about 29 squares under the curve and about 7 are in the 660nm region. It's a 330 watt light which means that there's about 25% or 80± watts of 660nm. If I add another 40 watts of red, that's about 50% boost. For $60. That is cost effective.
Below is the spectrum of a no-shit-Sherlock flower light.
Adding those deep red supplemental lights won't get me a spectrum like this but, based on the new "count the squares" analysis, it will get me a lot closer than where I am now.
[time passes Delps checks out the Mars web site]
Well, lookee here! Seek and ye shall find! When I checked on these lights a while back, I don't think the PPFD map was there so I was meh over the whole thing. Based on what Mars is advertising, that's a signficant boost to even a flower light like I'm using now.
And for someone using a veg light, it's a no-brainer. Now someone's got to break the news to @The70’s…
- Thread starter
- #33
The70’s
Well-Known Member
I poked around about a month ago and 30 watts comes to mind but if Mars says 40, let's run with that number.
It's unlikely that the major players would all market "something that does nothing". That's just not how the markets work today. With that in mind, I've can accept the postulate that the light that they're selling will be of a not insignificant benefit.
Your comment "I don't think much is needed," got me thinking more about the issue and, even though we don't have spectroradiometer data, we can still look at the picture of a spectrum and use the completely unrefined technique of counting up the square in the spectrum graph thatI just pulled out of my assis, perhaps, "crude but effective".
Given this spectrum, what % of photos are from the 660mm region?
I'd say there's about 29 squares under the curve and about 7 are in the 660nm region. It's a 330 watt light which means that there's about 25% or 80± watts of 660nm. If I add another 40 watts of red, that's about 50% boost. For $60. That is cost effective.
Below is the spectrum of a no-shit-Sherlock flower light.
Adding those deep red supplemental lights won't get me a spectrum like this but, based on the new "count the squares" analysis, it will get me a lot closer than where I am now.
[time passes Delps checks out the Mars web site]
Well, lookee here! Seek and ye shall find! When I checked on these lights a while back, I don't think the PPFD map was there so I was meh over the whole thing. Based on what Mars is advertising, that's a signficant boost to even a flower light like I'm using now.
And for someone using a veg light, it's a no-brainer. Now someone's got to break the news to @The70’s…
I hear ya, i really like the idea of a single lite with selectable veg and flower. Im not in a position to take money away from my recording studio
i cant dismiss the fact that my lite leans toward veg, but my jars are gonna be filled soon, and my studio needs mics, a mackbook pro and cables, possibly a strat and a keyboard, LOL…..Thanx guys, i really do appreciate your research and knowledge and dedication to one of my fav hobbies
