Compact Flourescents vs Metal Halide

[guntercb]

Hello,

I am thinking of setting up an Oceanic 37 gallon (24" x 18" x 21" high). I am thinking of lighting it with 4 - 65 watt power compacts for a total of 260 watts of compact flourescent.

How would this compare to a single 250 Watt Metal Halide SE light system? I was orginally planning on using a 250 watt MH, but someone gave my 4 - 65 watt ballast and this saves me having to buy a MH system.

Can anyone give me thoughts or inputs into 260 watts of power compacts vs. 250 watts of SE MH? Or does anyone know of any on-line articles comparing compacts to MH. I searched briefly but did not see anything.

Thanks in advanced.

Chris

 

[Steve Gordon]

I think you'll find from just about everyone, it's not the watts that matter, it's the type of light your getting. From what I've heard, MH produces light that is closest to the actual sun, which is better than any flourescent source. Depending on the types of corals you intend to keep, MH is usually considered the preferred lighting.

 

[Horace]

While I agree that MH is far and away better than any PC unit. I wouldnt necessarly say its better than any flourescent source. T5s come to mind

 

[guntercb]

I thought that the K rating of the bulb determine how closely the light relates with the sun.

Horace, why do you say that T-5s are the better of the flourescents? Do you have anything that backs this up? I know they seem to be the new big thing. But I think it has to do with the reflectors and the fact you can squeeze alot of them in a small space. I believe many people would say that the T-12 URI has the best actnic.

Does anyone know where I can find information on this subject or any thoughts?

Thanks,
Chris

 

[unclereefer]

hey guntercb, i have an oceanic 37 gal. make sure you can fit 4 fixtures on it. I cant, i have 3 65w compacts and am anxiously waiting on the new coralife pro HQI to arrive from dr. foster. I really wish they would have had these when i started, i would have saved alot of money in the long run. 2 65w actinics and 1 150w HQI, for a total of 280w of light. Its gonna kick butt. by the way i really like the glitter lines you get with a halide.

 

[rickh]

Personally I thing PC works great on a small tank. One concern is the tank depth, but with on a 21" tall tank + sand bed PC will work fine. I put 3 X65 watts PCs over a 37 AGA and the coral are looking great. MH is good, but you may have heat problems and I hate the living room looking like a parking lot from all the light spilled in the room from a pendant. I looked into the Current MH/PC combo but all those lights are too wide for a 12" wide tank like mine. R

 

[guntercb]

Unclereefer,

Thanks for the update. I am sure I can get 4 65 watts in the canopy of the 37. The 37 is 18" wide. Each of my 65 watt bulbs is 2" wide. So if I allow 1/2" between bulb I would only need 10.5" of space. I don't think this is an issue. But thinks for making sure.

Your new halide system sounds great.

Thanks,
Chris

 

[Horace]

yes the T12 is the best actinic (in most people's opinion), but the argument was that MH are the closest to the Sun and better than any flourescent. I was simply pointing out that MH are not necessarly better than flourescent and T5s are a very popular alternative that are considered as good or better than MH by many (this of course is pending on the application). As far as T5s being the better of teh flourescents...well other than actinic, T5s are hands down the best. I am not going to try to present all the facts because there is ample evidence to support this all over. VHO is the next best, but this all of course is TOTALLY dependent on the application. Simply put, you cant just say MH or T5 or VHO is the BEST lighting. That simply does not hold water depending on the type of tank and the inhabitants you intend on keeping.

 

[Horace]

If it were me, of course again this totally depends on the stuff you plan to keep. I would go with a single 175w or 250w MH with dual VHO actinics. This will be more than adequite for pretty much anything you want to keep. The MH will give you the flexibility to put low light corals in shadows, where florescents do not. I personally dont care for PC at all. If I had to choose flourescents, and I didnt intend on keeping pure SPS, I would go with all VHO. If you want pure SPS, go T5. VHO can support SPS too just not as well as T5. PC are great for shrooms and softies. However, I hate the PC actinic so I would never go with it for anything. VHO is low enough light to support any low light, but high enough to allow you for SPS in the upper portion of the tank as well. MH will do the same if you plan accordingly and put corals in shaded/non-shaded areas.

 

[unclereefer]

hey chris, do you have any pics of your 37 gal? did you build your own canopy for it? I bought my oceanic 37 gal show at petsmart and a canopy was not available. I think it is completely different than yours because it is 24" across

 

[guntercb]

Unclereefer,

I am thinking of setting up an Oceanic 37 gallon (24" x 18" x 21" high)

I have not set it up or bought for that matter. )-: I currently have a 55 gallon I am thinking of selling and going to the 37. But I don't think it will happen.

Horace, thanks for the added info. I think I will go compact if I do set up the 37 only because I already own the ballast. But I do agree. I really want to set it up with a 250 MH. But money is always the issue. )-: I want to set it up for SPS and claims. And I do think 4 - 65 watt pc will be enough. Maybe not ideal, I may have to put them higher up in the tank. But that is ok.

Thanks,
Chris

 

[fishes2889]

hey all just puttin' some info about the lighting.
MH's put out about 80 lumens per watt
T5's put out about 75 lumens per watt
vho's put out about 45 lumens per watt
and finally PC's put out about 35 to 40 per lumen watt

 

[swashbuckler]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6952269#post6952269 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by fishes2889
hey all just puttin' some info about the lighting.
MH's put out about 80 lumens per watt
T5's put out about 75 lumens per watt
vho's put out about 45 lumens per watt
and finally PC's put out about 35 to 40 per lumen watt

acutally, t-5 HO puts out 92 lumens/watt

VHO is like 70s and PC are around the same....... t-5 HO puts the most light out there...

but lumens is useless compared to PAR

 

[Horace]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6952269#post6952269 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by fishes2889
hey all just puttin' some info about the lighting.
MH's put out about 80 lumens per watt
T5's put out about 75 lumens per watt
vho's put out about 45 lumens per watt
and finally PC's put out about 35 to 40 per lumen watt

These numbers are complete blanket statments that dont even come close to representing all the factors involved. Depending what ballast/bulb/reflectors used these numbers could be GREATLY skewed. I have seen plenty of T5 combos that put out more than MH so these numbers just dont give an accurate representation of what each will do.

 

[Horace]

double post