![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 37
|
![]()
How come reefers are not using T12 VHO lamps anymore?
Is it energy consumption? Is it intensity vs. size? Is it Temperature differences? It seems like everyone is blasting their tanks with a million watts of light for all applications...other than keeping SPS. Am I wrong? I love my softies and growing coralline, but should I jump aboard the T5 wagon? Somebody convince me, or tell me that I'm not losing my mind |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 341
|
Your losing your mind buddy,
lol
__________________
Tanks to hold corals: $1000's of dollars Hand feeding corals at 5 in the morning: Priceless Current Tank Info: 30g, 58g, 100g |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Registered Member
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 5,009
|
I agree, not many new tanks are going up w/ pure VHO these days. SImply put, there is no reason to. T5 is brighter, lasts longer and is cheaper to run. T12 bulbs wont be around much longer I am afraid. Apparently the chemicals inside them are quickly being regulated. Its only a matter of time before the EPA says no more T12.
__________________
-Horace Pinker Current Tank Info: New 180g Mixed SPS Build in progress |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hornell, NY
Posts: 1,483
|
Well, i'm perfectly content with my VHO only 125 setup. There are reasons to do such a thing especially if you're looking to cover a 6' span.
__________________
Jason Current Tank Info: 125 mixed reef. Icecap 660 3x5' T5HO Icecap 430 2x6' VHO actinic |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,104
|
I also use only VHO for a softie and LPS reef. I may upgrade in the future (especially now that UV/URI is making HO T5 bulbs), but until recently VHO was the king of color.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Registered Member
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 5,009
|
VHO are nice... my buddy has a pure VHO tank. I think many out there underestimate how well they can do w/ SPS as well. But I must admit, most folks are not installing VHO new anymore. Most just use T5 instead. If the T5 super actinic is as good as the VHO version, there will be no reasons left to install VHO over T5 IMO.
__________________
-Horace Pinker Current Tank Info: New 180g Mixed SPS Build in progress |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Gresham, OR
Posts: 294
|
Anyone know if I can run T5's with a workhorse7 ballast?
I was planning on running two 48" vho's to supplement my halides, but now I am thinking T5's.
__________________
Rich Current Tank Info: 90 Gallon with 100 gallon sump in garage |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,811
|
T5 and T12 bulbs have the same stuff in the bulbs.
A T5 and T12 should last the same time with similar ballasts. T5 are great with the reflector. There is a limit to the number that will fit over a tank due to the T5 reflector limitation. Any thing can be grown under VHO that can be grown under MH. The differance is how fast it will grow. With equil wattage over the tanks T5, T12-VHO and MH should all be capable of similar growth. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Sponsor
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 548
|
From IceCap:
I recently switched over to T5HO and think it's a big improvement in light delivered where you want it. The new lamps GE has in 6.5K, and I'm told the new UVL T5HO line, are Eco in that at end of life the mercury bonds with a metal surface in the lamp. You also use less glass to make them. We found that even overdriving them they were good for two years. Because of the thin design, it's easy to direct the light where you want it. As to not having room for enough lamps, you will not need as many. Andy |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: milwaukee wisconsin
Posts: 4,125
|
Quote:
my 3x39t5ho retrofit has been run soley on one workhorse 5 ballast from day 1. that was right around 1.5 years ago. and i still have the original bulbs in it, and they are doing fine. whaledriver, AFAIK, t5 and t12 bulbs do not have the same contenets inside the glass. all I have heard is what horace has said, that its only a matter of time until t12 are not made anymore due to regulations. heck, even most industrial fluorescents are not t12 anymore. t8 and t5ho are replacing t12. and some stores, like home deathspot, have switched from MH lighting in their stores, to t5ho. the HD stores are now brighter as well.
__________________
people write stupid things in this space Current Tank Info: 200g DIY wood reef, 2x 250w SE 10k MH 2x80 t5ho, 75g sump, Geo Ca RX, ASD 6" recirc skimmer |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Registered Member
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 5,009
|
Quote:
I am not trying to bash T12 because they do a fine job, but they are simply obsolete in every way when compared to the T5 bulb. The only reason anyone is hanging on to them is because of the SA bulb. If it wasnt for that, VHO would have been history a long time ago. I have a strong suspicion that the new T5 SA will blow away the VHO. If thats the case, VHO wont be around much longer. There simply wont be a market for them any more. Who would want to run a 110w bulb that lasts half as long as the T5 version that runs at 54w and puts out probably half as much light?
__________________
-Horace Pinker Current Tank Info: New 180g Mixed SPS Build in progress |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Moved On
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: fortlauderdale florida area
Posts: 1,874
|
vho = more wats for the same amount of bulbs.
i know you can fit more bulbs of t5 style over a tank but that also means more ballast t5=54 watts i think while a vho is 110 im used vho on my old tank and on my new tank if the epa has probloms with what is in the bulbs they could just change the chemicals in the vho t12 anyways im using vho till the bulbs start to become extreamly hard to find . i think t12 and t5 put out same light but one is more compact either way its gonna be expensise and annoying to change over to t5 if you already have vho and the vho endcaps ( oh also t5 isnt reliably dimmable yet) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: milwaukee wisconsin
Posts: 4,125
|
with the advent of the SA UVL bulbs, the only thing vho has on t5ho is an 18" length (t5ho are only down to 24"). there already are dimmable t5ho ballasts. they are pricey, but they do exist.
