4 Bulb 48" T5 Retro For Sale..NEW BULBS!

[Horace]

I have a 4x54w T5 retro kit for sale. It has 4 Icecap SLR individual reflectors (the best T5 reflectors made) and 2 triad normal drive ballasts. Each ballast runs two bulbs so you can runk dusk/dawn if you so choose. Unit is fully wired/assembled and fits perfectly inside your 48" canopy. Unit comes with a bran new(only 3 weeks old) set of D&D/Giesman bulbs (a $95 value). This unit is perfect for mid/high light corals and will be fine for most SPS in a 75g/90g aquarium. Asking $200. I prefer not to ship this item.

[ChemE]

You've got PM.

[philagothos]

I paid $250 for my 4x36" with SLS reflectors, this is one heck of a deal! I wish I had an excuse to buy this. I'm curious though, why are you selling?

[brad23]

He went MH

[fkdenton]

WHAT????

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7630719#post7630719 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by brad23
He went MH




Quiter

[hcs3]

that's a good laugh! i remember horace as being the huge fan of T5. not sure if brad is joking, or horace "saw the light," but either way, thanks for the laugh brad! :lol:

[brad23]

I wasn't jk, he chose to go with a very nice MH setup.

[philagothos]

"Saw the light"? I love my T5s and don't see any need to waste electricity with MH. Am I the only holdout for T5s in the area? I likely always will be because the MH shimmer lines give my wife a headache.

If I had a tank to use these on, I would be all over these lights. Best of luck selling them.

[fkdenton]

I am with you kevin

[hcs3]

i own a 4' ~ 4 bulb T5 enclsoure. it is 3 months old and i hope i use it no more than another week or two. mine operates alongside a 250w 14k hamilton MH and i must say the T5 is rather unattractive and annoying to look at alongside the natural-looking glow of the MH. the T5 used to be on its own aquarium and back then i thought it was at least OK. putting it alongside a MH ruined T5 for me.

[nu2reefs]

Just started my 55g back in April and haven't added any corals yet because of the lighting. Really confused on what to get, but you guys might have answered my questions.

[nu2reefs]

So I am assuming since this thread was started a few days ago that the lighting system is sold?

[hcs3]

want mine? :p

[nu2reefs]

What are you thinking about selling yours for hcs3?

[hcs3]

haha, make sure horace sold his first 'cause i don't want to highjack his thread. if his is sold, we can talk :)

[nu2reefs]

LOL...I'll see if it is, then like you said we'll talk. I just need something to start out with. BTW, did you guys see the post for the get together on the 29th of July? Also sent ya an email with some info on it...FYI.

[Horace]

Yes mine is sold...or atleast Chem says he wants it...

As far as why I switched....I switched NOT because T5 wont work for SPS because is most certainly does. However, I like the look of halides much better and that was 90% of the reason for the switch. The other part was because I have a few corals that I just have not been able to get the right color on....(my green corals turn to yellow/green). So because of that and the lack of the awesome shimmer, I switched over to 2x250w HQI 14k Phoenix in Reef Optix III reflectors. I am also using 2x54w T5 UVL Super Actinics for additional actinic pop. Tank looks awesome...I'm very pleased

[fkdenton]

I am very disapointed, The anti MH club has lost a member. And henrys review is not helping my membership drive much:D :rolleyes:

[ChemE]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7655542#post7655542 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Horace
Yes mine is sold...or atleast Chem says he wants it...

As far as why I switched....I switched NOT because T5 wont work for SPS because is most certainly does. However, I like the look of halides much better and that was 90% of the reason for the switch. The other part was because I have a few corals that I just have not been able to get the right color on....(my green corals turn to yellow/green). So because of that and the lack of the awesome shimmer, I switched over to 2x250w HQI 14k Phoenix in Reef Optix III reflectors. I am also using 2x54w T5 UVL Super Actinics for additional actinic pop. Tank looks awesome...I'm very pleased

I still want em'; hijack away.

[humbugy]

i'm using two icecap de pendants, and two ushio's 14k's hqi on icecap electetrnoic ballats, supplemented with two t5 acitnic blue +, im rather pleased, i love the shimmer, hate the heat and electric bill.

[beapeams]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7656319#post7656319 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by fkdenton
I am very disapointed, The anti MH club has lost a member. And henrys review is not helping my membership drive much:D :rolleyes:

Saw this on SLASH forum. Here is a thread that can really help your memebership drive.

http://archive.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=700454&perpage=25&pagenumber=1

This guy says he only uses T5's

[Horace]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7662268#post7662268 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by beapeams
Saw this on SLASH forum. Here is a thread that can really help your memebership drive.

http://archive.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=700454&perpage=25&pagenumber=1

This guy says he only uses T5's


This is perhaps the most well known tank in the world......

Obviously T5 works....its just a matter of preference and perspective. Both have thier strengths and weaknesses. I am not all of the sudden a T5 hater...I just like the look of a tank that shimmers with MH...plain and simple. I however dont much care for the extra heat in my tank, but that is something I am learning to deal with.

[panaboy95]

i remmemeber that you were trying to duplicate the shimmer with other things along with your t-5 i guess you never found anything that would work good enough. didn't you try some stuff with LED's.

i ended up going with MH in my tank and i love them i do need some antinics. down the road maybe i am tapped out at the time. my one year old takes most of my money.

[Horace]

Frankly there is nothing that will shimmer like halides that I know of and there is no way to duplicate it. I have never seen a tank that is lit with LED only but my guess is that even that wouldnt have as good of shimmer because of the massive amount of LEDs that would be needed and it would almost make the light evenly dispursed, similar to fluorescents. which is why they dont shimmer.

Personally, the shimmer makes the tank look more alive and more realistic. That was the #1 reason I dont have T5s anymore....if you dont care about the shimmer they are a great option.

[beapeams]

You are right about the look of MH. When I started my tank I had T5's and thought they looked great until I picked up MH. I will never go back. What that guy did with T5's is amazing but later in that post I referenced early, he even stated he was switching to MH.

[nu2reefs]

Well, I'm still looking for lights for the 55g.....the urge to move onto a bigger tank is already teasing me, but right now with the kids and the dogs (which everyone refers to as the livestock herd) makes it nearly impossible at this point and time. Did manage to find a really good deal on the imfamous aution site....80lbs. LR for $83. What's even better was he was someone from my town...no S/H. Once in a lifetime do you get lucky, and I've been really fortunate with my setup. All told, I think I have spent about $500 and that's everything including the livestock.

[ChemE]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7675655#post7675655 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by nu2reefs
Well, I'm still looking for lights for the 55g...

This is the only thing I'd consider over a 55.
http://www.dragonhome.org/~lucas/55_Lighting.PNG

To me MH over a 55 is very inefficient since you'll need at least 300 watts (2 bulbs) to cover the whole tank. I'm sure people will chime in who prefer MH, but if you go T5 this is probably the way to go.

[hcs3]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7676387#post7676387 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ChemE

To me MH over a 55 is very inefficient since you'll need at least 300 watts (2 bulbs) to cover the whole tank. I'm sure people will chime in who prefer MH, but if you go T5 this is probably the way to go. [/B]

haha, leave it to the electrical guru to consider electricity usage when deciding the proper lighting :p

really, what is the addded cost of running 2 - 175w MH versus the T5 combo you got up there? $5 per month? $20 per month? i know you can't nail it exactly but in your educated opinion, roughly what would be the monthly cost difference?

[tcottle]

Henry

I'll leave it to ChemE to nail it exactly (and he will :p ) . Obviously you do not have any appreciation of engineering sensibilities especially when it comes to efficiency .... :D

[hcs3]

Haha! None whatsoever :p

More = Better

Excess = Perfection

[ChemE]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7689783#post7689783 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tcottle
Henry

I'll leave it to ChemE to nail it exactly (and he will :p ) . Obviously you do not have any appreciation of engineering sensibilities especially when it comes to efficiency .... :D

Thanks for the vote of confidence. I'm certainly not the electrical expert though, tcottle is the electrical engineer. I just had one course on EE plus a smattering in the second semester of physics.

Anyway, here is a comparison which assumes my rate for a kWh (YMMV) and neglects ballast losses. I actually don't know what is typical for MH ballast losses but my Triad ballasts waste 6 watts per bulb. It is also worth pointing out that with 3 ballasts it is possible to get a nice sunrise/sunset effect, give the corals plenty of light, lengthen bulb lifespans, and save $1.50 a month in electrical expenses. tcottle is right about efficiency being beaten into engineers though, it tends to run in our veins.

http://www.dragonhome.org/~lucas/MH_vs_T5.PNG

[hcs3]

so your best guess is running T5 saves the hobbyist $18 per year?

honestly guys, and i ask this in all seriousness, does $18 per year really matter when it comes to the aestetics of our aquariums? if saving $18 per year actually mattered that much, why even run an aquarium to begin with?

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7676387#post7676387 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ChemE
This is the only thing I'd consider over a 55.
http://www.dragonhome.org/~lucas/55_Lighting.PNG


care to reconsider this statement after doing the math or no?

[hcs3]

oh wait, i see now.... /thud

haha, you truly are a geek about electricity :)

so the MH costs more than double per month to run.... given those same choices with a better understanding, i can *almost* see the "light," persay, but still we are talking $5 per month or $60 per year.

now if it was me, i'd run zero T5 (can you tell how much i like the lights?) and run 2x175w MH with VHO actinic and run up my electricity bill the extra $7.50 per month to have my ideal lighting setup :p

[philagothos]

Umm... 12 X $5.22 = $62.64 with non-staged it's $80.64 if they are staged. Again not a HUGE difference, but certainly a noticable one. Also, with MH you might have to supplement actinic running it up even higher.

