SWitch from MH /VHO to T5's
- Thread starter Gipsy
- Start date
dwdenny
New member
Yeah I do. Most are going a little longer then that with T5 but most are starting to replace at about 12 months or so. Are you going to retro or fixture? If retro you could use the 80w bulbs and stager them like this:
------------------
------------------
------------------
------------------
If you use and IC 660 ballast you can push the 80w bulbs to 100w. If you are using the fixtures then 2 36"X6 bulb would work good too. I would still use the 6X80 if you went with a retro.HTH
Ok it didn't come out like I hoped it would but I think you get what I mean by stagering them right?
------------------
------------------
------------------
------------------
If you use and IC 660 ballast you can push the 80w bulbs to 100w. If you are using the fixtures then 2 36"X6 bulb would work good too. I would still use the 6X80 if you went with a retro.HTH
Ok it didn't come out like I hoped it would but I think you get what I mean by stagering them right?
PelagicMagic
New member
what MH ballast do you have? I would keep the MH and add t5's. You cant beat the shimmer effect. Anyways do you want to sell your 250's if you go all t5's? I need 2 more. let me know
also what I have seen on proven t5 tanks the bulbs are changed every 6 months.
also what I have seen on proven t5 tanks the bulbs are changed every 6 months.
hahnmeister
In Memoriam
Hello JD, thanks for the coral frag. I made a post at WRS, but I see you have started already.
One thing you were kicking around was using 6 of the 60" T5 bulbs, and then one 250watt halide in the center for the shimmer effect. What do the rest of you guys think? Overkill in the center?
One thing you were kicking around was using 6 of the 60" T5 bulbs, and then one 250watt halide in the center for the shimmer effect. What do the rest of you guys think? Overkill in the center?
horkn
New member
or, yeah, the 6x60 with a 250 would work, but i dont think there is that kind of room in there.
my plans for my 90 are 4 54watters 2 in front then a MH (250 or 400) then 2 more 54w t5s .
this 150g is the same front to back as a90, so 6 will not work.
you could do 2x250, and 4x60" t5ho. but, at that point, you might as well have the 3rd MH again...
6x60" of t5ho would probably be your best bet, but use a very good reflector, not the teks, for the 30" height of this 150g..
my plans for my 90 are 4 54watters 2 in front then a MH (250 or 400) then 2 more 54w t5s .
this 150g is the same front to back as a90, so 6 will not work.
you could do 2x250, and 4x60" t5ho. but, at that point, you might as well have the 3rd MH again...
6x60" of t5ho would probably be your best bet, but use a very good reflector, not the teks, for the 30" height of this 150g..
hahnmeister
In Memoriam
Yeah, I suppose JD's 250 would be a mogul base...a little too big...I always think DE when I think halide.
Perhaps this is the reason JD is considering a different tank size...
48x48x24" h is my pick!!!
But on the 150...perhaps 4 T5s and one halide in the middle is enough.
Perhaps this is the reason JD is considering a different tank size...
48x48x24" h is my pick!!!
But on the 150...perhaps 4 T5s and one halide in the middle is enough.
horkn
New member
i think so too...
but what 4 t5ho bulbs with that mh?
maybe he could do a t5ho UVlighting super actinic in addition to the 4t5s? on a separate balklast for dusk dawn effect, and if they are as good as we hear they are, then leave that on all day as well.
2 36" teklights would bet very pricey, and since he already ahs a canopy, i think thats the last option, 6 t5s would be adequate.
would it be possible to run 2 day bulbs on either side of the MH in the center? i know 2 24watters would work, but if he can run a set of 39watters even if they are obstructed a tad by the mh, he would be better off than with only 4 tubes of t5ho,....
but what 4 t5ho bulbs with that mh?
maybe he could do a t5ho UVlighting super actinic in addition to the 4t5s? on a separate balklast for dusk dawn effect, and if they are as good as we hear they are, then leave that on all day as well.
2 36" teklights would bet very pricey, and since he already ahs a canopy, i think thats the last option, 6 t5s would be adequate.
would it be possible to run 2 day bulbs on either side of the MH in the center? i know 2 24watters would work, but if he can run a set of 39watters even if they are obstructed a tad by the mh, he would be better off than with only 4 tubes of t5ho,....
