looking to downgrade lighting from MH to t-5 - question

giants4pc · 12/05/2007, 08:10 PM

I want to sell my few SPS frags and colonies and transform my 90 into a ricordea and zoo tank.
Current lighting:
2 x 175 watt MH 15k Iwasaki supplemented with 2 x 96 watt PC actinic

Thinking about:
Nova extreme 216 watt T-5

I am really doing this to lower electricity costs. Will this make a big enough dent on my electric bill yet still be adequate for rics and zoos?

pjf · 12/05/2007, 08:18 PM

My recommendation is a T5 fixture with individual parabolic reflectors for each tube.

crumbletop · 12/05/2007, 08:40 PM

That would be fine. It might even be too much light for rics and zoos. Not so much the zoos but the rics don't usually like tons of light.

luke33 · 12/05/2007, 08:44 PM

I'd say get a 6x54w tek light and keep zoo's and ric's towards the bottom and keep your sps in the middle or top. You can have the best of both worlds. And imo your not downgrading with t5's. Here in IN it wouldn't make much of a difference in electricity cost.

luke33 · 12/05/2007, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by crumbletop
That would be fine. It might even be too much light for rics and zoos. Not so much the zoos but the rics don't usually like tons of light.

Hmmm, IME, all my shrooms, ric's, zoo's and xenia LOVE my overdriven IC's and grow like weeds. They grow better under my t5's than my mh's.

crumbletop · 12/05/2007, 08:57 PM

mine hide unless there is shade.

barjam · 12/05/2007, 10:33 PM

Maybe you could ditch the PCs and go with bluer 175s?

ganjero · 12/05/2007, 11:48 PM

you mean upgrade to T5. Get something with individual reflectors.

Reef Sponger · 12/06/2007, 02:00 AM

You can easily keep rics, zoos, lps and some sps under 4x54w T5HO Teklights. They have the individual reflectors. Need to keep the rics partially shadowed and SPS near the top.

barjam · 12/06/2007, 09:01 AM

Are you sure you want to get rid of the shimmer though? I am getting ready to go MH because the T5s in my tank just don't do it for me visually.

GSMguy · 12/06/2007, 09:14 AM

dont you mean UPGRADE???????

DarG · 12/06/2007, 11:53 AM

No, an upgrade would be ditching the PC's for T5's and keeping the halides. Halide + T5 is an upgrade

I think the OP means downgrade in the sense of power consumption. Obviously, going from 542 watts down to 216 watts will cut energy use some but 326 watts less is not going to make a huge dent in the electric bill. Every little bit helps though and as a side benefit it could help some with temperature issues if you are having any in your tank. Could also decrease chiller use some if you happened to be using a chiller. That in turn could also help lower the electric bill some.

Personally, I couldnt bear losing the halide shimmer and that "crisp" character that halide gives that I dont think can be described without seeing it, and that I never quite had with VHO or T5 alone. But that's just my individual perspective.

BeanAnimal · 12/06/2007, 12:06 PM

Lets look at some math here.

In connecticut, electricty averages about $0.15 a kWh.

Lets assume a 10 hour a day photoperiod. We will also assume that 300 watts are being saved with the lighting downgrade. That equates to 3 kWh per day of savings.

So you save about 45 cents a day or around $165 per year. The Nova 4 lamp fixture is about $250 shipped. So it will take you almost 1.5 years to break even.

BUT... that fixture does not use individual SLR reflectors. So you are wasting large portion of the light. You would be much better off with a fixture that uses SLRs.

DarG · 12/06/2007, 12:21 PM

If you do decide on the Nova fixture, consider going with the new Nova Pro. It's 6 bulbs instead of 4 but the reflectors are upgraded. They still arent true individual reflectors but the reflective material is bent to form a reflector for each lamp. The standard Nova extremes just use a flat reflective sheet shared by all the bulbs. The pricing is still good on the new Pros.

giants4pc · 12/06/2007, 09:18 PM

All good suggestions. Here's another if I do assume to keep my setup and change the bulbs. My current 15k's are approaching a year old. I saw the exact setup I have with the same lighting with 20k XM's. It looked much nicer.

My reflectors may be an issue as well. I have ones from Hellolights. Everyone talks about lumenarcs. Are they significantly better?

BeanAnimal · 12/06/2007, 09:24 PM

They are MUCH better. You will get nearly twice the light into the tank.

DarG · 12/07/2007, 10:06 AM

I use two Lumenmax 3 DE reflectors over a 90 gallon with 1 T5 in front and 1 T5 in back of the reflectors. Everything is mounted on an open aluminum light frame/rack. I chose the Lumenmax over the small Lumenarc DE reflectors because they are little bit narrower and they allowed me to fit the T5's in front and behind the reflectors on the rack. The Lumenmax reflectors share a similiar design to the Lumenarcs and the peformance is the same. So if you did decide you wanted to go with a couple of T5's (or VHO) there just enough room with the Lumenmax reflectors. They are more expensive than the Lumenarcs but I needed the couple of inches saved and they are very nice reflectors.

12/05/2007, 08:10 PM	#1
giants4pc Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: connecticut Posts: 1,699	looking to downgrade lighting from MH to t-5 - question I want to sell my few SPS frags and colonies and transform my 90 into a ricordea and zoo tank. Current lighting: 2 x 175 watt MH 15k Iwasaki supplemented with 2 x 96 watt PC actinic Thinking about: Nova extreme 216 watt T-5 I am really doing this to lower electricity costs. Will this make a big enough dent on my electric bill yet still be adequate for rics and zoos?