ChemE is also only comparing to 175w halides, whereas Grim showed T5 to be comparable to 250w halides. I still think his statement is valid, but then again, I really like my T5s.

[philagothos]

Sorry about that, I was composing my response at the same time you were Henry.

And of course, one man's "ideal" setup is another man's garbage. Mine is ideal for me but you would hate it. Yours is ideal for you, but would give my wife a splitting headache every time she looked at it.

[hcs3]

no problem kevin, i read Chem's post incorrectly and didn't study the chart until after i posted my orignal thoughts.

for the record, kev, i can't say i believe Grim's numbers. 1 month ago i had a single 250w 10k XM bulb that was no less than 12 months old running alongisde my 4x48" T5 setup with 2 - 6500k and 2 - 10k bulbs. it had been running for maybe 2 weeks when i measured the T5 against the MH. my more than 1 year old 250MH simply wasted the 2 week old T5 setup in measurable light output. it wasn't scientific so i didn't post results, but it was conclusive enough for me to scuff at all those that believe T5 are more powerful than MH.

[ChemE]

Aesthetics with T5's huh?
http://www.dragonhome.org/~lucas/T5.JPG
I know Iwan's tank is exceptional, but this is what T5's can do. While my tank doesn't look as nice as his (yet!) I love the way my T5's look which incidentally is nicer than many MH reefs I've seen.

As for savings being insignificant a friend of mine has a saying that I really like: "If $60 doesn't matter to you, reach into your pocket and give it to me."

[schmoeger6]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7690399#post7690399 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by philagothos
Umm... 12 X $5.22 = $62.64 with non-staged it's $80.64 if they are staged. Again not a HUGE difference, but certainly a noticable one. Also, with MH you might have to supplement actinic running it up even higher.

ChemE is also only comparing to 175w halides, whereas Grim showed T5 to be comparable to 250w halides. I still think his statement is valid, but then again, I really like my T5s.

60 or 80 dollars over the course of a year:confused: I can't remember the last time I was at a LFS and didn't spend atleast 160 or 180 dollars or more and didn't even think twice about it.

No way I would trade my MH's to save 5 or 10 dollars a month. Heck I just finished putting a 250 MH over a 30 gal nano. :D

[brad23]

What type of T5 setup was this?

[ChemE]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7690445#post7690445 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hcs3
...for the record, kev, i can't say i believe Grim's numbers. 1 month ago i had a single 250w 10k XM bulb that was no less than 12 months old running alongisde my 4x48" T5 setup with 2 - 6500k and 2 - 10k bulbs. it had been running for maybe 2 weeks when i measured the T5 against the MH. my more than 1 year old 250MH simply wasted the 2 week old T5 setup in measurable light output. it wasn't scientific so i didn't post results, but it was conclusive enough for me to scuff at all those that believe T5 are more powerful than MH.

Really? What did you use to measure with? I'm always up for learning new things and if it turns out that T5's aren't as efficient as I think I'd sure like to know about it.

Thanks,
Chris

[Michelle L]

For me all it took was one look at MH's. It was love. Cost to operate them wasn't even in the equasion for me.

Cost to run T-5's- $4.50 per month
Cost to run MH's- $9.72 per month

Shimmer of MH's- Priceless

[ChemE]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7690480#post7690480 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by schmoeger6
60 or 80 dollars over the course of a year:confused: I can't remember the last time I was at a LFS and didn't spend atleast 160 or 180 dollars or more and didn't even think twice about it.

No way I would trade my MH's to save 5 or 10 dollars a month. Heck I just finished putting a 250 MH over a 30 gal nano. :D

Don't forget that with the extra light comes heat concerns in the summer which can also spin up the bill.

Also try to keep in mind that this is just my opinion and I'm not trying to tell everyone else that they are wrong. Everyone should do what seems most reasonable to them. I'll give you the information, you do with it what you will.

[Benny Z]

i don't know anyone that runs their halides 12 hours a day. (ok, maybe i do and just don't know it, but i'm pretty sure most people run halides 10 hrs a day or less.)

that said, i also don't know many people that run halides without supplementation.

[hcs3]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7690478#post7690478 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ChemE
Aesthetics with T5's huh?
http://www.dragonhome.org/~lucas/T5.JPG
I know Iwan's tank is exceptional, but this is what T5's can do. While my tank doesn't look as nice as his (yet!) I love the way my T5's look which incidentally is nicer than many MH reefs I've seen.

