I have read about it but can't grasp the differences. How many watts T-5 would be equivalent to 192 watts power compacts. I just want some lights that will support macroalgae and mushrooms in my 46 gal tank.
So far everything I've read you should have 2 or more watts per gallon of water in your tank. So if you have a 46g tank you need a minimum of 92 watts of lighting. Depending on the size (height) you may want more. You really should have more than that for the size of tank you have. Now the difference in the two lights is the design and size. You probably won't find a 192w power compact but you can get enough of them to make 192w. Don't forget the Actinic lights either. Each light has it's own wattage. Add them all together when you are done and that's what you have.
95g Cracked (Hopefully fixable some day)
10g Guppy tank
2.5g tank with Indian Dwarf Puffers
24g Aquapod Reef tank (Probably going to be sold)
55g Reef :D
Your 2x96w PC's are 3' in length.A 2x39w T5 setup is also 3' in length.What makes T5's better than PC's are the longer bulb life and the small size of the bulb.This small size allows for an efficient parabolic reflector that maximizes the light output/penetration of the T5 bulb.So,a 2x39w T5 setup with individual reflectors would be better than your 2x96w PC's.
A 46 is a 2 foot deep tank. You need lots of light to be able to grow corals in a tank that deep (Or you stack everything up high). The other advantage of T5s is the size. I do not agree that 2, 39 watt lights are better than 2, 96 watt lights. If the parabolic reflector puts 100% of the light into the water, that is still only 39W, on the PC, with a basic reflector, you would have to be at 40% of the light making it into the water to be at 39W.
As I said, the advantage of T5s is size. On your 46, you will not be able to mount any more that 2 PC bulbs. With T5, you may be able to mount as many as 4 (Bowfronts are hard to figure, because the tank is only 3 foot wide for 8 - 10 inches.
At 4x39 = 156 vs 2x96= 192, you can really start looking at the bulblife, as a major factor in which is better for your system.
A 46 is a 2 foot deep tank. You need lots of light to be able to grow corals in a tank that deep (Or you stack everything up high). The other advantage of T5s is the size. I do not agree that 2, 39 watt lights are better than 2, 96 watt lights. If the parabolic reflector puts 100% of the light into the water, that is still only 39W, on the PC, with a basic reflector, you would have to be at 40% of the light making it into the water to be at 39W.
As I said, the advantage of T5s is size. On your 46, you will not be able to mount any more that 2 PC bulbs. With T5, you may be able to mount as many as 4 (Bowfronts are hard to figure, because the tank is only 3 foot wide for 8 - 10 inches.
At 4x39 = 156 vs 2x96= 192, you can really start looking at the bulblife, as a major factor in which is better for your system.
Robert
You cannot determine light output on watts.Wattage is just the amount of electricity used by the light.It has nothing to do with how much light is being produced.If you cant understand why 2x39w T5's w/SLR's can produce more output than a 2x96w PC setup,then this info should really leave you confused.My 4x54w T5/Ic660 setup puts out 33% more output at 19" depth than a 2x250MH setup.The 4 x24w T5/IC660 setup i just built for Tracy puts out the same amount of light as a 250MH.
Chris makes some valid points,although with the cost of PC bulbs($30) -vs- T5's($13-$21) and the fact that he only wants low-light corals,the 2x39w T5 setup will be perfect.I recently built/installed this same lighting setup in my friends 65gal(3'Lx18"Wx24" deep).He grew LPS/shrooms,and even a RBTA with them.
As much as much as I would hate to keep someone from moving up and away from a pc light, why would you need to change to a t-5 for macro algae and mushrooms? If you were planning on growing some corals like sps or zoos, rics or anything needing intense light I can see the jump up.
Now here is where I disagree with the benefit of using a 96 watt PC, you will never get the penetration of light that the t-5 and reflector will give, even though it may be more wattage(PC), the penetration intensity is hardly what you need to sustain any type of light loving coral below say 12" and I think I am being generous with that estimation. Having said that you will not get 96 w of pc to the bottom of the tank, with the t-5 you surely will be getting per watt more percentage at a lower level in the tank and it will cover more area as well. And I will agree that the t-5 bulbs will last longer, without having been overdriven you should get a solid 18 months out of your bulbs,if they are overdriven maybe a bit over a year.
i agree with everything Chris just said. especially this ...
As much as much as I would hate to keep someone from moving up and away from a pc light, why would you need to change to a t-5 for macro algae and mushrooms? If you were planning on growing some corals like sps or zoos, rics or anything needing intense light I can see the jump up.
Now here is where I disagree with the benefit of using a 96 watt PC, you will never get the penetration of light that the t-5 and reflector will give, even though it may be more wattage(PC), the penetration intensity is hardly what you need to sustain any type of light loving coral below say 12" and I think I am being generous with that estimation. Having said that you will not get 96 w of pc to the bottom of the tank, with the t-5 you surely will be getting per watt more percentage at a lower level in the tank and it will cover more area as well. And I will agree that the t-5 bulbs will last longer, without having been overdriven you should get a solid 18 months out of your bulbs,if they are overdriven maybe a bit over a year.
T-5 vs power compact
CR Member
CR Member
Originally Posted by harmanrk
CR Member
CR Member
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote