MH vs VHO

[jasontk]

I was wondering if I would be better off going with a retrofit system that included one 175W MH bulb and 40 watts of NO lighting (total of 225 watts), or a VHO system that totalled 300 watts. The VHO system would be about $60 less for 75 more watts, but no metal halide bulb. Would it be worth it to spend more for less watts, just because its a metal halide bulb?

 

[daniel411]

Wattage isn't really as important as the intensity of the lighting.
While you may be getting less wattage, you're have more intense lighting. You can probally have nearly anything under that VHO setup on your tank. You deffinately can have everything with the metal halide setup. As well as having albout half the cost in the electrical bill each month.
HTH

 

[jasontk]

I had an idea I would probably be better of with the MH. Thanks for the help!

 

[enomadra]

Does MH really save that much more $$$ on the electric bill than VHO?:notsure:

 

[shouse]

no, it's pretty bloody expensive as well

 

[nas19320]

Wattage is wattage so really 300 watts of MH is no more expensive than 300 watts of VHO provided that your ballast is actually using 500 watts and no more. MH though is much more intense so you get more bang for your buck.