power usage mh vs. power compact - Page 2

Lake75 · 08/24/2006, 09:53 AM

I would say 2x175W is good enough. 2x250W is OK, but 400 is definitely overkill. I use 10K 175W MH on my 75 (20" deep) and I'm having difficulties in keeping soft corals and mushrooms (as Rich said: "I burn the crap out of everything"). I do have light-loving SPS and a crocea clam in my tank. I place them in the upper portion and they're doing abosultely OK. So, if you want to keep a mix of softies, LPS, SPS, and clams, I say 175s with actinics are good enough and also fairly fleasible. If you want to keep mainly SPS and clams, then 250s are the way to go.

gguertin · 08/24/2006, 10:47 AM

ok well I am in the midwest and am relocating to the middle of nowhere fargo next week so I am sure I will be at the lower number anyway.

I am confused as far as what bulbs now though are you saying that 2x250 are too much light? or only with the actinics? I think simulating a sunrise option is cool and I have the actinic's and pc already so this option would be easy to do? What is the best situation for the fish and coral? would 10000 and actinics be better then the 14000? or 2 175 instead of 2 250? I have 2 timers already.

jdieck · 08/24/2006, 11:16 AM

2 250 watters on 10 K might be too much if you plan to have other than sps and clams 2 250 14 or 20 K (without actinics) will be OK for a mixed tank as the higher the Kelvin normally there is lower light intensity (PAR).
In general for flexibility in the kind of tank you would like to have (It is always nice to mix some mushrooms and wavy LPS corals) you will be better off with the actinics and two 175 watters 10 K
The other advantage is that with that combination lowers your increase in power consumption.

RichConley · 08/24/2006, 11:17 AM

Its not that the actinics are too much par, its the 2x250 10Ks that are pushing it. Run 2x14Ks with actinics if you want. 2x10Ks are just a TON of light though.

gguertin · 08/24/2006, 11:29 AM

so 2x175 10000 with actinic. or 2x14k which is better? is it just preference? I have always had the 10k in my pc so I am not sure what reason there would be for changing?

jdieck · 08/24/2006, 11:39 AM

10K metal halide without supplementation might be on the white yellow for your likeing, in addition on shallower tanks the blue range of the spectrum better simulates the light spectrum at deeper water. So you can go with 10K plus actinics to fill in the blue spectrum gap left by 10K or use 14K or 20K which already contain a higher portion of blue spectrum.
In general corals under 10 K grow faster but turn pale compared with corals under 14K and 20K which grow slower but with deeper coloration. A combination of 10K (intensity adjusted not to exceed the requirment of PAR) plus actinics is also a means to try get the good of both worlds.
In addition actinics increase the fluorecense of some species, specially the red and greens that can really glow.

gguertin · 08/24/2006, 11:46 AM

well who doesnt want color? so from what you said I am taking 2 250 watt 14k with my pc with actinics for sunrise and sunset? Is that the best possible situation without adding more lighting?

Do you think i will need 175 14k or 250 14k
the actinics would just be sunrise and sunset unless you think I would need more I could always mess with one set on one off and see how it changes the color too.

jdieck · 08/24/2006, 12:59 PM

My specific proposal would be 2 175 watt MH 10K plus 4 65w PC actinics for supplementation and rise and dawn effect.
Who else vote for this?

gguertin · 08/24/2006, 02:41 PM

alright well thats cheaper I think too and I have the bulbs I would be using old actinics but between the 4 that should do wouldnt you think. I think 2 are 6 months old and 2 are a little over a year.

gguertin · 08/24/2006, 02:43 PM

what 10k bulb is best? under 100 preferably the 50=70 a piece would be best? and what ballast?

Are you sure 2x175 is enough? I keep hearing people talk about 400 watt bulbs and much larger setups?

Lake75 · 08/24/2006, 03:10 PM

I also vote for the "2x175W 10K plus actinics".