if you look at it as pure watts, then vho has that over t5ho. But we dont care about watts, we care about PAR, and a 4 tube vho puts out nowhere near the PAR that a 4 tube t5ho with good reflectors does. Seeing as we dont care about watts that doesnt matter. Actually, we want less watts to keep our energy bill down, unless you work for the power company ![]()
__________________
people write stupid things in this space Current Tank Info: 200g DIY wood reef, 2x 250w SE 10k MH 2x80 t5ho, 75g sump, Geo Ca RX, ASD 6" recirc skimmer |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 1,738
|
I've never had a PAR meter or even a LUX meter to test the actual output, but I can say for certain that my 432 watts of T5 HO (with individual reflectors) produces quite a bit more light than the 660 watts of VHO that I used to run over my 90, and that is without overdriving the bulbs. More light for less energy seems like a no-brainer to me.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |
Registered Member
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 5,009
|
Quote:
Although VHO bulbs are 2x as many watts per bulb for the same length T5, they put out probably HALF as much PAR. So your statment about T5s putting out the same light, except in a smaller bulb is just plain not true. In fact its WAY OFF base. As for the T12s being reengineered...NOT LIKELY. They have been around forever, and they havent evolved much, if any in several years. While they used to be the standard in lighting, they are a whole generation of technology behind. Also depending on your ballast, you may not even have to get a new one for the T5. If your using workhorse or Icecap ballasts, both will work for T5. My suggestion is before making sweeping statements about T5, do some good research on them. I think you will be surprised what you find out. They REALLY ARE that much better.
__________________
-Horace Pinker Current Tank Info: New 180g Mixed SPS Build in progress |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Premium Member
![]() Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 6,611
|
Just out of curiosity, where are the PAR readings? I don't doubt that T5s are brighter in this regard, however, I have never seen any measurements to substantiate it.
__________________
You've done it now, haven't you? Current Tank Info: 40g breeder patch reef w/ seagrass; 2-250w XM 10K; Vortech MP40wES & MP10wES; BM Curve 7 skimmer; carbon & occasional GFO |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Registered Member
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 5,009
|
There are posts out there, but they are mainly in regards to T5 vs MH. In many cases T5s are actually higher PAR than even 250w MH. If T5s beat out MH in many situations, you can bet ur arse that they blow VHO out of the water. There is a post somewhere around here where the PAR was taken right at the bulb from VHO and then the PAR was taken at the sandbed w/ T5 and the T5 was still brighter if i remember correctly. The Grim Reefer did some tests a while back... here is one of them http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/sh...5&pagenumber=1
__________________
-Horace Pinker Current Tank Info: New 180g Mixed SPS Build in progress |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Premium Member
![]() Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 6,611
|
I never doubted they were brighter--just wanted to see numbers
![]()
__________________
You've done it now, haven't you? Current Tank Info: 40g breeder patch reef w/ seagrass; 2-250w XM 10K; Vortech MP40wES & MP10wES; BM Curve 7 skimmer; carbon & occasional GFO |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: INDY
Posts: 2,857
|
I was just getting ready to do a search on t-12's and ran across this
![]() I got a used 75 so I could move my corals out of my 46 bow . I have been looking at lights and I like the Sun-tek 6 bulb unit or the Finnex [leaning toward Finnex as it comes with bulbs, cheaper] I don't think I will be able to get these lights however until I sell my 46...Soooo I was in Menards, looking at lights for my basement when I saw these hanging fluorescent light units..Some of which used t-12 or t-8 bulbs. This lamps where CHEAP!!! And one was kind of stylish ![]()
__________________
AKA Kim Hardie.. Current Tank Info: 240 gallon FOWLR, 180 gallon reef, 55 gallon for my Dwarf Lion |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: INDY
Posts: 2,857
|
Nevermind.....they only take 40 watt bulbs
![]()
__________________
AKA Kim Hardie.. Current Tank Info: 240 gallon FOWLR, 180 gallon reef, 55 gallon for my Dwarf Lion |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 37
|
First of all, you cracked me up Save our reefs...I appreciate the honesty.
However, there is something I can't get my mind around... 1.) T5's produce more PAR? 2.) How could a 39watt bulb be more intense than a 96watt bulb? Now I did take 1 year of physics in college, and I understand the unit of measure for power in this case is "watt", but the more energy you have is proportional to the intensity or output of light. So with that in mind...wouldn't a 39 watt lamp emit less light than a 96 wat bulb (stand alone with out T5 reflector)? Help me understand
__________________
Actual quote from my fiance, "You give your fish more attention than you give me." Current Tank Info: 46 gallon Oceanic bow, 10 gal live rock/Live sand, mangrove esturary tank Last edited by hollywood300m; 05/13/2006 at 07:31 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Registered Member
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 5,009
|
Quote:
So believe it or dont, but all the T5's stomp the VHO counterpart into the ground in pretty much every way, ESPECIALLY when overdriven.
__________________
-Horace Pinker Current Tank Info: New 180g Mixed SPS Build in progress |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | |
Premium Member
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Shawnee, Kansas
Posts: 4,568
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 37
|
OK...I feel a little more comfortable now. The more I talk about it, and get feedback from you guys the more I see VHO's wearing a member's only windbreaker, and splashing on some Old Spice.
__________________
Actual quote from my fiance, "You give your fish more attention than you give me." Current Tank Info: 46 gallon Oceanic bow, 10 gal live rock/Live sand, mangrove esturary tank |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Central Jersey
Posts: 430
|
A few posts above... You need to realize that in the case of a fish tank the job of a lightbulb is to direct all its light down into the tank. Many bulbs (especially like PC) waste alot of light that bounces up into a reflector and then back into the bulb, it's light never reaching the tank with its original intensity. A 55wPC is actually as powerful as a 95w VHO, but because PC's are such a bad choice for directing light in one direction they really aren't twice as good as VHO for our purposes. T5 is partially so good because with a single reflector its design allows it to get most of it's light into the tank (90%+) with a minimum of intensity loss.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|