12/05/2007, 08:40 PM	#3
crumbletop Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 4,718	That would be fine. It might even be too much light for rics and zoos. Not so much the zoos but the rics don't usually like tons of light. __________________ "Misers get up early in the morning; and burglars, I am informed, get up the night before." - GK Chesterton Current Tank Info: 90 gallon AGA RR. 20 gal sump. 6x54W T5. AquaController Jr.

12/05/2007, 08:57 PM	#6
crumbletop Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 4,718	mine hide unless there is shade. __________________ "Misers get up early in the morning; and burglars, I am informed, get up the night before." - GK Chesterton Current Tank Info: 90 gallon AGA RR. 20 gal sump. 6x54W T5. AquaController Jr.

12/06/2007, 09:14 AM	#11
GSMguy Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Northern New Mexico Posts: 17,420	dont you mean UPGRADE??????? __________________ 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.

12/05/2007, 08:18 PM	#2
pjf Premium Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 2,954	My recommendation is a T5 fixture with individual parabolic reflectors for each tube.

12/05/2007, 08:44 PM	#4
luke33 Moved On Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Indiana Posts: 8,375	I'd say get a 6x54w tek light and keep zoo's and ric's towards the bottom and keep your sps in the middle or top. You can have the best of both worlds. And imo your not downgrading with t5's. Here in IN it wouldn't make much of a difference in electricity cost.

12/05/2007, 10:33 PM	#7
barjam Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,695	Maybe you could ditch the PCs and go with bluer 175s?

12/05/2007, 11:48 PM	#8
ganjero saiperchémibatteilcorazon Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 4,027	you mean upgrade to T5. Get something with individual reflectors.

12/06/2007, 02:00 AM	#9
Reef Sponger Moved On Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: TX/USA Posts: 696	You can easily keep rics, zoos, lps and some sps under 4x54w T5HO Teklights. They have the individual reflectors. Need to keep the rics partially shadowed and SPS near the top.

12/06/2007, 09:01 AM	#10
barjam Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,695	Are you sure you want to get rid of the shimmer though? I am getting ready to go MH because the T5s in my tank just don't do it for me visually.

12/06/2007, 11:53 AM	#12
DarG Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 5,515	No, an upgrade would be ditching the PC's for T5's and keeping the halides. Halide + T5 is an upgrade I think the OP means downgrade in the sense of power consumption. Obviously, going from 542 watts down to 216 watts will cut energy use some but 326 watts less is not going to make a huge dent in the electric bill. Every little bit helps though and as a side benefit it could help some with temperature issues if you are having any in your tank. Could also decrease chiller use some if you happened to be using a chiller. That in turn could also help lower the electric bill some. Personally, I couldnt bear losing the halide shimmer and that "crisp" character that halide gives that I dont think can be described without seeing it, and that I never quite had with VHO or T5 alone. But that's just my individual perspective.

12/06/2007, 12:06 PM	#13
BeanAnimal Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 20,772	Lets look at some math here. In connecticut, electricty averages about $0.15 a kWh. Lets assume a 10 hour a day photoperiod. We will also assume that 300 watts are being saved with the lighting downgrade. That equates to 3 kWh per day of savings. So you save about 45 cents a day or around $165 per year. The Nova 4 lamp fixture is about $250 shipped. So it will take you almost 1.5 years to break even. BUT... that fixture does not use individual SLR reflectors. So you are wasting large portion of the light. You would be much better off with a fixture that uses SLRs.

12/06/2007, 12:21 PM	#14
DarG Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 5,515	If you do decide on the Nova fixture, consider going with the new Nova Pro. It's 6 bulbs instead of 4 but the reflectors are upgraded. They still arent true individual reflectors but the reflective material is bent to form a reflector for each lamp. The standard Nova extremes just use a flat reflective sheet shared by all the bulbs. The pricing is still good on the new Pros.

12/06/2007, 09:18 PM	#15
giants4pc Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: connecticut Posts: 1,699	All good suggestions. Here's another if I do assume to keep my setup and change the bulbs. My current 15k's are approaching a year old. I saw the exact setup I have with the same lighting with 20k XM's. It looked much nicer. My reflectors may be an issue as well. I have ones from Hellolights. Everyone talks about lumenarcs. Are they significantly better?

12/06/2007, 09:24 PM	#16
BeanAnimal Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 20,772	They are MUCH better. You will get nearly twice the light into the tank.

12/07/2007, 10:06 AM	#17
DarG Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 5,515	I use two Lumenmax 3 DE reflectors over a 90 gallon with 1 T5 in front and 1 T5 in back of the reflectors. Everything is mounted on an open aluminum light frame/rack. I chose the Lumenmax over the small Lumenarc DE reflectors because they are little bit narrower and they allowed me to fit the T5's in front and behind the reflectors on the rack. The Lumenmax reflectors share a similiar design to the Lumenarcs and the peformance is the same. So if you did decide you wanted to go with a couple of T5's (or VHO) there just enough room with the Lumenmax reflectors. They are more expensive than the Lumenarcs but I needed the couple of inches saved and they are very nice reflectors.