Which Style MH?
- Thread starter acrylic51
- Start date
zman1
Active Member
I went with DE and pendants in canapy as well. One of the reasons, was they already came with the glass for UV. Having the glass eliminates the water spray if you have any or cause a splash by accident from getting on the bulbs and breaking it. It's saved me a couple of times from my mistakes. Let the glass cool down and clean it off. I guess you could crack the glass eventually, but so far so good.
golfish
Active Member
Originally Posted by acrylic51
If you had the choice which would you chose??? SE or DE?? If using SE bulbs reflector would be the lumenarc of course or DE with the ReefOptics III? :notsure:
Shawn,
SLS has a new reflector out that's like the Lumenarc but much better...I'm using SE 400 watt SLS Reef Optix pendants right now with the PFO standard ballast. I have a new 250 watt HQI Blue wave ballast and RO pendant, as soon as I get a deal on another setup I'm switching over to DE's.
If you had the choice which would you chose??? SE or DE?? If using SE bulbs reflector would be the lumenarc of course or DE with the ReefOptics III? :notsure:
Shawn,
SLS has a new reflector out that's like the Lumenarc but much better...I'm using SE 400 watt SLS Reef Optix pendants right now with the PFO standard ballast. I have a new 250 watt HQI Blue wave ballast and RO pendant, as soon as I get a deal on another setup I'm switching over to DE's.
zman1
Active Member
Originally Posted by acrylic51
Hey Mark how hard are the 400's on the electric bill vs the 250's? I know it's high out your way just curious???
I am not Mark. However, this is from an earlier post I made (you can do this and find the difference and get your answer):
Find out what your kilowatt hour rate is, there are usually two. The first 750 KWh at .0xxx and anything over 750 KWh at .0xxx. This is an example may not be 750 KWh. Look at you dad's bill, it will show the rate. If not, you may have to do some division.
150 Watts for the bulb and the ballast is inefficient and the result of this is heat. It's probably closer to 170 Watt being used. (170 is on the high end) to be exact look at the ballast specs.
Take 170 x 12 hours = 2040 or 2KWh Daily
2040 x 365 =744600 or 744.6 KWh Yearly
744.6 * Rate = Yearly cost
example 744.6 x .06 = $44.67 yearly or 12 cents a day
My average is 13 cents per KWh = $96.8 or .26 cents a day.
Hey Mark how hard are the 400's on the electric bill vs the 250's? I know it's high out your way just curious???
I am not Mark. However, this is from an earlier post I made (you can do this and find the difference and get your answer):
Find out what your kilowatt hour rate is, there are usually two. The first 750 KWh at .0xxx and anything over 750 KWh at .0xxx. This is an example may not be 750 KWh. Look at you dad's bill, it will show the rate. If not, you may have to do some division.
150 Watts for the bulb and the ballast is inefficient and the result of this is heat. It's probably closer to 170 Watt being used. (170 is on the high end) to be exact look at the ballast specs.
Take 170 x 12 hours = 2040 or 2KWh Daily
2040 x 365 =744600 or 744.6 KWh Yearly
744.6 * Rate = Yearly cost
example 744.6 x .06 = $44.67 yearly or 12 cents a day
My average is 13 cents per KWh = $96.8 or .26 cents a day.
golfish
Active Member
Originally Posted by acrylic51
Hey Mark how hard are the 400's on the electric bill vs the 250's? I know it's high out your way just curious???
I have read the 250 watt HQI ballast draws more amps on startup then the 400 watt HQI does.. The problems with the DE's is the spread, they just can't match what SE's can do. It would be nice if they had a lumenarc type reflector for DE's .. Your setting up a big tank, right? You might want to use both.
If your tank is going to be under 26" deep I'd say go with the SE 250's and check out that new reflector from SLS. From what I've seen its a better reflector then the lumenarc.
I've never been a fan of electronic ballast. I'd get the 250 watt HQI (M80) ballast and run your SE bulbs on those.
Shawn, I run two Sequence Barracuda's, the skimmer pump (3500 Ocean Runner) ventilation fans, intake fans, powerheads, Sea Swirls, Mag 5 (Ca reactor) all 24/7... I really don't think I'd notice a difference between 400's and 250's...but I'm going to try to start reducing things and see.
Hey Mark how hard are the 400's on the electric bill vs the 250's? I know it's high out your way just curious???
I have read the 250 watt HQI ballast draws more amps on startup then the 400 watt HQI does.. The problems with the DE's is the spread, they just can't match what SE's can do. It would be nice if they had a lumenarc type reflector for DE's .. Your setting up a big tank, right? You might want to use both.
If your tank is going to be under 26" deep I'd say go with the SE 250's and check out that new reflector from SLS. From what I've seen its a better reflector then the lumenarc.
I've never been a fan of electronic ballast. I'd get the 250 watt HQI (M80) ballast and run your SE bulbs on those.
