Would this light be enough for FOWLR?

[haywood2]

Tank is a 46 gallon bowfront. I have heard of people using only a 20W light on 30 gallon tanks and successfully keeping live rock, so would this light work on a 46? The logical seems yes, but I want to double check. Each light is 21W.

http://www.bigalsonline.com/BigAlsU...2/cl0/coralifeswt5aqualightdoublestriplight36

 

[ionredline0260]

what fish are you planning on keeping? the thing is sooner or latter you'll want corals so you might as weel buy a nice light now right? doesn't have to be really expensive, a 192W PC is around $140 some places. more light makes your fish look better also (or atleast I think it does)

 

[BlueCorn]

For a fish only tank the only test the light has to pass is whether or not you like it. It's just an aesthetics thing.

Cheers

 

[haywood2]

Yeah but its Fish only with live rock. Corals are out of the picture, period. I just want to have a nice looking tank w/some pretty live rock. Money is a concern right now so I thought that would be my best bet if it will work for what I want right now.

 

[frederickk]

Well if it's only a FOWLR you don't need to have strong lightning.
What are you using right now?

I would go with VHO 50/50 atinics or some T5.

 

[oli5]

That lighting is perfectly fine. I just so happen to have the 48" 2X28 watt fixture (same thing as that) on my 75 FOWLR. It looks really good actually, not too blue not too white, and my fish and rock are doing great too. Good luck.

 

[SeaView]

I agree, if there are no corals the lighting is up to you. In fact, some fish from deeper waters may prefer less intense lighting.

If you ever get the coral bug you can always upgrade your lighting.

Good luck with your tank.

 

[haywood2]

Thanks everyone, time to take out the debit card.

 

[papagimp]

for what it's worth haywood, the "live rock" is only alive because of the bacteria growing on it. If you had no other life in the rock but the bacteria, and it was suffiecient to filter the tank, than you have live rock. And the bacteria doesn't require lighting. So, no need for a light at all for the rock. Just whatever type of lighting you like to look at. color specturn won't matter, wattage won't matter. Only word of caution I'd give, if you have too much lighting, you may fuel the algae more than what you like.

 

[papagimp]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9558781#post9558781 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SeaView
In fact, some fish from deeper waters may prefer less intense lighting.

some will actualy be hurt by intense lighting. Ever seen a fish blinded from too bright of lighting? It's so sad.

 

[EdKruzel]

It is correct, LR doesn't require any lighting to remain healthy and productive as a filtration method. With less intense lighting you actually have several advantages; coralline does better under less intensity and as mentioned, less fuel for the growth of nuisance algae. I recommend a combination of one 50/50 bulb and one 03 actinic. It's only my opinion, but that combination will be just bright enough and highlight your livestock's/fishes color best.

 

[papagimp]

Agreed on the color recommendation, but only for a fowlr, I'd go differently for a reef. You'll get the best coloring doing that setup though.

 

[haywood2]

So should I just stick w/my 24" Coralife 50/50 and save myself the 60 bucks, knowing that I will not upgrade to corals?

 

[WaterKeeper]

LR needs light to maintain the coralline, which is an algae. The good point is that it is a low light algae and as little as a watt to a watt and a half per gallon will sustain it. If you use fluorescent lamps an actinic will provide even better growth if used in conjunction with a daylight tube.