T5's adventure begins!

[goreefer]

This weekend I changed my 29 from 220watts of PC lighting over to T5’s. So the adventure begins!
The new lights are 2 UV Aquasun 10K’s and two UV Super Actinic’s all 24� long. Two WH5 ballasts drive them. Each bulb is driven at 32watts each at this time. As things become acclimated to the new lights I plan on increasing the wattage to 65watts per bulb. Along the way I will also add IC SLR reflectors.
I am not sure that I like the current colors of the lamps, as it is a little too pink for my taste, but the bulbs were what the local LSF were able to order, and I like to support the local LSF as much as possible.
I do like the way that these bulbs bring out the colors of my corals. What was a dingy brown SPS is now a bright green. The blue SPS is now much bluer. The GSP is now an exotic florescent green.
I can’t wait to try out other colors of bulbs and add the reflectors and up the wattage. Those are options that I never had with the PC’s.
The other thing that I noted is that today my tank is about 5 degrees cooler. Those PC’s put off a lot of heat! I will leave the cooling fan after reading the benefits of keeping the T5’s cool.
Any recommendations for bulbs to decrease the pink color?

[iamquockie]

I say change one of the aquasun's to ATI/D+D 10k and one of the SUVL actinic with a blue plus bulb.

[The Grim Reefer]

WHat ^^^ Said I think. Swap 1 Aquasun for a Aquablue and 1 SA for a Blue Plus. DONT OVRDRIVE THE LAMPS. Add the reflectors and run a fan and you will have more light than you can use.

[goreefer]

Thank both of you.
I am getting my order ready for ReefGeek together so I can call it in.
Grim,
With the WH5 ballasts the lamps are driven at 32 watts of power. That is already 33% overdriven, so with your recommendation I will leave them at that.
With my hood I already have a fan blowing into the hood. It is placed at one end at the back and blows perpendicular to the bulbs. Should I reverse the fan so it blows out of the hood? Or should I move the fan so it blows in line with the bulbs?

[The Grim Reefer]

You aren't really overdriving the lamps. Just because you use 32 watts doesn't mean you are putting out 32 watts.

Leave the fan blowing in. You just need air movement, doesn't take that much.

[horkn]

2 wh 5s are making each lamp run at 24watts, not 32 each.

be careful with the corals now that you have a lot more light over them. watts aside, t5hos are way more powerful.

[rickh]

horkn
So with 96 watts of T5 does the tank really look brighter than 220 watts PC?? I doubt it. R

[Ti]

LED for the future!

[nanoreefboy]

Hey sounds like the exact setup i would like to have when i set up my 29. Please post some pics when you get a chance. I have been trying what configuration to do for the best sps colors.

thanks

[hahnmeister]

Originally posted by rickh
horkn
So with 96 watts of T5 does the tank really look brighter than 220 watts PC?? I doubt it. R

Thats a close one... It depends on a few things of course. Bulb spectrums chosen, reflectors on the PCs, etc. But in general, T5s have higher performance bulbs for actinic and blues, so having 1/2 the bulbs wont kill as much of the output. With PC's, having half the bulbs actinic really kills the output... about the same as if you were only running about 150wattsPC on that 220watts. Then look at the reflectors. There are a couple decent PC reflectors out there, but for the most part, they are all crappy flat reflectors that waste alot of light. Testing with T5s has shown that about 60% of the bulbs output is wasted with non-individual parabolic reflectors. With PC's, you lack the individual parabolic reflectors, AND you have the bulb itself which blocks alot of its own reflected light. T5s slim design show a huge advantage here. Combine this with a cooler running temp and better phosphors, the T5s can do it. Even just 96 watts of them. CAN being the operative term. It depends on bulb selection (if he uses dual 6500K bulbs and blue+ bulbs for a high-output 12,000K look... oh, yeah!!), and how well he ventilates the bulbs. PC bulbs own heat kills alot of their output, and T5s have been shown to benefit from active ventilation... about 20% boost in output from doing so.

So, to wrap it up... lets say that the 220watts of PC are half daylight, half actinic and a flat reflector. The output per watt of a PC doesnt compare to T5, but lets say that due to actinic (about 1/4 that of a daylight bulb with PC's at best), the output is more like 137watts (110+(110/4)). The T5s can be 6500Ks, which are PAR monsters, paired up with blue+ bulbs, which are not quite monsters, but share about 80% of the output of a aquablue/daylight bulb. All in all, they are still a more efficient PAR/watt bulb than a PC bulb, even with half of them being blue+ bulbs. But Im not even going to go there... lets just say we still have an effective 96 watts of T5 to the 137watts PC.

Then look at the reflectors. The PCs waste about 60% of their output because of their bulky nature (double wide), and crappy reflectors (flat). OR, you could consider that 60% of T5's output is due to the reflector. You are looking at a possible ratio of effective watts of T5 to PC either way of about 153/137 or 96/54.8 depending on how you look at it.

