Vho or Compact

gypsie32

gypsie32

Member
I need a lighting kit for a 90gal tank with a canopy..I plan on having some soft corals..I know that there is alot of talk on
this subject but before I spend alot a money on a kit, I want
to feel like I am getting the right one..I am looking at the 4 bulb
ice cap set-up but alot of people say the compacts would be just fine...what do you all think? If you think the compacts would work
what set-up would you use? My tank is 48"long and the canopy is
5"deep....any info would be very useful//
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
I strongly suggest the IceCap setup. If you change your mind then you can switch to PC or you can mix & match because the IceCap 660 will run any flourescent bulb. If you go with a PC ballast you'll need a new ballast if you decide to go VHO.
 
bdhough

bdhough

Active Member
vho with a 90. You'll end up having more bulbs with pc's and you can space vho's out over the whole tank to properly light it. The more bulbs means more money in repalacement bulbs in the future. If you get a 4 bulb vho you can do 4 50/50's or alternate white blue down the line.
 
krux

krux

Member
vho bulbs are cheaper than pc, you will pay between 35 and 45 bucks for a pc 96 watt bulb, you are looking at about 25 to 30 for a vho bulb. add that across 4 bulbs, and you can see how fast vho will pay for its self.
you can run 2 wh7 ballasts for 4 110 watt bulbs, and that is cheaper than going icecap, but if you want ease of instilation, icecap is the way to go... also if heat is an issue, workhorse ballasts run pretty warm, so icecap will keep your tank cooler (if you do not mount your ballast remotely).
 
mr. angelfish

mr. angelfish

Member

Originally posted by krux
vho bulbs are cheaper than pc, you will pay between 35 and 45 bucks for a pc 96 watt bulb, you are looking at about 25 to 30 for a vho bulb. add that across 4 bulbs, and you can see how fast vho will pay for its self.
you can run 2 wh7 ballasts for 4 110 watt bulbs, and that is cheaper than going icecap, but if you want ease of instilation, icecap is the way to go... also if heat is an issue, workhorse ballasts run pretty warm, so icecap will keep your tank cooler (if you do not mount your ballast remotely).
I think it is about the equal cost to buy the bulbs as VHO tend to las 6-12 months compare to 14-24 months for PC.
For wattage operation and I think PC and VHO is similar as you will have to go with two PC to fully lit the tank compare to one VHO. (ie:a 4 foot tank). However It appear that PC may have way more of intensity than a VHO per 2 foot cube unless it is a 75W VHO vs 55/65W PC then intensity may be about the same.
For a 4 foot set up,
Compare......Watts equal and operation cost at 440 watts.
4-4 foot VHO 440 watts and cost around $100 for 4 bulbs: Replacement one and half to twice a year totaling range $100-200 for replacements)
8-55W PC (4 per two foot cube) total 440 watts and cost around an average $22 to get each PC X 8= $190's range and last between 14-24 months. SAME BULB REPLACEMENT OPERATION COST. Also way lot more intensity than VHO per 2 foot cube.
8-75WVHO (4 per two foot cube) totaling 600 watts!!!!!!!!! Would cost twice more than as mentioned above for 8 tubes that last 6-12 months. Cost inefficient but may benefit better intensity equal as PC.
So what the difference?
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator

Originally posted by Mr. Angelfish
So what the difference?
That's why I suggested the IceCap... the VHO bulbs will last 12 - 24 months depending on the bulb.
The IceCap ballast pays for itself very very quickly.
 
mr. angelfish

mr. angelfish

Member

Originally posted by Bang Guy
That's why I suggested the IceCap... the VHO bulbs will last 12 - 24 months depending on the bulb.
The IceCap ballast pays for itself very very quickly.
What brand VHO tube works the best with that fixture mentioned above? Must be the same brand?
and..........
How many hours you run 10000K and Actinic? 8 hrs for white and 10 hrs for blue?
That way I can figure the cost out more efficiently.
Thanks millions. :cool:
 
mr. angelfish

mr. angelfish

Member

Originally posted by broomer5
VHO actinic is hard to beat for the way the tank/corals "look" to me.
I had PC's
I have VHO
Yes, I have read so much debates regard to actinic pro and cons with PC and VHO. I must agree that VHO appear to rule with Actinic. Here is the question.....
For 10000K which one rules? PC or VHO?
Thanks.
Hey anyone, Is there any rumors or pending "improve" actinic PC being modified in near future? Thanks again.
 
krux

krux

Member
i have to agree, if you are replacing vho bulbs on an icecap ballast every 6 months, you are really wasting the money you spent on the more expensive icecap ballast. even every 12 months is still early, but good if you want a greater margin of error as far as light quality drop off goes.
i noticed a very visible difference between a new 96 watt pc bulb, running side by side with a 12 month old 96 watt bulb running on a csl fixture however, so the theory that they will last 2 years did not seem to work in my instance.
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator

Originally posted by krux
i noticed a very visible difference between a new 96 watt pc bulb, running side by side with a 12 month old 96 watt bulb running on a csl fixture however, so the theory that they will last 2 years did not seem to work in my instance.
I'm a VHO bigot but that's not a fair comparison. All flourescent bulbs have a burn in period where they are significantly brighter than their normal operating output. You need to compare them after they've run for about 2 weeks.
As for bulb manufacturers I'm very happy with URI for VHO bulbs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top