Nova Extreme t5 question

[kodyboy]

actually the teks look pretty nice, and their reflectors are quite good, easily 3x more par than an equivalent current usa unit.
a decent, cheap HOB skimmer is the D&D marine typhoon, for the price it is great!
T5s work MUCH better with individual reflectors, but if you must get something now and cannot afford an aquactinics unit, then the nova is better than PC, and with good bulbs (geisman, ati, uv etc.) it should be able to grow a variety of corals. The only problem I see is by the time you get the unit and replace the bulbs, you might as well have bought an aquactinics 5t5 system. A 36 inch nova is $180, new bulbs around 80 = $260, for about $200 more you could get the T5 unit and never need to upgrade/change your lighting. But that is $200 more. 2 4 bulb current usa units do not equal one 5t5 aquactinic unit in PAR. In addition the moonlights for the current are awful, can barely see them and the fan is noisy, although all fans produce some noise.

 

[GSMguy]

Aquactinics 36" TX5 Series
[TX53600]
$322.00

 

[HowardW]

<<< actually the teks look pretty nice, and their reflectors are quite good, easily 3x more par than an equivalent current usa unit. >>>


Do you have data to support this please? I don't really believe that a 4 X 54W Tek will put out 3X the PAR of a 4 X 54W Nova Extreme fixture using the same or similar bulbs.

 

[laserjim]

I agree with Howard.Lets say Nova puts out 300 par on its daylight bulb,your saying the teks will put out 900par.NO WAY !

 

[GSMguy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9839266#post9839266 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by laserjim
I agree with Howard.Lets say Nova puts out 300 par on its daylight bulb,your saying the teks will put out 900par.NO WAY !

i feel safe in saying the 5 bulb aquatinics or the 4 bulb powermodule would triple the out put of the nova

think about it the bulbs are round and only 30% of it points down the rest of the light is lost.

 

[HowardW]

<<< i feel safe in saying the 5 bulb aquatinics or the 4 bulb powermodule would triple the out put of the nova >>>



Again, we already know the PAR numbers for the popularly used T5HO bulbs (ATI, Geisemann, Slimpaq, UVL, GE) per The Grim Reefers tests using top notch individual reflectors, and for those figures to be 3X the output of those same bulbs running in a Nova Extreme fixture, the Nova 4 X 54W fixture would have to be putting out less PAR than 4 X 65W power compacts which I doubt is the case.

 

[GSMguy]

who tested 4x65w pc ?
how do you know what 4x65w pc puts out ?

 

[laserjim]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9839339#post9839339 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by GSMguy
i feel safe in saying the 5 bulb aquatinics or the 4 bulb powermodule would triple the out put of the nova

think about it the bulbs are round and only 30% of it points down the rest of the light is lost.

I do have an open mind,but without some hard data,I disagree.
We have nothing to back any of this up except opinions.Sounds like were at a stand off.

 

[GSMguy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9839420#post9839420 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by laserjim
I do have an open mind,but without some hard data,I disagree.
We have nothing to back any of this up except opinions.Sounds like were at a stand off.

i agree

 

[HowardW]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9839416#post9839416 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by GSMguy
who tested 4x65w pc ?
how do you know what 4x65w pc puts out ?

If memory serves, I remember asking The Grim Reefer a few months back if he ever ran any tests on PC bulbs and he did. I believe he told me that (1) 96W PC daylight bulb was about 20% less PAR than (1) 54W T5HO........if I remember correctly.

 

[DarG]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9839339#post9839339 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by GSMguy
i feel safe in saying the 5 bulb aquatinics or the 4 bulb powermodule would triple the out put of the nova

think about it the bulbs are round and only 30% of it points down the rest of the light is lost.

Now that's just silly. So the single reflector in the Nova is now a vacuum? What you're saying is that 30% of the lamp points downward and none of the remainder reflects back off of the single reflector.
That's just nonsense. Shine a flashlight into the Novas single reflector and I'll bet that the light will reflect back outward. Under your premise, the light from the flashlight will be totally absorbed by the reflector. Essentially, your claiming that the Nova reflector is akin to a vacuum.

Random numbers regarding X times par an individual refector vs. a single reflector system drawn from nothing but assumption is bad enough. But stating that all light hitting the Nova reflector is absorbed by the reflector is mind numbingly dumb.

 

[pjf]

The 3x figure comes from comparing a parabolic reflector with no reflector.

Without a reflector, only the bottom third (120 degrees) of the light reaches the substrate.

The remaining 240 degrees of light (represented by the red curve above) illuminates your walls and ceiling.

Beyond 120 degrees, the shallow angle causes light to pass through the aquarium glass instead of being reflected back into the tank by the glass walls. Shallow light often “leaks” through the side glass of a rectangular aquarium and illuminates the floor on the left and right side of the stand.