Shawn, I run two Sequence Barracuda's, the skimmer pump (3500 Ocean Runner) ventilation fans, intake fans, powerheads, Sea Swirls, Mag 5 (Ca reactor) all 24/7... I really don't think I'd notice a difference between 400's and 250's...but I'm going to try to start reducing things and see.
acrylic51
Active Member
SE bulbs are shield in the process when they are built so there isn't a need to shield them......On the other hand how DE bulbs are built designed they aren't shielded and that is why they are covered with the UV lens you see.....With the DE fixtures the reflectors are built and designed to maximize light output.......I think there is more to just putting a sheet of reflective material over a bulb and hoping to get good light dispersment.......For example do a search and look at the Lumenarc reflectors....They are bent and angled to maximize everything......
m000240
Member
I checked them out, and to me it looks like you could easily mount a DE bulb in the Lumenarc reflectors. The question that remains, is how would light dispersion be affected by UV glass, if at all? Or what additional must be done to shield UV from the tank? I don't know the answer, maybe someone does.
On a side note, what is the problem with UV rays on a tank? Does a natural reef receive UV from the sun?
On a side note, what is the problem with UV rays on a tank? Does a natural reef receive UV from the sun?
golfish
Active Member
Originally Posted by m000240
I checked them out, and to me it looks like you could easily mount a DE bulb in the Lumenarc reflectors.
Not so sure it would be easy, plus you'll have to add a tempered glass cover.
Originally Posted by m000240
The question that remains, is how would light dispersion be affected by UV glass, if at all? ?
Its not UV glass, just reg tempered glass. If you want to get deep into it I would suggest you talk to the people who make the Lumenarc reflectors but from what I hear their going out of business. You might try Sun Light supply's web site, see if they have a contact there.
I checked them out, and to me it looks like you could easily mount a DE bulb in the Lumenarc reflectors.
Not so sure it would be easy, plus you'll have to add a tempered glass cover.
Originally Posted by m000240
The question that remains, is how would light dispersion be affected by UV glass, if at all? ?
Its not UV glass, just reg tempered glass. If you want to get deep into it I would suggest you talk to the people who make the Lumenarc reflectors but from what I hear their going out of business. You might try Sun Light supply's web site, see if they have a contact there.
acrylic51
Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
I am not Mark. However, this is from an earlier post I made (you can do this and find the difference and get your answer):
Find out what your kilowatt hour rate is, there are usually two. The first 750 KWh at .0xxx and anything over 750 KWh at .0xxx. This is an example may not be 750 KWh. Look at you dad's bill, it will show the rate. If not, you may have to do some division.
150 Watts for the bulb and the ballast is inefficient and the result of this is heat. It's probably closer to 170 Watt being used. (170 is on the high end) to be exact look at the ballast specs.
Take 170 x 12 hours = 2040 or 2KWh Daily
2040 x 365 =744600 or 744.6 KWh Yearly
744.6 * Rate = Yearly cost
example 744.6 x .06 = $44.67 yearly or 12 cents a day
My average is 13 cents per KWh = $96.8 or .26 cents a day.
Thanks for the info, but I must admit I think I'm alittle to old (37) to look at my dads' electric bill
Actually I don't concern myself with the cost of electric running the tanks, just curious if there actually would be a big increase as others state there is or would be......Thanks Mark did check them out at SLS, but what is the big difference between them and what Hello has?
I am not Mark. However, this is from an earlier post I made (you can do this and find the difference and get your answer):
Find out what your kilowatt hour rate is, there are usually two. The first 750 KWh at .0xxx and anything over 750 KWh at .0xxx. This is an example may not be 750 KWh. Look at you dad's bill, it will show the rate. If not, you may have to do some division.
150 Watts for the bulb and the ballast is inefficient and the result of this is heat. It's probably closer to 170 Watt being used. (170 is on the high end) to be exact look at the ballast specs.
Take 170 x 12 hours = 2040 or 2KWh Daily
2040 x 365 =744600 or 744.6 KWh Yearly
744.6 * Rate = Yearly cost
example 744.6 x .06 = $44.67 yearly or 12 cents a day
My average is 13 cents per KWh = $96.8 or .26 cents a day.
Thanks for the info, but I must admit I think I'm alittle to old (37) to look at my dads' electric bill
zman1
Active Member
Originally Posted by acrylic51
Thanks for the info, but I must admit I think I'm alittle to old (37) to look at my dads' electric bill
Actually I don't concern myself with the cost of electric running the tanks, just curious if there actually would be a big increase as others state there is or would be......Thanks Mark did check them out at SLS, but what is the big difference between them and what Hello has?
That was a cut and paste from my other post in which the poster was worried about the cost and trying to justify it to his dad..... I wasn't saying your dad - I saw your 1969 in your user info.--LMAO
Thanks for the info, but I must admit I think I'm alittle to old (37) to look at my dads' electric bill
That was a cut and paste from my other post in which the poster was worried about the cost and trying to justify it to his dad..... I wasn't saying your dad - I saw your 1969 in your user info.--LMAO
reefraff
Active Member
It's all about geomety. The thinner tube of the DE lamp allows for a better reflector design, you can focus the light better. If you have a tall short tank (say 48x18x28" tall) the DE give you an advantage because the light will penetrate deeper. If you have say a 5 foot long tank that's 24" tall and deep and you want to use 2 lamp the SE's are better because the light will spread better.