As for savings being insignificant a friend of mine has a saying that I really like: "If $60 doesn't matter to you, reach into your pocket and give it to me."

Chem,

different strokes for different folks. my tanks used to look fake like that. yes i said fake. today i won't let them look like that. some people love it, i loath it.

[hcs3]

FWIW benny i run VHO actinic 14 hours and MH 12 hours. natural reefs experience sunlight for over 14 hours a day and thus i try to do the same for my tanks.

[Horace]

I would like to make a few comments here. First off Grim's tests were not using 10k MH bulbs vs T5s....they were 14k bulbs which obviously put out no where near as much PAR as a 10k XM. Second noone ever claimed that T5 are more powerful than MH. The only argument was that T5 are a viable alternative to MH. One other thing about Grim's tests that you have to keep in mind is that for T5 to be comparable to MH in output, they must be overdriven on icecap ballasts. So if your not using an icecap ballast, and expect the T5s to be brighter than your MH then your just kidding yourself. Also something to note is that when you overdrive, your using ALOT more electricity. A 48" bulb driven by an icecap ballast will actually be running at about 80w, not 54w. If your not keeping these things in mind then any comparison between the two, power usage wise or PAR wise is simply not fair.

I think the problem is people here T5 and think ALL T5 setups, and people here MH and think ALL MH setups are the same. The fact is that pending your MH bulb choice, and which ballasts and T5 bulbs you use, you will come up with very drastically different results. I believe Grim's numbers are accurate, but that by no means indicates that any T5 setup will compare to any MH setup....Infact I dont think that T5s can even come close to hanging with MH when using a 10k bulb. That being said, I think using 10k MH looks like total ***, and I would never run them over my tank anyway. I am REALLY liking the color of my Phoenix 14k w/ T5 UVL Super Actinic supplementation.

[Horace]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7690547#post7690547 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hcs3
FWIW benny i run VHO actinic 14 hours and MH 12 hours. natural reefs experience sunlight for over 14 hours a day and thus i try to do the same for my tanks.

I would like to see some pictures of your great success using this photo period because it has been shown that running halides, (especially 10k halides) over 8-10hrs often causes bleaching of the corals. Do a bit of reading regarding photoinhibition and see what you come up with...I would also chat with some of the other big time SPS guys out there and see what you find. I think you wont find very many that run thier halides for 12 hours, even people who run 20k.

[Horace]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7690536#post7690536 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hcs3
Chem, my tanks used to look fake like that.

You say this like you have ever owned a tank that is even remotely in the same ball park as Iwan's......some how I doubt that.

[brad23]

I'm sorry henry but Iwans tank is probably one of the best looking in home tanks in the world. I've never seen SPS with those colors before.

[hcs3]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7690918#post7690918 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by brad23
I've never seen SPS with those colors before.

i think that ties in well with my above comments. thanks!

[Benny Z]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7691477#post7691477 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hcs3
i think that ties in well with my above comments. thanks!

black and white avatar.

black and white online persona.

black and white tank.

is henry color blind? :confused:

that would explain a lot. :cool:

[fkdenton]

I am a fan of T-5s but I am under no illuision that they are better than MH. Its just in my case the benifits( cheaper fixtures and bulbs, cooler, a color scheme I like better) out way the negative aspects(no acros and no shimmer). Also what I have and like (lps, rbta, easy sps) do good under them

[ChemE]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7692617#post7692617 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by fkdenton
I am a fan of T-5s but I am under no illuision that they are better than MH. Its just in my case the benifits( cheaper fixtures and bulbs, cooler, a color scheme I like better) out way the negative aspects(no acros and no shimmer). Also what I have and like (lps, rbta, easy sps) do good under them

You can absolutely grow acros under T5's.

[fkdenton]

Possibly but I probaly can not in my system. I have the 36 inch 4 bulb tek fixture on a 46 bow. My flow probaly wouldnt be enough. I killed a purple tipped acro I got in a Frag swap drawling so I wont try again probaly.

[The Grim Reefer]

Just for the record I also tested 10K halides and a 4x54 watt Ice Cap T5 system running 2 Aquablues and 2 Actinic Plus lamps. The T5's spanked the halides and had a much more pleasing color. To compare them to 14K halides would have been a more legitimate comparison. Even the normally driven T5's beat the halides. Now take a 10K XM in a PFO mini pendant on an HQI ballast and it will probably hang with the IC T5 system. It will use more power but you get shimmer lines. Of course I could put 4 sun lamps in the Ice Cap T5 system and beat the XM.

[fkdenton]

The Great Grim Reefer has spoken. All hail the king of the anti MH club.

[The Grim Reefer]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7693512#post7693512 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by fkdenton
The Great Grim Reefer has spoken. All hail the king of the anti MH club.

I am the grand wizzard of the go with what works and looks best for you club:D