Here’s what should happen when an individual parabolic reflector is used:

The upper 240 degrees of light is directed downwards. There is a small loss of light that goes straight up and is reflected back into the tube. The larger the reflector is in relation to the tube, the more effective the reflector. A narrow diameter T5 tube enhances the reflector’s effectiveness. Bending retrofitted reflectors to fit into a small area is not optimal.

Without individual parabolic reflectors, a significant portion of light is blocked by neighboring tubes or passes through the aquarium glass without reaching the substrate. How much depends on the geometry and can be determined by measuring the PAR.

Another inexpensive alternative to consider is to build a canopy with T5 components and individual reflectors. You can start with a canopy, a ballast and two tubes/reflectors. A second set of ballast and tubes/reflectors can be added later.

 

[GSMguy]

yes thank you pjf

 

[DarG]

"The 3x figure comes from comparing a parabolic reflector with no reflector."


GSMguy, PJF did NOT support your claim that a single reflector loses all but the downward facing portion of the light. Nothing or nobody would support that claim because it never should have been made.

 

[GSMguy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9839866#post9839866 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by DarG
"The 3x figure comes from comparing a parabolic reflector with no reflector."


GSMguy, PJF did NOT support your claim that a single reflector loses all but the downward facing portion of the light. Nothing or nobody would support that claim because it never should have been made.

my claim was a 5 bulb aquatinics would be 3x a 4 bulb nova i feel confident that number is pretty close some where from 2.5x to 3x

 

[lecher]

Could not have said it better myself DarG. I wish someone would do side by side comparisons of the Nova and a ind. reflector setup with the same bulbs, ballasts and water. And finally put this discussion to rest. Instead of stating irrelevant data, implying that the Nova is the same as using no reflector at all. It has a reflector. Is it as efficient as individual reflectors, probably not. Is it the same as using NO reflector, definetly not.

 

[GSMguy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9839912#post9839912 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by lecher
Could not have said it better myself DarG. I wish someone would do side by side comparisons of the Nova and a ind. reflector setup with the same bulbs, ballasts and water. And finally put this discussion to rest. Instead of stating irrelevant data, implying that the Nova is the same as using no reflector at all. It has a reflector. Is it as efficient as individual reflectors, probably not. Is it the same as using NO reflector, definetly not.

actually it doesnt do that much more than no reflector would the design is not efficent at all not even comparable. sorry. its not just shape of reflectors that matters its size and material.

 

[lecher]

Where are the numbers?

 

[DarG]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9839931#post9839931 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by GSMguy
actually it doesnt do that much more than no reflector would the design is not efficent at all not even comparable. sorry. its not just shape of reflectors that matters its size and material.

Your claims are meaningless. How confident you feel in your guesses of X par are meaningless. First you claim that all light from the tube but the 30% that faces downward is lost. Now, it's almost like having no reflector at all. It's all just hot air.
Nobody is doubting that the individual reflectors are more efficient, just asking for numbers for comparison, not hot air.

There is plenty enough light coming off the Nova 4 lamp fixture to give Sneeyatch a gorgeous reef. The Nova 4 lamp T5 with stock bulbs was all he needed. So he could have paid 2x or 3x or 4 x as much, but he clearly didn't need to. I'm confident that Sneeyatch got more out of his T5's in his Nova than just the 30% that faced downward from his Nova.

One thing I do know is that theres a lot more proof in Sneeyatchs reef that the Nova is an effective T5 fixture than there is in the proclamations that it is "like a scam". If it's plenty good to get the job done then anything else is just extra money spent. And that's perfectly fine for those who want to spend it.

 

[GSMguy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9840225#post9840225 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by DarG
Your claims are meaningless. How confident you feel in your guesses of X par are meaningless. First you claim that all light from the tube but the 30% that faces downward is lost. Now, it's almost like having no reflector at all. It's all just hot air.
Nobody is doubting that the individual reflectors are more efficient, just asking for numbers for comparison, not hot air.

There is plenty enough light coming off the Nova 4 lamp fixture to give Sneeyatch a gorgeous reef. The Nova 4 lamp T5 with stock bulbs was all he needed. So he could have paid 2x or 3x or 4 x as much, but he clearly didn't need to. I'm confident that Sneeyatch got more out of his T5's in his Nova than just the 30% that faced downward from his Nova.

One thing I do know is that theres a lot more proof in Sneeyatchs reef that the Nova is an effective T5 fixture than there is in the proclamations that it is "like a scam". If it's plenty good to get the job done then anything else is just extra money spent. And that's perfectly fine for those who want to spend it.

a tek 2 bulb retro would use less energy and have just as much or more output

a 2 bulb IC retro would kick the crap out off it.
and both cost less money.