Forget about how other people are tallking about 400W bulbs. It's all about your own interest. Again, if you don't have a deep tank (> 24") and you want to keep mainly LPS and softies (with a few SPS or clams), then you have no strong reason to use the powerful beasts.

jdieck · 08/24/2006, 04:58 PM

I started my 225 gal tank 30" deep with 175's, later one I got the hipe and switched to 400w and I am still trying to lower the intensity, rised the hood, changed to 20K's and still too much.
The best 10K performance wise I ever had is the Ushio although some people complain it is not white enough. XMs are also one of the most popular and cheaper.
Ballast wise I am biased toward electronic ballasts for the flexibility they provide in selection of any type of bulb (Pulse or probe) and because of the low heat generation and less weight, For 175 either Hamiltons (made by Advance) or IceCaps will be my choice.
If you go for magnetics you need to select the bulb first as different bulbs may require different ballast types.
On your used PCs I will keep the 6 Mo. old but the one year olds are due for replacement, you do not notice how deteriorated they become until you replace them.

gguertin · 08/25/2006, 02:42 PM

sounds great I will go with the 2 x175 10000k and probably ice cap ballasts thank you for all the help!

jdieck · 08/25/2006, 03:08 PM

David Grigor · 08/25/2006, 03:36 PM

For a 75g community tank with mostly LPS/Softies and a few sps/acropora, 175Wers will be fine. However, when you start getting seriously into SPS /Acropora, 175W may work but most likely your corals are not going to get the intensity to really show them off. I've had pretty much all MH over the years from 150W single ended up to 400w including the double ended ( except for 400W de ). I can definately say without question that some of your SPS/Acropora currently under 175W that you think look good now will change some much ( mostly for the better ) under higher wattage MH that you won't even recognize the coral.

Whenever you want to step up to higher K bulbs, you really need the higher wattage MH to help compensate for the intensity loss. So if your ever considering higher than 10K bulbs best to step up in wattage. Also, higher K bulbs tend to be more friendly with LPS/Softies so you can still keep them without any major issues when using higher K bulb. So no 250W or 400W is not too much when dealing with higher K bulbs. Definately if sticking with 10K bulbs there is a trade off between acropora improvements and detriment to some LPS/softies.

Unfortanately, the original thread owner really doens't know what he/she wants or just how serious into Acropora they find themselves getting into years from now as reefkeeping experience grows. There are quite a few tradeoffs and no one lighting solution is a catch all for everything as the thread owner is looking for. If there was, we all would have it wound't we.....

But from my 11 years of experience with Mh goes, If I had to pick one bulb that is most friendly with a wide variety of corals from the most demanding acropora down do low light LPS/softies, it would be the 400W 20K XMs ( and/or Radiums ) providing heat and electricity is a non-issue.

gguertin · 08/26/2006, 01:17 AM

heat isnt an issue I am getting a chiller and elec. seems not to be an issue since it is not near as bad as I thought it was going to be. If I go to a higher k bulb I would go up in watts as stated earlier. Thanks for the help guys.

08/24/2006, 11:16 AM	#28
jdieck Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Maumee, OH Posts: 15,673	2 250 watters on 10 K might be too much if you plan to have other than sps and clams 2 250 14 or 20 K (without actinics) will be OK for a mixed tank as the higher the Kelvin normally there is lower light intensity (PAR). In general for flexibility in the kind of tank you would like to have (It is always nice to mix some mushrooms and wavy LPS corals) you will be better off with the actinics and two 175 watters 10 K The other advantage is that with that combination lowers your increase in power consumption. __________________ Did I write what I wrote? What the heck am I talking about! Well..... Nevermind. Current Tank Info: 225 gal reef, DSB, 40 g sump w/ LRT100 return, 37 g pre-sump, 3 MH 250 W 15K, 4 96 W PC dual actinic,ETS 1500 Skim.w/LRT70, 20 lb Ca R., 40 W UV, 1/3 HP chiller, two 350 W Htrs, Neptune II Cont., 330 P LR/ 330 P LS. 55 gal Refugium

08/24/2006, 11:17 AM	#29
RichConley Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC Posts: 9,908	Its not that the actinics are too much par, its the 2x250 10Ks that are pushing it. Run 2x14Ks with actinics if you want. 2x10Ks are just a TON of light though. __________________ NO TANKS!!!

