Vs.
Looking for the pros and cons between the two. I originally was thinking the HLG but then someone recommended this chilled tech instead. I’m hoping to get some outside input before I make my final decision. Also, I’m planing on running this in a 2x4 tent, and think I’d like to ad some supplemental uva lighting as well. @dbrn32 @Hellraiser @Covertgrower
Blockquote
You have just summoned the power of the almighty. May the force be with you.
Lol 
These guys will hook you up.
The new quantum boards by HLG are by far the most light/$. Especially if you build your own with their easy af kits like mine.The hl kit that comes with a driver raises the price an extra $100. So don’t do that. This was driver recommended by dbrn32
From all the info I gathered researching the threads, asking all the questions. I bought HLG 320w QB v2 rspec. For my 2x4
As far as sub lighting, the pros will see this.
Don’t know what your budget is, but Hlg has a discount if you use “dude”
But hang out, read some threads and I’m sure you will receive all the answers your looking for
I seen that also before ordering my light, the inventronic driver on the hlg site.
The 320w is 3 boards of the two I use. It’s overkill for a 2x4. Quantum boards are closer to 30w per SQ ft of usable light before you need to increase environmental factors or throw away money and harm plants. Would need to bring up CO2 levels, increased heat, wind, feed. My 240 is killing it in the same area of 3x3. Same as 2x4.
Note that 240 is what I run it at. I could turn it up to 260, it’s just not necessary.
Basically what I’m saying is that LED are now to the point when you think 50w,/SQ ft you need to cut that by 40%. If using quantum boards.
I’m going to leave this one to @dbrn32 I have no experience with either.
The chilLED would spread the light out better, for better coverage.
Both companies are in the US and offer high performance horticulture lighting applications. They are using the same or similar components in most cases and differences in performance will be minimal when comparing similar products.
You almost have to compare on a product level to be fair. Like Covertgrower pointed out, the chilled tech design usually offers a larger fixture that will provide more balanced intensity while being a little closer to canopy than majority of hlg products. Fit and finish of diy kits is probably a little better with chilled tech too. Cost on umol per dollar is typically a little better with hlg, and hlg has typically offered more in the small to medium space range as well.
If hlg has inventronics drivers it is because they have noticed that the meanwell drivers for certain lights the diablos and such do not hold up as well so they did a switch. Same everything with diff driver but does the same if not better watts. My scorp diable is rated at 650w with inventronics driver and it pulls 691 from the wall. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the new drivers
Edit i believe its the xl and diablo models
I think the 300L has introvonics as well
They only dim but don’t turn off completely from switch, right? That’s what mine does but I could be mistaken about which driver is which though
My scorpion diablo turn off from knob the meanwells dont for the 260xls. They just dim real low
Ahh then maybe I have the meanwell then,
Should say on the driver
Huh, I’ll check that out never cared too much about it really, as long as it grows tight buds
Looks like the wife needs to do a better clean job ontop the lights lol. Maybe she cant reach there. She is only 4 10. Lmao.
Can’t go wrong with either company, comes down to price and what you prefer the looks of.
Any recommendations for a great uva bar for that coverage? And would 2 of them be overkill? I really think I’m leaning more toward the ChilLED 330 X3 over the HLG
HLG has the uva bar tho. Most highly recommended I’ve came across anyway.
Id like to see recent tests of ChilLed vs the v2 rspec quantum boards personally. Most information you find on the subject is against the Diablo or original 288s. And that’s the out dated information people use to argue with. Which as I just said. Is outdated. Even on light spread. My 2 qb 288 v2 rspec have a much larger foot print than my sf 2000. My sf2000 is considerably larger tho… yet it has a smaller foot print.