Horace
New member
Horkn...the mad T5 advocate 
....I am also looking to get some shimmer. I have 6 T5s on my 75 right now and I am having great luck... I just miss the SHIMMER!!!! I think I want to go with 2x250 MH and 4xT5 URI actinic (if they ever come out lol) or blue+....Any idea how to jam all that above a 75?? I havent found any easy way to do it.
....I am also looking to get some shimmer. I have 6 T5s on my 75 right now and I am having great luck... I just miss the SHIMMER!!!! I think I want to go with 2x250 MH and 4xT5 URI actinic (if they ever come out lol) or blue+....Any idea how to jam all that above a 75?? I havent found any easy way to do it.
hahnmeister
In Memoriam
Horace, Horkn and I have a mutual friend, Bill, who has the dual 250wattDE + 4x54wattT5 setup you mention...it works great...for his 120gallon!!! Putting that over a 75 would be overkill.
Horkn, I was thinking that the halide would be a bluer bulb, as a daylight bulb in the center with the T5s might be overkill, and the shimmer is all JD is really looking for. So a 250watt pheonix or radium, or heck, a 20,000K XM. With how blue JD runs everything, the T5s will be the primary source of his PAR, not the halide.
What 4 bulbs? Well, first, I would run the Icecap 660 ballast...it will overdrive those 80watt bulbs to 100watts, and give a proportional boost to the output w/o shortening the bulb life like many are reporting with the shorter bulbs that get overdriven by 50% or more. Or not...the IC660 is an expenive ballast, and I suppose 80watts x4 isnt bad at all. Heck, it might be too much as is.
As for the 4 bulbs... JD likes his blue, so I would skip the GE 6500K, and use this combo...2 aquablue, one blue plus, one actinic plus. Or, since the actinics are pretty pathetic in output compared to the blue plus, just use 3 blue plus and an aquablue (11,000K daylight is really what it is). Or, yet again, 2 aquablues, and 2 blue plus. That would be the brightest combo while keeping a nice 14,000-20,000K look.
Or, the other option might be to use smaller halides...much smaller halides. I know JD might not like that though with his existing investment in ballasts...but maybe his other half has resources...
If the halide is just for shimmer, and beyond that, just for looks. Perhaps just running three small halides...175s, or better yet, 150wattDE (I have heard of the reasons why JD doesnt want to use DE though...but the 150DE does have a much differrnt socket than the 250s and 400s). I know JD doesnt like 10,000K much either, BUT, it would be for effect, and that yellow light would be minimal compared to the T5s output. When you look at the spectral output of the 10,000Ks, they actually contain more actinic than any other bulb...even 14,000K and 20,000Ks (except for 6500K bulbs which do have more, but hardly anyone uses for show). 10,000Ks have a significant actinic output, its just all the other warmer spectrums that cover it up. So what you do it kinda what Bill did. You get 10,000Ks, and suppliment with blue plus T5s (Bill also uses actinic plus, which is kind of a waste when you think about it) to give them a similar look to 20,000Ks and 14,000Ks (the blue 450nm spike is what makes bulbs like the pheonix and radium look so blue, not the purple). So heres my suggestion using 'spectral addition' of 10,000K halides with T5s.
Use 4 blue plus bulbs, or one aquablue with 3 blue plus T5s, and three smaller halides at 10,000K...175watters (to keep the mogul sockets), or better yet 150s, which could also allow for enough room (due to the smaller bulb) for an extra T5 bulb or two.
Bright as all H#LL. There would be such a huge blue spike that the 10,000K would get covered up, and since blue+ bulbs are perhaps the strongest PAR performer for T5s except for GE 6500Ks...it might even melt his shrooms on the bottom still...lol.
The late Grim Reefer wrote me this in a PM at another forum...
"I did PAR readings 18" under the surface on a reefoptix lll with a Hamilton 10K and on an EVC electronic ballast (250watt). With the fixture raised about 2" above the tank I got PAR around 150. That unit would reay need to be at least 5" above the tank to prevent it from boiling the tank. a 4 lamp Ice Cap T5 system an inch above the tank did 183. I would have raised that another inch or so for permanent mounting so I would guess the PAR would be in the 170 range. The Ice Cap system used 303 watts to produce the light. I would have to run 2 halides to cover the same area the T5 did which would have used 520 watts plus whatever actinics would have been needed. The T5's were 2 aquablues and 2 actinic plus. My 3x250 halide system pulled off 95 at the sand with new EVC 14K DE's. I put some bright 10K's in that were a little too yellow for my taste and they pulled of 120's."