Granted, thats assuming the best possible 'livable' (12,000K looking) combo for T5s. A more conservative estimate would place them about the same in final output. Still, thats a huge heat source you have eliminated, and wattage cut out for about the same amount of light. Not to mention bulb replacement costs/longevity. Then the T5s become an even better deal.

All in all, can 220watts of PC be outdone by 96watts of T5? You betcha.

[rickh]

When you can measure what you are speaking about and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind. (Lord Kelvin)

Enough of the talk--give me data. RRRRRRRRR

[hahnmeister]

Sorry, the only way to know for sure is to have someone test. As of now, I only have a radiospectrograph, but no 4x24wattT5 unit, nor a 220wattPC unit to measure. So all I can do is go by the information that other tests have shown. Just trying to give an idea... I never said it was an exact comparison, only that yes, the 96watts of T5 can compete with the 220 watts of PCs for output.

[goreefer]

Great comments and great arguments.

The reason that I switched were multifold:
1, with PC's you are limited to bulb choice.
2, PC's run very hot.
3, I don't have room for MHs, and if I did I would still have to deal with the heat.
4, with T5's you have multiple color choices.
5, with T5's the par is over 130, with PC's below 30.

Those were my top 5 reasons, but I'm sure that there are others that I don't know yet.

Lighting is one area that is almost personal. What I like to look at is different that what you like. Yes I want my tank to flourish and I want my corals to grow and be healthy, beyond that it is all what you like.

T5's are also a new technology that is available to the every day reefer. Someday the LED systems will be at the same level.

When I finally get my color preference figured out I will post new pictures in my gallery. You can see the old PC's there now.

[horkn]

Originally posted by rickh
When you can measure what you are speaking about and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind. (Lord Kelvin)

Enough of the talk--give me data. RRRRRRRRR

talk is cheap, do a search, and you will see in PAR research that grim reefer did about PAR numbers for various lights. PC had minimal PAr compared even to VHO.. VHO was very weak compared to t5ho.

220w of PC isnt a lot of light. if i had 220w of PC on my tank (vs the 117w of t5ho) i would have a lot of stuff lose color/ and or die.


so while you may NEED numbers, i have seen enough tanks lit by all sorts of lighting. Numbers in reality dont mean as much as the results of how well corals grow, and coloration. Based on what i ahve seen, t5ho, and MH are the only way i will light my tanks.. well, until LEDs are affordable.

[RFC]

I currently use 195w of PC over a 29g and I am debating whether to go MH or T5 in the future. I am somewhat skeptical of the proported MAGIC of T5s. I too would rather see the data as oppose to people regurgitating a current popular opinion.

Then again I am an total noob so what do I know

Goreefer, besides the color differences, does your tank look any brigher with your T5s ?

Thanks in advance


Regards

RFC

[The Grim Reefer]

Leaving output numbrs out of the argument just the lamp selection is reason enough to choose T5 over other fluorescents.

Leaving output out of the argument just the lamp life is reason enough to choose T5 over other fluorescents.

Add to that the fact that T5 use less energy, create less heat and give far superior light output per watt than other fluorescents, assuming you are using proper reflectors, T5's are by far the best choice.

T5 Swack PC's in output. I tested 2 10K 65/55 watt PC lamps against 2 54 watt T5's. I don't recall the exact numbers but it wasn't even close.

PC's supposedly start out with better output than VHO's but they quickly lose output due to heat.

[goreefer]

My tank looks at least as bright, if not brighter than with the PC's.
Even with the color difference.

One of the reasons that i have not added the reflectors yet is from what I have read here at RC. From the numbers that I've seen in relation to the PAR and other data given by Grim and others helped me make my decision.
It was time to change out the PC's anyway. They were nearing their 9-month birthday and from my experience with the PC's I knew that it was time.
By the way, I have lit my tank with PC's for about 10 years, so I am not new with reef lighting. As my signature says, I have been into reefing and SW for about 40 years. I have had about everything from a ten gallon tank to a 150. I have had my 29 for over ten years, as I like the simplicity of the size.

[rickh]

I read the Humongous T-5 threads a year ago.
If you have no light or an inadequate light then T-5 is definitely the way to go. If you current light is working well, it's not worth replacing it to save electricity. It's nice to be "Green" but it will take years to recover the cost.

[The Grim Reefer]

Between electricity, looks and lamp life..... Depends. They have got the look of PC's a lot better in the last few years. They will never be good for taller tanks with high light critters but if they work for you and you like the look then there isn't really a reason to change.

[hahnmeister]

Originally posted by rickh
I read the Humongous T-5 threads a year ago.
If you have no light or an inadequate light then T-5 is definitely the way to go. If you current light is working well, it's not worth replacing it to save electricity. It's nice to be "Green" but it will take years to recover the cost.

