Would one light rail be strong enough to hold a 48" Tek light? Or would I have to have two per fixture? I was thinking I could cut a 6' track in half and use one for each fixture. Then just buy another drive motor for the second track. Would end up costing me around $350 though. Might be better off just buying another fixture........too many decisions to make on these big tanks.
lighting a 4' front to back tank (500 gallon)
- Thread starter 46bfinGA
- Start date
Well my 2 lights would be moving front to back only about 2 ft on a 3' track if I decide to go that route. So I would guess there will not be many "dark spots". Im going to try the fixtures without a track at first and see how I like it. The track can always be added later down the line if I dont like the outcome.
FishTruck
Premium Member
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11449984#post11449984 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by 46bfinGA
Yeah you buy them for me for Christmas!
No way I would ever spend $6000 on 2 lights. Im trying to spend as less as possible on this. The Tunze setup,Dart NW skimmer,etc....has allready cost me an arm and a leg.
Awww, c'mon! I was talking about the twin 400 watt halide fixtures with no T5s or moons. They are only $1799.00 per fixture or $3600 for two lights. This includes ballasts and bulbs. Besides, isn't there a prize for the most money spent per gallon per year? :celeb1:
Actually, I think the idea of just spotting the coral heads is brilliant and your current plan is a good one. It will cut down on your costs and should look spectacular. As long as you don't have clams in the sandbed you should do great.
yaktop
New member
depends how far spread you go, with two 20 inch lumenarcs over a 72 inch tank, less the 5 inch on either side for the euro brace leaves 62, the light are spaced roughly 12 " so the lights dont move a great distance. the advantage is no shadows for the entire 2/3rds and less light on the ends for lower light corals. using 400W it works, couldnt work with 175w very well.
I do have a very small triangle shadow on the back wall. But other than that it doesn't look unbalanced to me.
Here's a really old thread http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=751201&highlight=kents+450
Here's the 1000 I'm working on: (haven't gotten to the lighting yet but it will be 3- 250w with lumenarcs)
http://fingerlakesreef.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=413&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=580
Here's a really old thread http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=751201&highlight=kents+450
Here's the 1000 I'm working on: (haven't gotten to the lighting yet but it will be 3- 250w with lumenarcs)
http://fingerlakesreef.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=413&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=580
I can't guarantee it's going to work yet, it's a theory. But as it is I don't want the glass to be lit to cut down on scraping, and so that eliminates a lot of tank along the parameter. The lights will be approximately 2 feet above the water so that will give a 3' spread and that covers the tank.
I'm going to test the lighting with a par meter once its set up and the water is in. If the values are high enough I'll go with it. If not it'll be plan B -400 watters.
I'm going to test the lighting with a par meter once its set up and the water is in. If the values are high enough I'll go with it. If not it'll be plan B -400 watters.
Kent E: I'll be looking over your shoulder hoping it works, regardless, it seems light movers are the way to go, are you entertaining the arc model for the rail noted on your build thread? I would think the distance variation would be problematic.
not to take this thread off course 46bfinGA, but I think it's still relevant here
not to take this thread off course 46bfinGA, but I think it's still relevant here
By all means. The point of this thread is to figure out how to light a large tank at a minimal cost monthly/up front. I can use all the info. I can get.
I like the idea of the light movers. And If the two lights dont look right on my tank i may just go that route. Im pretty sure retrofitting the light movers after the fact shoudnt be too big of a chore.
jamesdawson
New member
I'm also planning an 8'x4'x25" tank and have done alot of research.
The most cost effective (in terms of energy efficiency, if not initial purchase cost) lighting by far is 175W Iwasaki 15k mogul bulbs on e-ballasts and in LumenArc 3 or similar large-spread reflectors. The Iwasaki/E-ballast combo had the highest efficiency rating of any bulb tested by Sanjay Joshi. You can easily grow SPS at the sandbed under the combo i suggest.
