# T5HO vs. Metal Halide



## fishn00b (Jun 10, 2005)

Hey back again with another quick/stupid question. 

I am looking at lighting for the reef tank that I am building, but after realizing that I need to put 7 - 10 watts a gallon on to grow some corals, I realized that I would need a ton of wattage over the tank (I'm deciding between a 265 or 410 gallon).

Basically I just wanted to know if I would need the same amount of watts over the tank if I was using T5HO vs. Metal Halide. Many of the systems I'm looking at come with T5 bulbs rated at 24 watts. I was thinking of putting 300 watts of T5 (with different K ratings) over the 265, but is there anything I should know that T5 won't be sufficient for the reef tank? I'd much rather use this set up rather than using 2000 watts of metal halides because of the monthly electric bill. Thanks for your input.


----------



## Fishfirst (Jan 24, 2005)

its all about lumens... and penetration. How deep is the tank?


----------



## fishn00b (Jun 10, 2005)

The tank will probably be around 2 - 3 feet deep.


----------



## Damon (Jan 18, 2005)

There is a huge difference between 2 and 3 feet, especially when it comes to penetration of light.


----------



## fishn00b (Jun 10, 2005)

I realize that.

I just wanted to know if you need the same amount of watts of T5HO as you do metal halides, let's say the tank is only two feet high then.


----------



## Fishfirst (Jan 24, 2005)

I'd go with metal halides... if you don't really know the depth... can't go wrong with 400 watt mh's


----------



## Damon (Jan 18, 2005)

Couldnt agree with you more...............


----------



## fishn00b (Jun 10, 2005)

I was going to go with metal halide's orginally because of basically how effective they are. But then I realized to put that wattage over a tank of 265 gallons, would be like 40 bucks a month in just the lighting bill. 

With all the hype of T5HO, I was wondering if they were interchangable (obviously by matching spectrums and lumens) and I could get away with using less wattage.


----------



## Fishfirst (Jan 24, 2005)

eh... I've found my bill went up around $5 a month with MH's


----------



## fishn00b (Jun 10, 2005)

I've been hearing that a lot with people, but when I go to calculate it (at 10 watts per gallon) I have at least 2750 watts.

Then obviously with the little formula thats 2.75 kW x 12 hours a day x .10 cents an hour x 30 days for the month = 99 dollars....

How many watts are you running over yours?


----------



## Damon (Jan 18, 2005)

First off, you dont need that much lighting over a reef tank. The corals you want to keep will determine the amount. That old wpg rule is way off nowadays with more efficient bulbs (PC, VHO, MH). 2x400 MH with 2x110 VHO would give you more than enough light to grow just keep just about anything and thats around 4.5wpg over a 265 gallon tank.


----------



## fishn00b (Jun 10, 2005)

This is true, but then I'm still looking at over 40 dollars a month just to run the lighting .


----------



## Damon (Jan 18, 2005)

Here's an example.........
For instance 1000 watts * .024 = 24 KW
24kw/24 (hrs in a day)*10 (amount of time you run lights for)=10KW per day
10kw per day *.09 (National average) =.90
.90*30 (days)= $27.00

Thats for a 1000 watts left on 10 hrs a day for 30 days.


----------



## Fishfirst (Jan 24, 2005)

plus you never leave metal halides on for more than 5-6 hours when you've got vho's backing them up


----------



## fishn00b (Jun 10, 2005)

I see what you're saying. So if I leave the VHOs on for approximately 10 hours, I can peak out the Metal Halides for the "noon time" effect. Excellent. I'll see how this works out. Thanks a bunch guys, but I'll probably be back with more questions.


----------



## Damon (Jan 18, 2005)

And we'll be here to answer them.............


----------



## fishn00b (Jun 10, 2005)

Lol, well thank you.

I'm assuming when I do my setup, I will have one MH (400 watt) at 20,000K, and another MH (400 watt) at 6,500K... while having the two VHO (110 watt) at around 7,100K for the best color spectrum output? Would that set up be optimum for the reef?


----------



## harif87 (Jun 5, 2006)

Since your already talking about T5's i was wondering if its possible to keep LPS with around 432 watts of pure T5 lights over a 55 gallon tank? Or possibly 384 watts of PC lights...


----------



## Damon (Jan 18, 2005)

You'll have much better success with the T5 vs the Pc bulbs. While intensely stronger then N.O. they still dont have the PAR for growing light intensive corals.


----------



## Fishnewb1 (Mar 24, 2006)

harif87 said:


> Since your already talking about T5's i was wondering if its possible to keep LPS with around 432 watts of pure T5 lights over a 55 gallon tank? Or possibly 384 watts of PC lights...


yea that would be well over enough. I have 4 bulbs for like 216w over my 55 and the lps is thriving. The wattage on T-5 HO bulbs dont apply to the watts per gallon scale because of the high output and intensity. 432w would be enough for sps. I would NOT go for PC's there expencive bulbs and short life is horrible. If I were you i would get the Nova Extreme with either 4 bulbs (which i have and its great) or if you want sps i would get the 8 bulb.

http://www.drsfostersmith.com/Produ...a_Gen_Page-_-Lighting&subref=AA&N=2004+113175


----------



## balachel (Mar 30, 2009)

it all depends on what you like because i have seen some pretty big tanks with just t5ho lights that keep everything from sps to softies and everything is thriving and with the t5's you have more option of changing bulbs and getting a color temp that you really like, and with mh lights you just have the bulb and the color temp that comes in. personally i would go with t5ho lights.


----------



## justintrask (Jun 29, 2008)

this thread is from 2006.....


----------



## balachel (Mar 30, 2009)

oh i wasn't paying attention lol


----------