I understand the basic concept behind what you are saying. There are very few energy saving 'buy-ins' that justify their initial cost with significant savings, but consider the people that are buying into the PFO Solaris LED lights already... Ill admit, Im not considering it, I know LED's have a long way to go still (er, rather, 'potential' because they arent lacking so much as I know they will really rock 2x as much in 2-3 years), but for some, the long term savings are well worth the $2000 spent on the unit. For me, I wouldnt save jack on switching to LED's, but others are reporting savings of $70-100 based on less heat/humidity that the A/C or chiller has to deal with, and no bulb replacement cost (at least for now... he he he).
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showth...23#post8425123

For me, the consideration of T5s (I did them on a new tank, so I didnt really switch so much as add on, although the results have me considering a larger scale change) was for less heat. Up front, a 6x39wattT5 Tek unit cost more than a halide pendant, but its benefits are multifold. In the lonng run, the less heat means less A/C use. The output is rivaling MH lamps, and the longevity of the bulbs will actually mean lower replacement costs in the long run. Now, consider, in my case, I was comparing MH to T5!!!

PC to T5 isnt even worth it. I remember my 65watt PC bulbs.... never again!!! A halide pendant ran the tank cooler than those things. The output was crappy, and the bulb life was short. Within 6-9 months I would have cyano outbreaks because the bulbs were shot. And the bulbs were $36 each or more!!!

Sure, 220watts of PC vs. 96watts of T5 might only be about $3 a month in savings for the light itself, but look at the bulb replacement costs, not to mention heat produced (more of an issue for some than others). If you replace your PC bulbs every 6 months, or at worst, 9 months like you SHOULD, you are paying an average of $140-210 per year on bulbs!!! The average cost of replacing those 4 T5s? $80 if you replaced them every year...which is what I would consider a minimum for T5s... 2 years is more like it... so thats $40 per year in bulb replacement costs.

And thats 2' T5 bulbs. If you have a longer tank, T5s are an even better deal. 2' bulbs cost something like $2 less than 4' bulbs, yet the 4' bulbs make 2.25x the output. The same goes for the fixtures... the price of the number of bulbs influences the price more than the length... a 4' 4 bulb fixture costs something like $20 more than a 2' version. That really adds up. Overall, 4' are by far the best bargain for T5s... which makes sense... the number of reflectors, number of ballasts, etc, (number of bulbs) is what costs more, not the length or total wattage as much. Thats why a 4 bulb 4' fixture is less than a 3' 6 bulb fixture by a $100 or more even though they are about the same wattage.

If I had PCs still, I would drop them in a heartbeat for T5s. The long term costs of PC compared to T5 makes T5 seem like a dream compared to PC. The total yearly savings in going from the 220wattsPC to 96wattsT5 in this case is anywhere from $100-200 a year in savings... wattage and bulb costs alone. The total savings if you were to switch to 4' bulbs would be even greater.

For those using 220watts in a 4' configuration, they could get away with a 2x54watt setup (which can be had for as little as $120 for the fixture with individual parabolic reflectors)... gain more light, cut the wattage in half, and spend only $20-40 a year on replacement bulbs (or less if you use the GE 6500K for daylight, which combined with an blue+ does look nice and grows corals very well, and they last 2 years, easily... so that bulb cost just went down to $15 a year). The T5s pay for themselves within a year or two...

[goreefer]

Nanofeefboy and RFC:
I have uploaded some more pictures into my gallery so you can see the difference between to PC's and the T5's. I expect to recieve my other bulbs from ReefGeek in the morning and will post somemore pic's in my gallery when I get them up and running.

[nanoreefboy]

well needless to say, to my eyes the t-5 definately look brighter. I would like to see the new lights when you get those in too. I think that is a good but bad thing at the same time with flourescent bulbs, too many lighting combinations to chose from to find the best one to each persons preference. Thanks again for helping me decide.

[goreefer]

The good thing about T5's is that you have a lot of choices, The bad thing is that you have a lot of choices!

If you just want the colors that the PC's offer, then go with them and forget about all of the reams of reading that you have done about T5's. Why move with technology when you can stay where you are at?

I can't wait to add the reflectors when they come in. I am tempted to add them one at a time to keep my corals from getting too much light at one time.

[goreefer]

My order from ReefGeek arrived today!
The packaging was excellent and nothing was amiss with the order. If you have been wondering if you can order from them and have things arrive as ordered, go for it. I am a very satisfied customer.
I have changed out two of my bulbs at the recommendations posted at the beginning of this thread. My bulb configuration is now from front to back:

Super Actinic
Aqua Sun
Aqua Blue
Blue Plus

You can see my tank in my gallery.
I still have not figured out how to post pictures with in a message…

[hahnmeister]

okay... how to post a pic. You see in your gallery, when you click on a photo... there is a http addy under the pic itself labelled as 'Use this in img tag:'. If you copy this address, and paste it between first this >>> [img] and then this at the end >>> [/img] the forum will insert the pic from that addy.

Like so...