The new X model. More than enough
Dana measured the PAR of the X and the max was lower than the 360W, but the eveness of the light distribution was better.
Last edited:
Kessil Club
- Thread starter Zacktosterone
- Start date
Dana measured the PAR of the X and the max was lower than the 360W, but the eveness of the light distribution was better.
ComforablyNumb
New member
Would it not be the same amount of light just distributed more evenly? Did they use less leds? Still more than enough either way I'm sure
90 gallon Light upgrade
90 gallon Light upgrade
Hello I wanted to see if I could get some suggestion on lighting for my 90 gallon tank. I currently have 2 chines LED boxes and my corals aren't getting the growth I would like. I'm thinking of getting two Kessil A160WE lights for my tank. Or would I need to get A360W ?
I have a canopy that the lights will be mounted to from the top. would these light work for me ? I have a mixture of corals.
Thanks
90 gallon Light upgrade
Hello I wanted to see if I could get some suggestion on lighting for my 90 gallon tank. I currently have 2 chines LED boxes and my corals aren't getting the growth I would like. I'm thinking of getting two Kessil A160WE lights for my tank. Or would I need to get A360W ?
I have a canopy that the lights will be mounted to from the top. would these light work for me ? I have a mixture of corals.
Thanks
ComforablyNumb
New member
True. But you lose some flexibility in giving up individual lamp placement. Having said that, my a360's have been running everyday going on 4 yrs now.. and I would look at the AP700 if I thought I needed more par.
ComforablyNumb
New member
2 a360's minimum, 3 preferred. Or one AP700, which is a great light. You can add an extra 360 later if you feel you need it. I have a160 sun on my heavily planted 65gal angelfish tank. Works and looks fantastic with shimmer. But that freshwater plants, corals need much more light
ComforablyNumb
New member
65 lit by single a160sun
It replaced 2 x 39w HO tubes and looks much better visually. I pull a bucketful of plants out of that thing every 2 months. It is going on 4 yrs old now too. I have never taken the fish out of that tank in those 4 yrs, nor have I lost any fish in 3. Its easy to run once solidly balanced.
It replaced 2 x 39w HO tubes and looks much better visually. I pull a bucketful of plants out of that thing every 2 months. It is going on 4 yrs old now too. I have never taken the fish out of that tank in those 4 yrs, nor have I lost any fish in 3. Its easy to run once solidly balanced.
Would it not be the same amount of light just distributed more evenly? Did they use less leds? Still more than enough either way I'm sure
Probably more light and more even. Kessil says 20% more or something. The peak just isn't any higher. I suppose the peak would be higher if you put one of the focusing lenses on it though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah and I like having the 360s on the ends of my 6 foot tank so I can adjust the light separately in those areas. It's 200 PAR on the ends and like 375 in the middle portion of the tank where the AP700 is. The AP700 is only at 35% intensity as well.
ComforablyNumb
New member
Thanks! good vid. the new one is half the size of the orig, with usb..great
no fan? that would be great as well because a few of the failures I've heard of relate to the fan
you have a nice youtube page as well
thx for your contribution
Bpb
New member
I think a more appropriate analogy would be halides to kessils would be like driving an ac cobra versus a Tesla.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
ComforablyNumb
New member
Or an old gas guzzler vs a hybrid electric vehicle..
footballcs12
New member
Buy a 360x or stick with my 360we? My current WE are about 4 years old, nothing really wrong with them other than age. Corals still growing and everything seems happy. I've got some extra money burning a hole in my pocket and I kind of want the new x but dont really NEED it. Do I upgrade to the x or make my wife happy and take her on a vacation?
shred5
Premium Member
ComforablyNumb
New member
Mine are 4 years old too. Buy something you do need
Merry Christmas
Merry Christmas
madweazl
Member
Noise hasnt changed any. Some random stuff I've checked/measured the past few days.
Based on some quick testing, the A360X had the highest draw at 62% color (via Kessil Spectral Controller X) regardless of intensity so I set intensity at 100% for everything. Measurements were taken with a P4460 Kill A WATT EZ.
Avg sound level (phone app after a 30 second average).
A360X - 39.6 db
A360WE - 39.7 db
Mounting height over aquarium (150g measuring 60x24x24). I mounted the lights at a height where they cast light right to the top of the tank walls.