It seems T5 really does give halide a run for the money...beyond the shimmer effect...
But lets see...that would be 150x3=450, + 80x4=240...450 (halide) and 240 (T5) makes 690 watts total, and I believe that would be a similar look/output to what he has now...except for a tad more daylight up at the very top where the halides might overpower the T5s around the bulbs a little. But 690 watts only...not a bad energy reduction.
As for the tek lights, I wouldnt use them on a 150. The icecap SLR reflectors are better for taller tanks (unless you intend on a 20% comparative PAR drop at 18" with the tek to give the lower light corals a chance down below). If you did buy 3' tek lights though, the best place I have found was ebay. I bought my 6x39watt Tek off there for $250. Ebay and horticultural suppliers are the cheapest places I know of really...much less expensive than reefgeek and other reef stores even.
Horkn, I was thinking that the halide would be a bluer bulb, as a daylight bulb in the center with the T5s might be overkill, and the shimmer is all JD is really looking for. So a 250watt pheonix or radium, or heck, a 20,000K XM. With how blue JD runs everything, the T5s will be the primary source of his PAR, not the halide.
What 4 bulbs? Well, first, I would run the Icecap 660 ballast...it will overdrive those 80watt bulbs to 100watts, and give a proportional boost to the output w/o shortening the bulb life like many are reporting with the shorter bulbs that get overdriven by 50% or more. Or not...the IC660 is an expenive ballast, and I suppose 80watts x4 isnt bad at all. Heck, it might be too much as is.
As for the 4 bulbs... JD likes his blue, so I would skip the GE 6500K, and use this combo...2 aquablue, one blue plus, one actinic plus. Or, since the actinics are pretty pathetic in output compared to the blue plus, just use 3 blue plus and an aquablue (11,000K daylight is really what it is). Or, yet again, 2 aquablues, and 2 blue plus. That would be the brightest combo while keeping a nice 14,000-20,000K look.
Or, the other option might be to use smaller halides...much smaller halides. I know JD might not like that though with his existing investment in ballasts...but maybe his other half has resources...
If the halide is just for shimmer, and beyond that, just for looks. Perhaps just running three small halides...175s, or better yet, 150wattDE (I have heard of the reasons why JD doesnt want to use DE though...but the 150DE does have a much differrnt socket than the 250s and 400s). I know JD doesnt like 10,000K much either, BUT, it would be for effect, and that yellow light would be minimal compared to the T5s output. When you look at the spectral output of the 10,000Ks, they actually contain more actinic than any other bulb...even 14,000K and 20,000Ks (except for 6500K bulbs which do have more, but hardly anyone uses for show). 10,000Ks have a significant actinic output, its just all the other warmer spectrums that cover it up. So what you do it kinda what Bill did. You get 10,000Ks, and suppliment with blue plus T5s (Bill also uses actinic plus, which is kind of a waste when you think about it) to give them a similar look to 20,000Ks and 14,000Ks (the blue 450nm spike is what makes bulbs like the pheonix and radium look so blue, not the purple). So heres my suggestion using 'spectral addition' of 10,000K halides with T5s.
Use 4 blue plus bulbs, or one aquablue with 3 blue plus T5s, and three smaller halides at 10,000K...175watters (to keep the mogul sockets), or better yet 150s, which could also allow for enough room (due to the smaller bulb) for an extra T5 bulb or two.
Bright as all H#LL. There would be such a huge blue spike that the 10,000K would get covered up, and since blue+ bulbs are perhaps the strongest PAR performer for T5s except for GE 6500Ks...it might even melt his shrooms on the bottom still...lol.
The late Grim Reefer wrote me this in a PM at another forum...
