Thanks for all the feedback. At first I was really leaning towards the enlite. I like it being two strips of individual disks. Allowing me to adjust each side depending on the height of the plants. But the 600W QB288 V2 R SPEC LED KIT is looking really nice. It’s out of stock right now but I’m not ready anyways. Will be soon though. VERY EXCITE! *
@Hogmaster I’ll be honest. I had no interest in those style lights until I seen the price. How bad is it on the ol electric bill?
@dbrn32 what did you mean by “black dog isn’t in the same category”? Are they really that much better than everything else? Because their price sure looks like it lol
@StephenBro I was running several leds and I took them all down and it was the same if not a little cheaper in price Ipower 3000k bulbs work just as good and they are cheaper then Phillips but I’m very happy mine is on a light mover and I love the whole setup
2 Likes
The opposite. You may as well buy Mars hydro.
5 Likes
I think that’s stretching quite a bit. California light works isn’t even at efficacy that hlg was 2 years ago.
5 Likes
I like that they are three channel … the specs on their UVB units are similar to the lower Spydr (2P), not the 2X though (higher end one). They are driverless and you can change out fans… seem legit to me…
Do you not like them? I wanna try one…
It’s not really about liking or disliking. The lowest performing fluence spydr series fixture currently available is still 2.5 umol/joule, that’s still 11% higher efficiency than the ck flagship model. Putting each of their best lights against each other is nearly 20% difference in efficacy. AND the fluence is less expensive.
The aspect of potential differences that uv bring to the table are so small that it’s not even worth considering in my opinion. There are also studies in which lights lacking uv produced higher thc content than lights with uv. In either case, you have to remember that both studies were performed in laboratory settings, and there’s no inclination that your results would follow suit in either case. Circling back, there’s nothing special about the cl lights after the uv. To me, that’s not really anything more than a gimmick.
6 Likes
2.23 umol and 1730 PPFD is not bad. That is at 600 watts. I thought the Spydr’s all run about the same but lower PPFD??
Anyways, I am not afraid to try new stuff. I can get close to .75 gpw with T5’s so I am sure this would be a GPW light for sure…
I am not buying one… if they want to comp me one for writing a detailed product review, I am in 
1 Like
I’m not sure where about the 2.23 umol/joule came from, but the 1730 is ppf not ppfd. And it’s at 800 watts according to their web page. If the ppf was 1730 at 600 watts the efficacy would be 2.88 umol/joule.
It wouldn’t surprise me at all if they clocked the efficacy at 600 watts and then the ppf at max power of 800. More misleading stuff from led manufacturers.
3 Likes
Going thing we know a guy!
3 Likes
That one doesn’t appear to come with uvb bulb?
1 Like
The UV Kit is an add-on. Think like $150.
1 Like
That makes sense.
1 Like