A360x - 2.25" above tank
A360WE - 5.5" above tank
I haven't checked PAR yet but the 3.25" delta would certainly increase PAR in favor the of the A360X (I'll know more later). Accounting for the water level, the A360X would be mounted 4" off the water in this scenario which is lower than I'd typically run a light. The A360WE would be 7.25" above the water.
Dont get caught up in the absolute PAR numbers; this was conducted in an empty 150g tank with a Seneye sensor sitting in a plastic container that had two inches of water in it (the Seneye cant take measurements out of water). The increased PAR from being able to mount the light lower than the WE model is huge while still covering the same area within the tank. Whether you can take advantage of this or not is something you'll need to figure out.
The X produced peak PAR numbers at a Color setting of 50 while the WE produced peak PAR at Color setting 60 (this will produce a difference in PUR so that column isnt particularly useful). I used the Controller X to configure both lights; super simple to use in both instances.
I've been running the WEs for a couple years now and started switching over to the X. Hopefully there are some more under the tree tomorrow and I can do some additional testing.
nycman
New member
Was wondering what is the difference between using a single AP700 versus two AP360Xs. I plan on installing either setup on a 60" by 30" by 30" African cichlid tank. Was going with the Tuna Blue as most people use a higher K value (spectrum) with Mbunas, and that is why the AP700 is in play here. I plan to run them at relatively low intensity, but like the spread 36" of the A360Xs. Maybe this is the primary difference from the AP700?
nycman
New member
AP700 versus 2 AP360Xs
AP700 versus 2 AP360Xs
Was wondering what is the difference between using a single AP700 versus two AP360Xs. I plan on installing either setup on a 60" by 30" by 30" African cichlid tank. Was going with the Tuna Blue as most people use a higher K value (spectrum) with Mbunas, and that is why the AP700 is in play here. I plan to run them at relatively low intensity, but like the spread 36" of the A360Xs, along with the programmability. Maybe the spread is the primary difference from the AP700?
AP700 versus 2 AP360Xs
Was wondering what is the difference between using a single AP700 versus two AP360Xs. I plan on installing either setup on a 60" by 30" by 30" African cichlid tank. Was going with the Tuna Blue as most people use a higher K value (spectrum) with Mbunas, and that is why the AP700 is in play here. I plan to run them at relatively low intensity, but like the spread 36" of the A360Xs, along with the programmability. Maybe the spread is the primary difference from the AP700?
ComforablyNumb
New member
A little more par with the AP700 but you lose flexibility in placing the lights.
So I took a bunch of reading with my Seneye today here are some of the results
Tank: 25g IM Nuvo black, I had all flow off so the water surface was at about about 10.5" mark
Light: mounted in the center of the tank 7.5" off the water
Par meter: seneye on a cpvc wand I built
Reading were taken at the
Bottom: (this is approximately 1" - 1.5" off the bottom because of the thickness of the sensor
Mid Tank: I just eyed this up so they may be slightly off. If I was going to do this again I would make cpvc spacer that would hold the sensor at the exact height I wanted to test
Top: I made sure there was about 1" of water over the sensor
I tried to keep the sensor level so that I would get the effects of reflection off the glass (I did see higher readings in the from vs the back of the tank (this tank has a black back pane of glass)
Here is the setup, it's in my bathroom to test the plumbing. I also lowered the light about 1.5" before I did the tests
Some initial readings
UV at 100% directly below the light is 100 par at the surface and 25 at the bottom
For the rest of the tests I kept the UV at 100 Red at 20 and Green at 10 (this seems to be what I've heard people using over there tanks so I went with it)
So here are some reading with intensity at 100 and changes to the color from 0-100
All reading have two values, directly over the light and on the side of the tank (12 from the light, this was harder to get so has some variance)
Color (Intensity 100)
0 - Top: 405/120 Mid: 225/100 Bot: 155/70
20 - Top: 460/60 Mid: 290/90 Bot: 170/75
40 - Top: 480/80 Mid: 280/150 Bot: 170/90
50 - Top: 470/150 Mid: 290/140 Bot: 169/120
60 - Top: 450/115 Mid: 260/130 Bot: 165/80
80 - Top: 425/110 Mid: 280/155 Bot: 165/90
100 - Top: 400/120 Mid: 270/100 Bot: 170/80
As you can see pretty decent par numbers for this tank. Also the whole color range is pretty close in par value
I did a similar test but I changed the intensity
I used a color of 40 as I liked that and kept UV at 100, red at 20 and Green at 10
Intensity (color 40)
20 - Top: 270/100 Mid: 150/85 Bot: 85/40
40 - Top: 330/100 Mid: 210/95 Bot: 130/120
60 - Top: 440/120 Mid: 260/80 Bot: 140/77
80 - Top: 460/130 Mid: 270/165 Bot: 165/110
100 - Top: 460/150 Mid: 310/160 Bot: 165/160
I also did a grid across the whole tank with color at 40 intensity at 60 and uv-100, r-20 and g-10
Here are some the interesting readings
- Back corners on the bottom were about 50 par, the front corners were about 120 par. My guess is from the reflection off the side and front glass.
