watts per gal question
- Thread starter sin
- Start date
fishfanny79
Member
Depends on what you want to have in the tank...for a reef I think for a general rule I like to say 4 watts a gallon or better. (really 3 or 3.5 should be ok) The better the lighting, the more you can keep. If it's fish only, I don't even think it matters.
carshark
Active Member
Originally Posted by sin
Well i have a 25 gal so 4x25= 100 and the light i'm going to get is 130 watts so i have 30 watts more then i need. What could i keep under this lighting
depends on your lighting choice...VHO is not going to put out sufficient lumens to keep anything you want.. your best choice is T-5's, pc wont be bad, but T-5's are excellent lighting.
Well i have a 25 gal so 4x25= 100 and the light i'm going to get is 130 watts so i have 30 watts more then i need. What could i keep under this lighting
depends on your lighting choice...VHO is not going to put out sufficient lumens to keep anything you want.. your best choice is T-5's, pc wont be bad, but T-5's are excellent lighting.
jdboy
Member
Originally Posted by carshark
depends on your lighting choice...VHO is not going to put out sufficient lumens to keep anything you want.. your best choice is T-5's, pc wont be bad, but T-5's are excellent lighting.
What makes the T5's that much better than VHO? I looked into the T5's but I would have had to have 8 bulbs instead of the 4 VHO's I'm running now for the same wattage. Any thoughts would be appriciated.
depends on your lighting choice...VHO is not going to put out sufficient lumens to keep anything you want.. your best choice is T-5's, pc wont be bad, but T-5's are excellent lighting.
What makes the T5's that much better than VHO? I looked into the T5's but I would have had to have 8 bulbs instead of the 4 VHO's I'm running now for the same wattage. Any thoughts would be appriciated.
carshark
Active Member
well for one, the T-5's are stated to last up to 15 months without efficiency loss, as opposed to 6 months VHO, the size of the bulbs is so much smaller, giving infinitely more reflection, especially when they have their own individual reflectors. the heat output is so much less with T-5 as well. and you get the true amount of wattage as opposed to VHO which you can not rely on exact wattage even for what they are rated for. for instance, if you have 4x110w VHO , looking at it, that tells you 440 watts of light. in all actuality you are closer to 390 true watt light output. and you take 2x54 T-5, that is a true 2x54 with excellent lumen output. they are more efficient and less temperature. T-5 is an excellent choice for lighting to supplement MH.
not to mention the size of one VHO bulb, is bigger than T-5 bulb and reflector.. the best lighting scenario is MH with T-5 supplement. so you can have 2x54 T-5 in the space for 1 VHO and the best part is at 108w(t-5) - 110w(VHO) your lighting will be almost 5 times better out of two T-5...
Now if you are choosing to not use MH, then i can understand your gripe and VHO may work out better if that is your sole source of lighting. But I can safely say to ditch the VHO, and if you refuse to use MH, go with a nice power compact setup with T-5 supplements. the VHO are not a true of reading actual light output..
not to mention the size of one VHO bulb, is bigger than T-5 bulb and reflector.. the best lighting scenario is MH with T-5 supplement. so you can have 2x54 T-5 in the space for 1 VHO and the best part is at 108w(t-5) - 110w(VHO) your lighting will be almost 5 times better out of two T-5...
Now if you are choosing to not use MH, then i can understand your gripe and VHO may work out better if that is your sole source of lighting. But I can safely say to ditch the VHO, and if you refuse to use MH, go with a nice power compact setup with T-5 supplements. the VHO are not a true of reading actual light output..
carshark
Active Member
Originally Posted by jdboy
Thanks for the input. I was looking for a better set-up and was just wandering the differances. I like the thought of being able to use my same ballest if I go T5.
do more research. as most advertisers and info will state that it can be used, or rather it will "fire" but it doesnt have the adequate power to truly run an efficient output...and vice versa.. listen you can pick up 2 54 watt setups with everything youll need including individual reflectors, but not bulbs for anywhere between 100-200 bucks, depending on where you look...
Thanks for the input. I was looking for a better set-up and was just wandering the differances. I like the thought of being able to use my same ballest if I go T5.
do more research. as most advertisers and info will state that it can be used, or rather it will "fire" but it doesnt have the adequate power to truly run an efficient output...and vice versa.. listen you can pick up 2 54 watt setups with everything youll need including individual reflectors, but not bulbs for anywhere between 100-200 bucks, depending on where you look...
airforceb2
Active Member
Keep in mind that VHO bulbs come with reflectors as well. Plus, the real thing to look at here is par. I haven't read anything anywhere that states VHO T-12 lights putting out less par than T-5.
jdboy
Member
The ballest I run is an IceCap 660. It says it is capable of running T5's but I really don't know myself. By the way, why is everything I've been reading saying use the T5's as supplimental light (spectrum or what)? I really don't have the money to go to a MH setup so the VHO or T5 was what had me interested. Right now I've been running 4 110 watt VHO's. 2 atinic and 2 10,000 but will need to change bulbs before long. Trying to do a little research.
carshark
Active Member
email me aaronmiller_23@hotmail.com