Need some help with MH

0verfl0w

0verfl0w

Member
I'm currently running these lights....
"36" Aqualight™ Retrofit - 1-96 watt True Actinic 03 and 1-96 watt 10,000K™ Daylight Compact Fluorescent Lamps Square Pin Base"
I wanna add this...
"250 Watt Mogul Based retro kit by CoralVue. Includes Electronic Ballast,10K Bulb, And Reflector"
I was about to make the order when I noticed I'd be running PC and MH 10k bulbs. Is that smart? Should I try to get a different spectrum of light? 14k or 20k :notsure:
BTW, it's a 65 gal tank. Thanks
 
symon

symon

Member
I personally would go to the 20K MH, but it really depends on what you are wanting to keep!
 
kdfrosty

kdfrosty

Active Member
Hey Symon :)
Supplement 10K MH light with actinics. It tends to be too yellow/white, IMO. If you go with 20K, it may be so blue that you either use your actinics for dawn/dusk effect, or not at all. I had an old crappy PC fixture, which I still use with my 20K bulb.
Also, if you're debating between 14K and 20K, do some research on PAR ratings of the exact bulbs. I found that many brands of bulb have much better PAR when using their 20K instead of the 14K.
HTH
 
hurt

hurt

Active Member
Since you already have the pc's, I'd incorporate your current pc's but switch both the bulbs to actinics and then add your proposed MH 10k's. 10k MH have alot more PAR than 20k's do. PAR=growth. If you are going to add the actinic's to the 10k's, your color should be very nice. But if you don't plan on incorporating the pc's into your setup, go with the 20k's if color is your primary concern.
 
0verfl0w

0verfl0w

Member
If I switch out my PC 10k to actinics and run the 250W MH at 14k or 10k, I think I'm gonna be more or less where I'm at now. I'm gonna get deeper penetration but less surface light...no. I don't wanna buy 2 MHs so I guess that's my dilemma. Becuase of that, I'm leaning towards running my PCs with the 10K and actinics and implementing the MH at 14K. I think this gives me the best lighting combo and bang for buck. :thinking: Please tell me if I'm wrong though..
 
hurt

hurt

Active Member
If I switch out my PC 10k to actinics and run the 250W MH at 14k or 10k, I think I'm gonna be more or less where I'm at now.
Not even close, MH and pc are night and day. If you only wish to use one MH, then put it in the center and put all your corals under the spread from the MH. Personally I would run two, I have 2 MH's on my 55 with 2 VHO actinics. If you only wish to run one MH than you could run a 20k's MH with 10k pc's if overall coral coloration is your goal. I'll send you a email of a site that will give you a better understanding of lighting.
 
kdfrosty

kdfrosty

Active Member
I have a 50g, and run a XM 400w 20K bulb supplemented with 55wx2 PC actinics. I like the blue look, others dont. It all depends on personal preference.
Hurt is right....a 10K usually has higher PAR ratings than a 14K or 20K, but if you look at PAR ratings for XM bulbs you will see that the 10K and 20K ratings are similar. It's the 15K bulb only that you see a drop in PAR. Every light manufacturer is different, and what I'm talking about only applies to the Xm branded bulbs, which are damn fine bulbs.
 
hurt

hurt

Active Member
Actually KDFrosty, they aren't even close on the PAR numbers. For example, a 250w XM 10K on an IC ballast will give off 530 PAR, on the same ballast a XM 20K will give off only 270 par, and a XM 15K just 187. Even more profound on a PFO HQI ballast a XM 10K will give 835 PAR and a XM 20K just 314 PAR. So there is a definite difference between the two bulbs(degrees Kelvin). If you want greater growth in your corals, use 10K; if you want more coloration and slower growth use a 20k. Tradeoffs between the two bulbs unfortunately, hopefully they will be able to combine the benefits of each bulb.
 
hurt

hurt

Active Member
If anyone would like the link to my info source, email me at REIrwin79@yahoo.com It seems I can't enable the e-mail feature on my user CP? Also, could anyone possibly tell me how to?
 
0verfl0w

0verfl0w

Member
Another question. Is there really a huge difference between the electronic and magnetic ballasts? I've read the electronic consumes less energy but sometimes flicker and give more problems than the magentic. Any comments about this greatly appreciated.
 
0verfl0w

0verfl0w

Member
Never mind my previous post. I found the thread called "magnetic vs. electronic ballast"...very helpful. So, I've decided to go with the magentic ballast due to little difference in energy savings and better bulb efficiency. I'm taking everyones advice and I'm going to throw the dual 250W MH setup with 2x96W actinic PCs.
Here are the components I'm looking at...
-PFO dual 250W MH ballast (magnetic) $160
-Coralvue 250W 10K MH bulbs (mogul) $56.95 each
-36" Reflector (not the flat sheet) with dual mogul base and space to mount a 96W PC on each side $103
-96W PC true actinic 03 light $29.95 (swap it with my current 10K PC)
Total-$406.85 (complete conversion)
This seems to be the best setup for my 65gal. I should have no limitaions as to what corals I can keep.
 
hurt

hurt

Active Member
You should probably e-mail me for the link. It will help you out alot. Personally I run electronic ballasts for a few reason. But the main reason being that they don't drive the bulbs as hot as magnetic ballasts do. Unless you have a chiller I would really take this into consideration. As for the bulbs, I personally would get the XM 10k's over the CV 10k's. On your proposed ballast, XM 10k=600 PAR, CV 10k=324 PAR. Just some food for thought
 
0verfl0w

0verfl0w

Member
Hurt...what type of Eballast are you running because I keep reading about TVs going nuts along with other appliances. Have you had any of these issues?
 
hurt

hurt

Active Member
I run IceCap MH ballasts. And no, no issues at all with interference among any appliances/TV's/etc. They don't flicker at all either. I think that was a problem with some of the older style E-ballasts. I am assuming you are DM? If so take at look at the top of the link I sent you. The second graph/table gives some heat measurements from various ballasts. The IC has the lowest heat readings among the various ballasts. I personally love my IC ballasts, they work great with no problems at all.
 
hurt

hurt

Active Member
And to answer a previous question, you will be able to keep any coral with this setup
 
hurt

hurt

Active Member
No I didn't just make up these numbers. They come from another site that tested a number of 250w bulbs on many different ballasts. He tested for PAR #'s as well as heat output. E-mail me if you want the link.
 
nyfisherman

nyfisherman

Member
I WASN'T TRYING TO SAY YOU MADE THEM UP. Some people have testing equipment for this purpose and that's what I was getting at. I was trying to ask if you did this to get these numbers. If you could e-mail me the site I would appreciate it. My e-mail is ryanpavlus@hotmail.com.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top