8 T5s over a 120 instead of MH....

[Patman]

Any opinions......with the research that I've done, it seems like the 8 bulb retrofit setups would light a 120 well enough to keep anything and not require a custon cap, not cause the heat issues, etc....


Are T5s too new for people to comment on?

Pat

[Minnreefer]

I have seen T5 in person, they seem bright, but I have not seen enough actual results to believe that they can take the place of MH for some real high need light corals and clams.

HTH

Jon

[mjsandbe]

I light my 90 gallon with 4 T5s driven by an IceCap660. The icecap overdrives the bulbs close to 100watts a bulb. But we all know watts is a bad measure of useful reef light. All of my corals are thriving in the tank. They are Soft and LPS corals. I am happy so far. I have two white and two blue bulbs from premiumaquatics. Nest time I think I need to find true Atinic 03 bulbs.

My fist thought is that is a lot of bulbs to replace. Second is that T5 get hot, not MH hot but hotter than my VHOs. They will need fans.

Best of luck.

[Doug1]

8 46.5 T5 with reflectores , waterproof endcaps and stand off
: 4 6500K day and 4 act
: $505.56 with instastart ballast(drives 4 bulbs) and $662.84 with the trick advance ballast that drive 2 each
: these are 54watt bulbs
sorry wouldn't be my choice, everthing I dont care for in PC and more

[kestrel]

So Doug,

Why don't you like T5's? And what would be yur choice? At what cost?

[Doug1]

low wattage, uncertain lifespan, cost of replacing a bunch of tubes, same thing I dont like about PC
My preference would be ICecap driven VHO act and 6500K Iwasaki 25 MH over time
or 2x250 XM 20000K setup, se prices listed
PC and T5 arent even in same ball park in my mind

[mjsandbe]

I had 4-55watt PC over my 90 before I put on the 4-54watt(overdriven by icecap660). The T5s are much brighter to my eye and the corals are growing much better(my frog spawn on the bottom of the tank is cantaloupe size now), they are not nearly as fragile, and at $20-$30 a bulb they are in the same exact range of cost as Power Compact and VHO. The only unanswered question in my mind is how long the bulbs will last being overdriven. So far it has been about three months for me and things are going well. I have been told 1-2 years. Lower wattage is not necessarily a bad thing, more efficient use of power means less waste heat and brighter light.

[Doug1]

I would really like to see side by side comparisons of the various lighting types setup with similar wattages and measured with Lux meter both at distances comparable to water surface and substrate level, say 6' and 18" from the bulbs. Using a waterproofed meter for bottom measurement would be real good.

[mjsandbe]

My house is open to anybody with a Lux meter I have VHO and T5 running and access to PC.

[Doug1]

Hopefully someone takes this up, it would be nice to see actual readings.
Not that I think manufacturers embellish there results, but its a little harder to argue readings taken side by side
I could be wrong about the whole thing, I am biased towards VHO based lighting systems and I have always been open about that. I feel they are a good flexible basis to build on a lighting system, one can add MH later as the need arises without obsoleting the VHO. In truth the same can be said for PC but as I pointed out in the price examples initial cost and replacement costs are greater with PC IME.
I realize there are people who have had success with some SPS and Clams with PC only(lots of bulbs) and there is one reefer that uses lots of NO tubes as well and does OK . But empiracly the best results with SPS and clams seems to be with Big watt MH and VHO actinic. light levels on a reef are said to exceed the output of 175 w MH an hr after sunrise, and coral is heavily light driven, why skimp?

[ASH]

From IceCap:
I've been testing T-5 HO 54-watt 6.5K GE bulbs for over 12 months, 24/7 with cycling every night before I declared them a winner. Depreciation is a fraction of VHO lamps and dependability has been excellent. These seem to be what the PC lamps were supposed to be. With the addition of a reflector, like Sunlight Supply's single lamp reflectors, the output per watt exceeds all other fluorescent options. Lamp life seems to be a solid 2 years for the GE's.

I haven't had the same time to test the various actinic and blue lamps but so far they seem to be pretty good, just not frighteningly bright like the 6.5K's are. Venting the heat off is vital to lamp life and maximum output of light. Without a reflector it doesn't really make the grade.

We recommend 2 X 54-watt lamps for a Model 430 and up to 4 for a Model 660. We're working on 80-watt T-5's and so far are OK on 2 for a 430 and 3 for a 660. Use approved waterproof T-5 endcaps as they do run hot (less lamp to spread the heat).

Andy

[Doug1]

Thanks for the reply Andy OK reliability seems good, its now a matter of how you want to set up lighting, several tubes and ballasts or dual MH. Just a little more info help make choices.

[Patman]

Thanks Andy, good info.

I am consdiering an 8 bulb set up. The fit for my canopy, heat production, cost and energy efficiency are all reasons....we'll see. I was thinking a 4 bulb daylight and 4 actinic set up for a 24 inch deep 120 (20 inches with substrate). I'll be careful with SPS, keep them high in the water column...

Pat