08/24/2006, 11:39 AM	#31
jdieck Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Maumee, OH Posts: 15,673	10K metal halide without supplementation might be on the white yellow for your likeing, in addition on shallower tanks the blue range of the spectrum better simulates the light spectrum at deeper water. So you can go with 10K plus actinics to fill in the blue spectrum gap left by 10K or use 14K or 20K which already contain a higher portion of blue spectrum. In general corals under 10 K grow faster but turn pale compared with corals under 14K and 20K which grow slower but with deeper coloration. A combination of 10K (intensity adjusted not to exceed the requirment of PAR) plus actinics is also a means to try get the good of both worlds. In addition actinics increase the fluorecense of some species, specially the red and greens that can really glow. __________________ Did I write what I wrote? What the heck am I talking about! Well..... Nevermind. Current Tank Info: 225 gal reef, DSB, 40 g sump w/ LRT100 return, 37 g pre-sump, 3 MH 250 W 15K, 4 96 W PC dual actinic,ETS 1500 Skim.w/LRT70, 20 lb Ca R., 40 W UV, 1/3 HP chiller, two 350 W Htrs, Neptune II Cont., 330 P LR/ 330 P LS. 55 gal Refugium

08/24/2006, 12:59 PM	#33
jdieck Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Maumee, OH Posts: 15,673	My specific proposal would be 2 175 watt MH 10K plus 4 65w PC actinics for supplementation and rise and dawn effect. Who else vote for this? __________________ Did I write what I wrote? What the heck am I talking about! Well..... Nevermind. Current Tank Info: 225 gal reef, DSB, 40 g sump w/ LRT100 return, 37 g pre-sump, 3 MH 250 W 15K, 4 96 W PC dual actinic,ETS 1500 Skim.w/LRT70, 20 lb Ca R., 40 W UV, 1/3 HP chiller, two 350 W Htrs, Neptune II Cont., 330 P LR/ 330 P LS. 55 gal Refugium

08/24/2006, 04:58 PM	#37
jdieck Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Maumee, OH Posts: 15,673	I started my 225 gal tank 30" deep with 175's, later one I got the hipe and switched to 400w and I am still trying to lower the intensity, rised the hood, changed to 20K's and still too much. The best 10K performance wise I ever had is the Ushio although some people complain it is not white enough. XMs are also one of the most popular and cheaper. Ballast wise I am biased toward electronic ballasts for the flexibility they provide in selection of any type of bulb (Pulse or probe) and because of the low heat generation and less weight, For 175 either Hamiltons (made by Advance) or IceCaps will be my choice. If you go for magnetics you need to select the bulb first as different bulbs may require different ballast types. On your used PCs I will keep the 6 Mo. old but the one year olds are due for replacement, you do not notice how deteriorated they become until you replace them. __________________ Did I write what I wrote? What the heck am I talking about! Well..... Nevermind. Current Tank Info: 225 gal reef, DSB, 40 g sump w/ LRT100 return, 37 g pre-sump, 3 MH 250 W 15K, 4 96 W PC dual actinic,ETS 1500 Skim.w/LRT70, 20 lb Ca R., 40 W UV, 1/3 HP chiller, two 350 W Htrs, Neptune II Cont., 330 P LR/ 330 P LS. 55 gal Refugium

08/24/2006, 09:53 AM	#26
Lake75 Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 158	I would say 2x175W is good enough. 2x250W is OK, but 400 is definitely overkill. I use 10K 175W MH on my 75 (20" deep) and I'm having difficulties in keeping soft corals and mushrooms (as Rich said: "I burn the crap out of everything"). I do have light-loving SPS and a crocea clam in my tank. I place them in the upper portion and they're doing abosultely OK. So, if you want to keep a mix of softies, LPS, SPS, and clams, I say 175s with actinics are good enough and also fairly fleasible. If you want to keep mainly SPS and clams, then 250s are the way to go.

08/24/2006, 10:47 AM	#27
gguertin Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 766	ok well I am in the midwest and am relocating to the middle of nowhere fargo next week so I am sure I will be at the lower number anyway. I am confused as far as what bulbs now though are you saying that 2x250 are too much light? or only with the actinics? I think simulating a sunrise option is cool and I have the actinic's and pc already so this option would be easy to do? What is the best situation for the fish and coral? would 10000 and actinics be better then the 14000? or 2 175 instead of 2 250? I have 2 timers already.