16 x 54 watt T5 equals 864 watts versus 3 175 w setups at a total of 525 watts (should be more then enough) or 4 setups at 700 watts if you want to strongly light the ends. Bulb changeouts will also be substantially less since 16 T5 bulbs aint cheap.
To make it perfect, you would probably want to have some supplemental actinic lighting since the Iwasaki has lots of 450nm blue but almost no 420 actinic spectrum. Either VHO or T5 supplemental will take care of that one deficiency and fill in the front and back of the tank.
I have had a 48", 8 bulb Teklight and they are a pretty crappy product from a crappy company. T-5s have to be actively cooled to have maximum PAR and lifespan and the Teklight doesn't do it. If your reflector gets splashed it will permanently stain/discolor and if you put a shield on you will further cook your bulbs and deplete Par and lifespan. If you want T-5, a retro is a cheaper and better option since you can blow a fan across it.
James
The most cost effective (in terms of energy efficiency, if not initial purchase cost) lighting by far is 175W Iwasaki 15k mogul bulbs on e-ballasts and in LumenArc 3 or similar large-spread reflectors. The Iwasaki/E-ballast combo had the highest efficiency rating of any bulb tested by Sanjay Joshi. You can easily grow SPS at the sandbed under the combo i suggest.
16 x 54 watt T5 equals 864 watts versus 3 175 w setups at a total of 525 watts (should be more then enough) or 4 setups at 700 watts if you want to strongly light the ends. Bulb changeouts will also be substantially less since 16 T5 bulbs aint cheap.
To make it perfect, you would probably want to have some supplemental actinic lighting since the Iwasaki has lots of 450nm blue but almost no 420 actinic spectrum. Either VHO or T5 supplemental will take care of that one deficiency and fill in the front and back of the tank.
I have had a 48", 8 bulb Teklight and they are a pretty crappy product from a crappy company. T-5s have to be actively cooled to have maximum PAR and lifespan and the Teklight doesn't do it. If your reflector gets splashed it will permanently stain/discolor and if you put a shield on you will further cook your bulbs and deplete Par and lifespan. If you want T-5, a retro is a cheaper and better option since you can blow a fan across it.
James
Last edited:
I would question 175 watt with SPS. I'm no expert, I use 400 watt on my 36" deep with great results...
I'm also interested in the track movers. Always planning a new system, 1,350 down the road. I've seen track light movers at a LFS one bulb on a 4' tank. The only problem is half the tank is dark/ shaded as the light moves. I really don't like the way it looks out of balance... Maybe it's just me? Looking forward to finished tank pictures with lights on...
Happy Reefing
I'm also interested in the track movers. Always planning a new system, 1,350 down the road. I've seen track light movers at a LFS one bulb on a 4' tank. The only problem is half the tank is dark/ shaded as the light moves. I really don't like the way it looks out of balance... Maybe it's just me? Looking forward to finished tank pictures with lights on...
Happy Reefing
jamesdawson
New member
You can blow a fan across the Teklight, but not with a shield on to protect the reflectors from staining unless you do the Hahnmeister mod (he bent an acrylic shield down at one side and put in a cross-flow fan to evenly blow air the width of the fixture.
175W IWASAKI 15K has an efficiency of .5261 on an IceCap ballast and will grow SPS at the sandbed on a 24" deep tank. It is the most efficient bulb ever tested by Sanjay (about double the efficiency of most other MH bulbs). What I claim only applies to this bulb on an IceCap or better e-ballast.
Light movers are also an efficient way to light a tank with less bulbs/electricity. I also don't like the look of a tank with lots of dark areas as the light mover moves.
James
175W IWASAKI 15K has an efficiency of .5261 on an IceCap ballast and will grow SPS at the sandbed on a 24" deep tank. It is the most efficient bulb ever tested by Sanjay (about double the efficiency of most other MH bulbs). What I claim only applies to this bulb on an IceCap or better e-ballast.
Light movers are also an efficient way to light a tank with less bulbs/electricity. I also don't like the look of a tank with lots of dark areas as the light mover moves.
James
Similar threads