"I did PAR readings 18" under the surface on a reefoptix lll with a Hamilton 10K and on an EVC electronic ballast (250watt). With the fixture raised about 2" above the tank I got PAR around 150. That unit would reay need to be at least 5" above the tank to prevent it from boiling the tank. a 4 lamp Ice Cap T5 system an inch above the tank did 183. I would have raised that another inch or so for permanent mounting so I would guess the PAR would be in the 170 range. The Ice Cap system used 303 watts to produce the light. I would have to run 2 halides to cover the same area the T5 did which would have used 520 watts plus whatever actinics would have been needed. The T5's were 2 aquablues and 2 actinic plus. My 3x250 halide system pulled off 95 at the sand with new EVC 14K DE's. I put some bright 10K's in that were a little too yellow for my taste and they pulled of 120's."
It seems T5 really does give halide a run for the money...beyond the shimmer effect...
But lets see...that would be 150x3=450, + 80x4=240...450 (halide) and 240 (T5) makes 690 watts total, and I believe that would be a similar look/output to what he has now...except for a tad more daylight up at the very top where the halides might overpower the T5s around the bulbs a little. But 690 watts only...not a bad energy reduction.
As for the tek lights, I wouldnt use them on a 150. The icecap SLR reflectors are better for taller tanks (unless you intend on a 20% comparative PAR drop at 18" with the tek to give the lower light corals a chance down below). If you did buy 3' tek lights though, the best place I have found was ebay. I bought my 6x39watt Tek off there for $250. Ebay and horticultural suppliers are the cheapest places I know of really...much less expensive than reefgeek and other reef stores even.
Last edited:
I think the following link is a good pretender.
Easy, can use my ballast, not that expensive...
What do you guys think?
http://www.reefgeek.com/products/categories/lighting/104490.html
Easy, can use my ballast, not that expensive...
What do you guys think?
http://www.reefgeek.com/products/categories/lighting/104490.html
hahnmeister
In Memoriam
Its a nice fixture, but its for double ended halides (thought you were against that JD) and is 80% halide/20% T5 in output. I wish there was a fixture like that that had at least 4 rows of T5 with the DE halide...er...there is actually, but the T5 reflectors kinda suck so its not worth it really.
As for the maristar...John S. in Kenosha (the scientist) uses one of those fixtures. It looks nice over his tank.
The only thing is...I dont think it takes full advantage of T5 technology like it could. Same for the Aqualine and Geisemann fixtures...they only use 2 rows of T5.
That and I dont like all-in-one fixtures simply due to their lack of easy upgrading. With seperate pendants and retrofits, you can move around bulbs, or simply add another pendant when you move to another tank...not so easy when you order a 6' long fixture.
JD, perhaps you should add another thread and title it "show me 150g T5 tanks", and everyone with T5 lit 150s can post images to get ideas...
Regards,
Jon
As for the maristar...John S. in Kenosha (the scientist) uses one of those fixtures. It looks nice over his tank.
The only thing is...I dont think it takes full advantage of T5 technology like it could. Same for the Aqualine and Geisemann fixtures...they only use 2 rows of T5.
That and I dont like all-in-one fixtures simply due to their lack of easy upgrading. With seperate pendants and retrofits, you can move around bulbs, or simply add another pendant when you move to another tank...not so easy when you order a 6' long fixture.
JD, perhaps you should add another thread and title it "show me 150g T5 tanks", and everyone with T5 lit 150s can post images to get ideas...
Regards,
Jon
Horace
New member
So your saying that 2x54 + 2x250w MH SE would be better eh? I guess I just dont know how blue it would look with a 10k and two Blue+. My guess is it would barely look blue at all...thats why I was thinknig 4x54 Blue+. The biggest issue is I dont think it would fit over the 75. Over a 120 it would fit no problem because there is like 6" more of room.
Horace
New member
James, you have much to learn.....VHO are T12 bulbs. T5 HO are much more powerful than VHO.
Watts per gallon is a useless measure these days and should be forgotten totally.
A UV shield is only used for Double Ended Metal Halides otherwise knowing as HQI or simply DE. You dont need a UV shield for any other type of bulb. The Single Ended (SE) otherwise known as Mogul, have UV glass around the elment so another is not needed. Hope that helps.
Watts per gallon is a useless measure these days and should be forgotten totally.
A UV shield is only used for Double Ended Metal Halides otherwise knowing as HQI or simply DE. You dont need a UV shield for any other type of bulb. The Single Ended (SE) otherwise known as Mogul, have UV glass around the elment so another is not needed. Hope that helps.
Similar threads