08/24/2006, 11:29 AM	#30
gguertin Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 766	so 2x175 10000 with actinic. or 2x14k which is better? is it just preference? I have always had the 10k in my pc so I am not sure what reason there would be for changing?

08/24/2006, 11:46 AM	#32
gguertin Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 766	well who doesnt want color? so from what you said I am taking 2 250 watt 14k with my pc with actinics for sunrise and sunset? Is that the best possible situation without adding more lighting? Do you think i will need 175 14k or 250 14k the actinics would just be sunrise and sunset unless you think I would need more I could always mess with one set on one off and see how it changes the color too.

08/24/2006, 02:41 PM	#34
gguertin Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 766	alright well thats cheaper I think too and I have the bulbs I would be using old actinics but between the 4 that should do wouldnt you think. I think 2 are 6 months old and 2 are a little over a year.

08/24/2006, 02:43 PM	#35
gguertin Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 766	what 10k bulb is best? under 100 preferably the 50=70 a piece would be best? and what ballast? Are you sure 2x175 is enough? I keep hearing people talk about 400 watt bulbs and much larger setups?

08/24/2006, 03:10 PM	#36
Lake75 Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 158	I also vote for the "2x175W 10K plus actinics". Forget about how other people are tallking about 400W bulbs. It's all about your own interest. Again, if you don't have a deep tank (> 24") and you want to keep mainly LPS and softies (with a few SPS or clams), then you have no strong reason to use the powerful beasts.

08/25/2006, 02:42 PM	#38
gguertin Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 766	sounds great I will go with the 2 x175 10000k and probably ice cap ballasts thank you for all the help!

08/25/2006, 03:08 PM	#39
jdieck Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Maumee, OH Posts: 15,673	__________________ Did I write what I wrote? What the heck am I talking about! Well..... Nevermind. Current Tank Info: 225 gal reef, DSB, 40 g sump w/ LRT100 return, 37 g pre-sump, 3 MH 250 W 15K, 4 96 W PC dual actinic,ETS 1500 Skim.w/LRT70, 20 lb Ca R., 40 W UV, 1/3 HP chiller, two 350 W Htrs, Neptune II Cont., 330 P LR/ 330 P LS. 55 gal Refugium

08/25/2006, 03:36 PM	#40
David Grigor Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2000 Location: Brooklyn Center, MN USA Posts: 4,951	For a 75g community tank with mostly LPS/Softies and a few sps/acropora, 175Wers will be fine. However, when you start getting seriously into SPS /Acropora, 175W may work but most likely your corals are not going to get the intensity to really show them off. I've had pretty much all MH over the years from 150W single ended up to 400w including the double ended ( except for 400W de ). I can definately say without question that some of your SPS/Acropora currently under 175W that you think look good now will change some much ( mostly for the better ) under higher wattage MH that you won't even recognize the coral. Whenever you want to step up to higher K bulbs, you really need the higher wattage MH to help compensate for the intensity loss. So if your ever considering higher than 10K bulbs best to step up in wattage. Also, higher K bulbs tend to be more friendly with LPS/Softies so you can still keep them without any major issues when using higher K bulb. So no 250W or 400W is not too much when dealing with higher K bulbs. Definately if sticking with 10K bulbs there is a trade off between acropora improvements and detriment to some LPS/softies. Unfortanately, the original thread owner really doens't know what he/she wants or just how serious into Acropora they find themselves getting into years from now as reefkeeping experience grows. There are quite a few tradeoffs and no one lighting solution is a catch all for everything as the thread owner is looking for. If there was, we all would have it wound't we..... But from my 11 years of experience with Mh goes, If I had to pick one bulb that is most friendly with a wide variety of corals from the most demanding acropora down do low light LPS/softies, it would be the 400W 20K XMs ( and/or Radiums ) providing heat and electricity is a non-issue. __________________ Neptune Systems 2016 Marine Aquarium Hobbyist of the Year Current Tank Info: 180g mixed reef show tank Last edited by David Grigor; 08/25/2006 at 03:47 PM.

08/26/2006, 01:17 AM	#41
gguertin Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 766	heat isnt an issue I am getting a chiller and elec. seems not to be an issue since it is not near as bad as I thought it was going to be. If I go to a higher k bulb I would go up in watts as stated earlier. Thanks for the help guys.