View Full Version : so two of these would be 1050W! for $70?!?!
steelhumm
02-23-2009, 3:09 PM
heres a section from the page:
• 85 watt SHO produces 5100 lumens, the equivalent of a standard 425 watt bulb while the 105 Watt produces 6300 lumens, the equivalent of a standard 525 watt bulb
• 60 Lumens per Watt
• Can be used in freshwater or marine
so 2 105 watt SHO bulbs would be the equivelant of 1050 watts? I can have like 19wpg for $70.. dat don't sound right :confused:
heres the link:
http://americanaquariumproducts.com/PowerCompact.html
phanmc
02-23-2009, 3:59 PM
I haven't played around with those lights yet but when people compare lumens to an equivalent "standard" bulb they usually mean an incandescent bulb, so you wouldn't be getting 5x the wpg.
Sploke
02-23-2009, 4:13 PM
Yes, when calculating your wpg, you need to use the actual wattage, not equivalent. So, one of the 60w ones over a 20gal would be 3wpg. These bulbs are not that great though, as a lot of energy is wasted in restrike due to the non-linear design, and lack of availability of high-efficiency reflectors.
steelhumm
02-23-2009, 4:41 PM
figured there was something that made it not as good as advertised...still was a pretty interesting read though.
icemanx23
02-23-2009, 11:11 PM
sprial bulbs cause a lot of restrike and less efficient than straight PC bulbs.
The Zigman
02-23-2009, 11:27 PM
not that great though, as a lot of energy is wasted in restrike due to the non-linear design, and lack of availability of high-efficiency reflectors.
...
sprial bulbs cause a lot of restrike and less efficient than straight PC bulbs.
...Echo!!
To the OP, those 105watt CFL wouldnt be that bad really. With that pendant type reflector, you could still grow a great deal of plants, but in the end it would probably be far cheaper to just start with T5 HO or ahsupply.com PC kits, since it would take less power for better results.