- the top corners were all around 50 par, I wasn't expecting much but that is still decent and shows the spread on this light
- the middle of the tank (12" from the front glass and 5" from the bottom read as follows
Left Side - 140
Left side 6" from side glass - 220
Middle - 240
Right side 6" from side glass - 220
Right side - 120
I think 60% int is a great starting point for me as it put most of my acros in the 200 par range and as the grow toward the surface they will get higher par.
Hope this help people
Len
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Tank: 25g IM Nuvo black, I had all flow off so the water surface was at about about 10.5" mark
Light: mounted in the center of the tank 7.5" off the water
Par meter: seneye on a cpvc wand I built
Reading were taken at the
Bottom: (this is approximately 1" - 1.5" off the bottom because of the thickness of the sensor
Mid Tank: I just eyed this up so they may be slightly off. If I was going to do this again I would make cpvc spacer that would hold the sensor at the exact height I wanted to test
Top: I made sure there was about 1" of water over the sensor
I tried to keep the sensor level so that I would get the effects of reflection off the glass (I did see higher readings in the from vs the back of the tank (this tank has a black back pane of glass)
Here is the setup, it's in my bathroom to test the plumbing. I also lowered the light about 1.5" before I did the tests
Some initial readings
UV at 100% directly below the light is 100 par at the surface and 25 at the bottom
For the rest of the tests I kept the UV at 100 Red at 20 and Green at 10 (this seems to be what I've heard people using over there tanks so I went with it)
So here are some reading with intensity at 100 and changes to the color from 0-100
All reading have two values, directly over the light and on the side of the tank (12 from the light, this was harder to get so has some variance)
Color (Intensity 100)
0 - Top: 405/120 Mid: 225/100 Bot: 155/70
20 - Top: 460/60 Mid: 290/90 Bot: 170/75
40 - Top: 480/80 Mid: 280/150 Bot: 170/90
50 - Top: 470/150 Mid: 290/140 Bot: 169/120
60 - Top: 450/115 Mid: 260/130 Bot: 165/80
80 - Top: 425/110 Mid: 280/155 Bot: 165/90
100 - Top: 400/120 Mid: 270/100 Bot: 170/80
As you can see pretty decent par numbers for this tank. Also the whole color range is pretty close in par value
I did a similar test but I changed the intensity
I used a color of 40 as I liked that and kept UV at 100, red at 20 and Green at 10
Intensity (color 40)
20 - Top: 270/100 Mid: 150/85 Bot: 85/40
40 - Top: 330/100 Mid: 210/95 Bot: 130/120
60 - Top: 440/120 Mid: 260/80 Bot: 140/77
80 - Top: 460/130 Mid: 270/165 Bot: 165/110
100 - Top: 460/150 Mid: 310/160 Bot: 165/160
I also did a grid across the whole tank with color at 40 intensity at 60 and uv-100, r-20 and g-10
Here are some the interesting readings
- Back corners on the bottom were about 50 par, the front corners were about 120 par. My guess is from the reflection off the side and front glass.
- the top corners were all around 50 par, I wasn't expecting much but that is still decent and shows the spread on this light
- the middle of the tank (12" from the front glass and 5" from the bottom read as follows
Left Side - 140
Left side 6" from side glass - 220
Middle - 240
Right side 6" from side glass - 220
Right side - 120
I think 60% int is a great starting point for me as it put most of my acros in the 200 par range and as the grow toward the surface they will get higher par.
Hope this help people
Len
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ComforablyNumb
New member
Good post.
Similar threads
