MH or VHO???

boostd2valve · 07/14/2007, 03:57 PM

Currently running 2 175w MH 10K w/a icecap 660 running 2 72" atinics...thinking of switching to 2 440 icecaps w/4 160w 72" daytimes and atinics...any pros or cons...this is on a 150g....what can be kept with the vho setup...thanks

Entropy · 07/14/2007, 04:24 PM

You will lose the glitter lines to start which leads me to say don't do it. Otherwise I think you will be pretty close on what you can keep with either setup. You are trading more power in two spots for more even lighting across the tank.

GSMguy · 07/14/2007, 04:30 PM

sounds like moving backwards to me

boostd2valve · 07/14/2007, 04:39 PM

Yeah i Just wasnt sure...It just made everything"pop" in the tank they were on...

aninjaatemyshoe · 07/14/2007, 06:11 PM

Output wise, VHOs simply do not compete with Metal Halides. T5s are the only fluorescents that can compete with MH lighting. VHOs suffer from so-so baseline output/Watt, but what makes them really the weaker choice is the fact that they are too large for good individual reflectors to be used. Some VHO bulbs use internal reflectors on their top halves, but this is not as effective as the individual reflectors of T5s. As far as what you can keep with VHOs, don't think you'll have much luck with SPS or some of the more demanding clams. Other than that you'd probably be ok. Beyond the fact that they lack the output of MHs/T5s, VHOs are simply a dying breed in aquarium lighting. The choices are dwindling; the only ones I've seen lately are UVL daylights and super actinics.

07/14/2007, 03:57 PM	#1
boostd2valve Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 243	MH or VHO??? Currently running 2 175w MH 10K w/a icecap 660 running 2 72" atinics...thinking of switching to 2 440 icecaps w/4 160w 72" daytimes and atinics...any pros or cons...this is on a 150g....what can be kept with the vho setup...thanks

07/14/2007, 04:24 PM	#2
Entropy Texas Reefer Join Date: May 2003 Location: Round Rock, TX Posts: 13,656	You will lose the glitter lines to start which leads me to say don't do it. Otherwise I think you will be pretty close on what you can keep with either setup. You are trading more power in two spots for more even lighting across the tank. __________________ Rich Overton 150G cube FOWLR, 30g sump, ReefKeeperII, 3x Koralia 1400's, QuiteOne 3000, Reef Octopus DNWB150, 4x 30w Par38 LED. Current Tank Info: 36x36x27 150g

07/14/2007, 04:30 PM	#3
GSMguy Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Northern New Mexico Posts: 17,420	sounds like moving backwards to me __________________ Nick. Conehead. Shallow Reef club. Current Tank Info: 48"x27"x14" Envision Acrylic rimless, 6x39w ATi Sunpower, Custom ATB Deluxe Skimmer, 4x tunze nano stream,ATB flowstar 1500, ACJR, Tunze osmolator.

07/14/2007, 06:11 PM	#5
aninjaatemyshoe Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Posts: 2,333	Output wise, VHOs simply do not compete with Metal Halides. T5s are the only fluorescents that can compete with MH lighting. VHOs suffer from so-so baseline output/Watt, but what makes them really the weaker choice is the fact that they are too large for good individual reflectors to be used. Some VHO bulbs use internal reflectors on their top halves, but this is not as effective as the individual reflectors of T5s. As far as what you can keep with VHOs, don't think you'll have much luck with SPS or some of the more demanding clams. Other than that you'd probably be ok. Beyond the fact that they lack the output of MHs/T5s, VHOs are simply a dying breed in aquarium lighting. The choices are dwindling; the only ones I've seen lately are UVL daylights and super actinics. __________________ You are not brought upon this world to "get it"

07/14/2007, 04:39 PM	#4
boostd2valve Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 243	Yeah i Just wasnt sure...It just made everything"pop" in the tank they were on...