Which T5 sunpower for Redsea 525 (5ft tank)? 6x80w, 6x48w, 8x54w?

[Radioheadx14]

I am going to be setting up a red sea reefer 525 towards the end of the year, with mostly SPS/acros. The tank dimensions are 59x22x22. I have settled on T5 based on up front cost, bulb replacement costs, energy consumption and SPS suitability.

Based on the BRS investigates, it sounds like a 6 bulb ATI fixure is best for SPS in most situations for the sweet spot of 250-350 par range throughout the tank.

Based on 59" x 22" x 22", would I be best off with a 6x80w 60" sunpower, or one of the 48" variants? either 6 bulb or a 8 bulb if the 22" front-to-back depth would warrant more bulbs.

BRS's SPS PAR video explains, with evidence, that more PAR might not always be better, so I don't want to waste money, energy and overly expose corals if I don't have to.

 

[jda]

I would do 5 feet and eight bulbs if you want a lot of acros. If you want more of the weed-type SPS, then four feet and six bulbs would probably be fine.

There is nothing worse than wanting a few last nice pieces only to know that you have six inches on either side of a 48" fixture that just don't put out enough light.

Anybody who supposes that more PAR is not better for acropora needs to find a new job... not all coral need more light, but I had acropora thrive outside under the sun at 1300+ PAR one summer and grow twice as much as the same corals inside (same system) under 20K Radiums. All of the frags in my frag tank grow faster (same system) under 600-750 PAR right under a Radium in 3" of water than they do 12" down in my main tank. Besides, more bulbs and more length is about coverage as much as output. I disclaim this to acros, so all of the folks that want to post to tell me that their montis and birdsnests grow just fine under 150 PAR can just save it.

 

[Radioheadx14]

I would do 5 feet and eight bulbs if you want a lot of acros. If you want more of the weed-type SPS, then four feet and six bulbs would probably be fine.

There is nothing worse than wanting a few last nice pieces only to know that you have six inches on either side of a 48" fixture that just don't put out enough light.

Anybody who supposes that more PAR is not better for acropora needs to find a new job... not all coral need more light, but I had acropora thrive outside under the sun at 1300+ PAR one summer and grow twice as much as the same corals inside (same system) under 20K Radiums. All of the frags in my frag tank grow faster (same system) under 600-750 PAR right under a Radium in 3" of water than they do 12" down in my main tank. Besides, more bulbs and more length is about coverage as much as output. I disclaim this to acros, so all of the folks that want to post to tell me that their montis and birdsnests grow just fine under 150 PAR can just save it.

I suggest you watch this: http://www.bulkreefsupply.com/video/view/brstv-investigates-setting-a-baseline-for-sps-corals-and-future-testing/

 

[Potatohead]

Like jda says it depends on what corals you want to keep. I have a 24x8 unit over a 32x24x20" tank and it's a lot of light. I have it 12" off the water and still most LPS and zoas are borderline, you have to place them carefully. Wall to wall acros I would go 60x8 but mixed reef probably 48x6.

 

[jda]

I have watched it. Bunk for high light corals like most acropora although I do think that some coral can have too much.

PAR on these is about 1500... and more when they are out of the water.
http://www.placestoseeinyourlifetim...-reefs-gardens-at-low-tide-in-australia-5312/

 

[Radioheadx14]

Do you have something I can read/watch on why that analysis is bunk?

 

[jda]

Sure. Check out all of the TOTM that have as much light as they can get with acros growing out the tops... or the ocean like I posted.

I respect that Mr. Riddle spent a lot of time looking at stuff, but is any real scientist supposed to believe that through natural selection, evolution and an adapt or die environment, that coral choose to use less energy that is available to them for a shorter amount of time than the energy is offered. If so, this would be one of the only times in nature that organisms have not adapted to thrive as best as possible in their natural environment.

There are threads on Riddle's articles, which BRS bases a lot of their videos on... some of them use Porites as a sample coral, which quite literally will grow under a screw-in light bulb in a fuge... a weed SPS.

 

[jda]

Also, I have the same coral, Gonzo's Blueberry Diesel under 560 of par up high and 280 of par down low and the higher one grows twice as fast. Same tank. Flow is probably not the same, but probably not all that different either. This is your thread and if you want to believe that less light is better for acropora, then I will bow out...