Mars Hydro vs Viparspectra Ultimate Comparison
While finding an LED grow light, sometimes it becomes challenging to select between two competitive brands that closely match their performance and the prices. The growers need to focus on the need of their plants instead of going into the price war because any light that suits your planting need may not be ideal for any other grower due to the type of space you utilize for growing.
While comparing Mars Hydro with Viparspectra, we would like to narrate what users say about their planting experiences of both brands of light. We are presenting a short comparison of two variants from each brand, Mars Hydro, and Viparspectra. These variants include 300W and 600W grow lights, and the comparison would include segmentation on features and their performance.
Both of these companies manufacture their grow lights in China and distribute lights throughout the world using multiple selling channels, especially online selling through amazon. Both the manufacturers have plenty of experience in the grow lights industry, while they actively take feedback from the users and use that feedback for refining their products. Both selected variants 300W and 600W, are from the reflector series that are common for indoor marijuana growing recently. Kindly look into the specification of each light then we could move on to the conclusion;
Viparspectra Reflector V-300W versus Mars Hydro-ECO 300W-Reflector Series
|PRODUCT SPECIFICATION||VIPARSPECTRA V-300 WATTS||MAR HYDRO-ECO 300 WATTS|
|Spectrum||12 Band + IR||12 Band + IR|
|Vegetative Coverage||2 feet X 2 feet at 24||inches
2.5×2.5 feet at 24 inches
|Flowering Coverage||1.5 feet x1.5 feet at 18 inches||1.5 feet x1.5 feet at 18 inches|
|Weight||6.4 Pounds||5.9 Pounds|
|Dimensions||12.8 x 8 x 2.8 = 287 inches||11 x 10 x 3= 330 inches|
|Years of valid Warranty||3||2|
|Money-back Guarantee Time||30 Days||30 Days|
|Lifespan||100000 Hours||100000 Hours|
Viparspectra V-300W consumes 130 Watts of energy with a fluctuation of 3%± whereas, Mars Hydro ECO-300W consumes 120 Watts with fluctuation of 10%±. Technically the upper consumption level is the same in both of these lights. However, Mars Hydro-ECO looks more economical when looked into the lower energy consumption levels. Sure, it must be since ECO uses less number of SMD’s onboard compared to Vipraspectra V-300 watts’ light.
Viparspectra V-300 installs 60 number 5-watt Epistar diodes whereas, MarsHydro-ECO-300 contains 49 SMD LED’s, while both these units are capable of delivering a broad range of variable wavelengths figuring out to be 400-410nm, 430-450nm, 450-475nm 620-630nm, 650-660nm,730-740nm, and 2700K-3000K.
Overall, this spectrum suits well for the entire growth stages of plants and doesn’t need any supplementation if you’re growing Cannabis under any of these lights. Moreover, Mars 300W-ECO has a competitive edge over the light throwing angle that helps light penetration deep into the canopy of the plants. For this purpose, they utilize a lens at a 90 and 120-degree angle that supports light disbursement. On the other hand, it’s SMD technology that is capable of producing the highest Lumens with less wattage consumption. You may say Mars Hydro 300-W Eco has an edge as far as the spectrum and light penetration concerns.
When both of these lights are installed at 18 inches from the canopy of the plants, Viparspecta delivers 412μmol/s per square feet whereas, Mars Hydro Eco-300 delivers 450μmol/s per square. This difference is only due to the technology that Mars Hydro uses for Eco-300. Anyhow, Mars Hydro again is on the upper edge for PAR Output.
The vegetative stage is the most critical stage that determines the success of the plants in the later stages. A vigorous vegetative growth leads to more flowering and buds yield in Cannabis and other vegetables that you grow under artificial lights. Viparspectra V-300 is capable of delivering light within 2 feet during vegetative growth whereas, Mars Hydro Eco could target it within 2.5 feet of the active footprint. It means it allows you to grow more plants due to an expanded footprint during the vegetative stage.
The plants need more intensive lights when reaching the flowering stage. Keep both of these lights at a distance of 18 inches above the canopy of plants, the Viparspectra V-300 could effectively establish a footprint of 1.5 feet whereas, Mars Hydro ECO-300 could go up to 1.7 feet footprint while placing it at the same height. It is important to consider Mar Hydro here since the footprint of any light is the dominating factor when comparing with other lights of a similar capacity.
Viparsepctra installs 60, 5-Watts Epistar diodes compared to 49 SMD LED’s in Mars Hydro ECO-300 which, is a recent invention in LEDs, and the majority of manufacturers are switching towards replacing old LED with SMD’s. It is partially due to light intensity and Lumens that SMDs deliver compared to ordinary diodes.
Both Viparspectra V-300 and Mars Hydro ECO-300 use aluminum heat sinks and mute fans to dissipate unit heat. However, reflectors series produce less heat compared to ordinary LED lights since a lot of light reflects into the canopy of the plants where it is needed.
Viparspectra V-300 weighs half a pound more than the ECO-300 series. The weight is something that determines the durability and lifespan of any working unit. Viparsepctra might have a competitive edge over Mars Hydro, what their users say about the sturdiness of Viparspectra’s lights. However, Viparspectra uses iron and Mars Hydro an alloy steel while manufacturing their LED grow lights.
Viparspectra offers V-300 in dimensions that measure 12.8 x 8 x 2.8 inches making an overall, unit surface area of 287 inches. On the other hand, Mars Hydro ECO-300 measures 11 x 10 x 3 inches which, makes a considerably larger unit surface of 330 inches compared to Viparspectra surface area. Anyhow, this measurement could help you to judge the size suitability of any unit that suits your planting area.
Viparspectra V-300 allows you to switch between the vegetative and bloom stages according to your plant’s need. Mars Hydro don’t install such switches in ECO-300. No additional switches mean no dimming option. Vipraspectra has a competitive edge here that growers could take advantage.
Both manufacturers offer daisy chains with their units in comparison here. However, the length of the daisy chain could vary.
Viparspectra offers 3-years of limited aftersales warranty on V-300 and Mars Hydro for only 2-years on ECO-300 lights. For feedback on their customers’ services and complaint handling, look for their online sites and analyze which one of them is best at handling customers’ issues.
If the unit receives damaged or faulty, both manufacturers replace such units within 30 days and return money to buyers.
Lifespan of LEDs
Both manufacturers install diodes and SMDs from the reputed brands and assure a lifespan of one hundred thousand hours. However, it entirely depends on the type of growing room wiring and internal conditions that how long a diode could survive under such conditions.
Nothing is kept hidden in comparing that matters while looking into the qualities of lights. It’s up to you to decide which units meet your planting requirements.