|
|
Have a question?
It's Free!
|
|
| General Reef Discussion In this forum we discuss issues related to keeping marine and reef aquariums in a friendly flame-free environment. |
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
08-21-2006, 12:52 AM
|
#1
|
|
Gruff But Lovable Reefer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: IN MY CAVE IN VIRGINIA
Posts: 316
|
t-5 vs. mh for a 180 softie tank
next question for you guys. tank will be alot of fish with soft corals, mushrooms, polyps, leathers etc. (and does anemones require straight mh's)
t-5 or mh? i understand that they do not make 6 ft. t-5's correct? if not what do you use two three footers?
or should i use 3- 250w mh's? i think the 180 is 24" deep.
and if that is overkill would pc's work well?
signed,
confused in angryland
|
|
|
|
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
|
__________________
AND SO CASTLES MADE OF SAND SLIP INTO THE SEA...EVENTUALLY- JIMI HENDRIX
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 02:24 AM
|
#2
|
|
Just some guy, you know?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 18,936
|
Myself I would go with 3 250W MH because of bulb replacement cost, and inital setup cost alone. Plus with the MH you get the cool Shimmer effect, and if you want to later you could keep anything you want unlike PC's.
HTH,
Whiskey
__________________
Vagabond
Computers are the worlds most plentiful source of unique, and unimaginable problems.
|
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 04:58 AM
|
#3
|
|
Plankton
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 37
|
For sure not PC's. That tank is too deep. I have pc's on my 150 and can't keep too many corals in there.
I have T5's on my 55 gallon and do really like them but for a big 6 ft tank would prolly go with MH if you can afford them.
With T5's you would either have to get 2 3 ft or a 5 ft and not have light on the sides.
Anemones require strong lighting and alot of types are bottom/sand dwellers.
3 MH would not be overkill in that big tank.
kass
|
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 07:31 AM
|
#4
|
|
Reefless Reefer
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 20,561
|
since this is a 6' tank i think 3 MH's are a must. MH's can only cover a 2'X2' area effectively. the only way around this would be to make your canopy very tall.
G~
__________________
Think Tanker
Friends Don't Let Friends Use Refugiums!
Reef Knowledge Impaired
"J" crowd member.
My Build Thread
|
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 04:49 PM
|
#5
|
|
Little Fishy
Join Date: May 2006
Location: West Haven CT
Posts: 135
|
Currently I have a 6ft T5HO system by aquactinics on my 125 tank and my anenome and soft corals are doing fine, but then again I am a newbie to corals and maybe the MH will be the next for me to try
|
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 05:32 PM
|
#6
|
|
Eat more PIE
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida Panhandle
Posts: 18,610
|
Mhs for sure.
__________________
Double your drive space. Delete Windows
|
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 06:12 PM
|
#7
|
|
Great Hammerhead Shark
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Southern United States
Posts: 1,477
Reviews: 31
|
I think T-5's for the following reasons (as long as the tank is not too deep)
1. cost t-5's will be cheaper to run.
2. softies do not require as much light as a SPS or LPS
Fred
|
|
|
|
|
08-21-2006, 10:20 PM
|
#8
|
|
Little Fishy
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Duluth, GA
Posts: 226
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fchidsey
I think T-5's for the following reasons (as long as the tank is not too deep)
1. cost t-5's will be cheaper to run.
2. softies do not require as much light as a SPS or LPS
Fred
|
Agreed. MH's provide very harsh light. Long strip light sources illuminates the softies very evenly - IMO looks a LOT better.
|
|
|
|
|
08-22-2006, 01:59 AM
|
#9
|
|
uber-stupid
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Biloxi, MS
Posts: 4,762
|
I would do the MH.
__________________
Jason
My girlfriend says bigger is better, so I am going to build the biggest skimmer I can.
|
|
|
|
|
09-22-2006, 04:41 PM
|
#10
|
|
Shark
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Andover, KS
Posts: 3,506
|
CT Reefer:
Where did you find your 6 foot T-5 lighting unit??? I am interested in looking into T-5s for my 180 i will be setting up soon...
Thanks!
__________________
Jenni  AKA "Reefmama"
180 gallon AGA RR mixed reef inwall, 100 gallon rubbermaid stock tank sump, 10 gallon hex fuge, Quiet one 5000 return pump, PCI PS-3000 skimmer with Octopus needlewheel pump, 72" Constellation from Aquactinics, 2 3250 gph powerheads, 2 250 watt heaters, 200 lbs live rock, 200 lbs pulverized limestone
|
|
|
|
|
09-22-2006, 04:53 PM
|
#11
|
|
Just some guy, you know?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 18,936
|
6 foot t5 bulbs don't exist, only 5 foot ones. I suspect the 6 foot unit is staggered 5 foot bulbs.
Whiskey
__________________
Vagabond
Computers are the worlds most plentiful source of unique, and unimaginable problems.
|
|
|
|
|
09-22-2006, 05:03 PM
|
#12
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: spartanburg, south carolina
Posts: 4,961
|
I would do the T-5 based on what you want to keep ( lower light corals). Here are the reasons: initial cost, bulb replacement costs, heat, power consumption. You could probably do this for a T-5 setup - get two icecap ballasts and drive 6 bulbs, 5 ft long with individual reflectors. The icecaps will overdrive the bulbs and you would have plenty of light down to the sandbed. Not enough light for clams or anemones, but plenty for softies and shrooms. You could also keep any lps you wanted on the rocks and most sps if up high enough on the rocks. If you are the DIY type, here's your cost: 2 icecap ballasts $320, 6 encaps $75, 6 5ft T-5 HO bulbs $150, 6 reflectors $130. That's a total of about $675. Now you wouldn't have to replace bulbs for 18-24 months. I don't know if you could do a DIY metal halide lighting for the same amount but you would run into heat issues and may need a chiller as well. T-5's are not perfect, so don't get me wrong, and I'm not saying they are better than halides. Just wanted you to hear that they could and would work for what you want to do. HTH
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
09-22-2006, 06:26 PM
|
#13
|
|
Shark
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toledo OH
Posts: 4,978
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bgi
Agreed. MH's provide very harsh light. Long strip light sources illuminates the softies very evenly - IMO looks a LOT better.
|
WOW....Harsh?? no way! even 400w MH's don't come close to the sun still!
Plus MH shimmer effect is much nicer looking.
either way a lot of T-5 or 3 250w MH's will work.
My vote is MH....unless heat will be an issue.
I have tons of softies that love my 250w MH's 
__________________
They are all gone!  NOW Planning 150g+ 
TIM MADE ME DO IT, Yet Robert made him do it, yet Casey made him do it!
Yet the voices in all their heads made them do it (skeety)
|
|
|
|
|
09-22-2006, 06:30 PM
|
#14
|
|
Eat more PIE
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida Panhandle
Posts: 18,610
|
T5s and Mhs awesome cant be beat period! 
__________________
Double your drive space. Delete Windows
|
|
|
|
|
09-22-2006, 06:34 PM
|
#15
|
|
[adult swim]
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,223
Reviews: 2
|
what about T-12's you can get 6 foot VHOs on an icecap 660 ballast. You wont need reflectors either.
I would go MH, you will want sps sooner or later trust me.
The shimmer effect is the best part
Last edited by PelagicMagic; 09-22-2006 at 06:48 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
