Ace25's 75G Build Thread
- Thread starter Ace25
- Start date
AquaMaxx 14k 250w PAR Results (Note: NEW Bulb, 15 minute warmup then tested)
1. AquaMaxx 14k - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line.
2. AquaMaxx 14k + 4 24w ATI Blue+ Actinics - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line
3. AquaMaxx 14k - 4" under water line
4. AquaMaxx 14k + 4 24w ATI Actinic Blue+ Actinics, 4" under water line
1. AquaMaxx 14k - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line.
2. AquaMaxx 14k + 4 24w ATI Blue+ Actinics - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line
3. AquaMaxx 14k - 4" under water line
4. AquaMaxx 14k + 4 24w ATI Actinic Blue+ Actinics, 4" under water line
Phoenix 14k 250w SE PAR Results
1. Phoenix 14k - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line.
2. Phoenix 14k + 4 24w ATI Blue+ Actinics - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line
3. Phoenix 14k - 4" under water line
4. Phoenix 14k + 4 24w ATI Actinic Blue+ Actinics, 4" under water line
1. Phoenix 14k - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line.
2. Phoenix 14k + 4 24w ATI Blue+ Actinics - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line
3. Phoenix 14k - 4" under water line
4. Phoenix 14k + 4 24w ATI Actinic Blue+ Actinics, 4" under water line
XM 10k 250w SE PAR Results
1. XM 10k - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line.
2. XM 10k + 4 24w ATI Blue+ Actinics - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line
3. XM 10k - 4" under water line
4. XM 10k + 4 24w ATI Actinic Blue+ Actinics, 4" under water line
1. XM 10k - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line.
2. XM 10k + 4 24w ATI Blue+ Actinics - 14" below bulb, 2" above water line
3. XM 10k - 4" under water line
4. XM 10k + 4 24w ATI Actinic Blue+ Actinics, 4" under water line
So, quick recap without the Pictures. + means actinics, - means without. A=Above water, B= 4" Below.
A XM10k - 804
A XM10k + 975
B XM10k - 382
B XM10k + 546
A Phoenix 14k - 440
A Phoenix 14k + 594
B Phoenix 14k - 191
B Phoenix 14k + 355
A AquaMaxx 14k - 406
A AquaMaxx 14k + 556
B AquaMaxx 14k - 168
B AquaMaxx 14k + 333
A Radium 20k - 475
A Radium 20k + 614
B Radium 20k - 200
B Radium 20k + 351
My personal opinion, I like the Phoenix the best. I think it brings out the colors the most in the corals. The AquaMaxx looked almost identical to the Radium. To be fair, I am going to run the AquaMaxx for the next 3 weeks to match the usage on the Phoenix and then retest. I want to make sure they both have equal burn time to really get an accurate conclusion.
A XM10k - 804
A XM10k + 975
B XM10k - 382
B XM10k + 546
A Phoenix 14k - 440
A Phoenix 14k + 594
B Phoenix 14k - 191
B Phoenix 14k + 355
A AquaMaxx 14k - 406
A AquaMaxx 14k + 556
B AquaMaxx 14k - 168
B AquaMaxx 14k + 333
A Radium 20k - 475
A Radium 20k + 614
B Radium 20k - 200
B Radium 20k + 351
My personal opinion, I like the Phoenix the best. I think it brings out the colors the most in the corals. The AquaMaxx looked almost identical to the Radium. To be fair, I am going to run the AquaMaxx for the next 3 weeks to match the usage on the Phoenix and then retest. I want to make sure they both have equal burn time to really get an accurate conclusion.
Now, here is where my lighting theory comes in. Let me explain why PAR readings alone are really meaningless in the grand scheme of things. These are my findings from my own observations, and willing to let anyone who wishes to come by to verify them themselves if they wish.
So, by the above tests if we were solely looking for most PAR and that was the sole reason for growth the 3 month old XM10k would be the obvious choice. Here is the problem, looking at the bulb under a spectrometer, (please don't bash me for calling it that, I know it really doesn't compare to the real thing, but it does work pretty well after to get used to it IMO), the XM has just a small amount of blue in the bulb, no peaks at all in the blues, and large amounts of greens, yellows, orange, and a little red. My corals had stopped growing for the most part, obviously not every coral came to a complete stop, but a few did, and others really slowed down. Within the first 7 days of replacing the 3 month old XM with a Phoenix 14k I started to see quite a bit of new growth from all the white tips on corals, within 2 weeks there was visually more growth in the entire tank, and week 3 you could see some corals really starting to shoot off on certain branches. Again, if PAR=Growth, I should have had much less growth with the Phoenix from those numbers above, but I had the opposite. From looking at the Phoenix there is a very strong blue peak and well as a small green and larger orange peak. Those are just the peaks that stand out, the lights put out almost the whole spectrum, but the Phoenix leaned much more towards the blue side than the XM did, and that is why I believe it is very important to make sure you have a sufficient amount of the 440nm wavelength for corals. It isn't about overall PAR, it is about the blue side to them. Yes, you need it all for corals to be their most happy, but it is much harder to get the 440nm into the tank via just a MH as my tests show, and again, why I feel that actinic bulbs are just as important, if not more important, than the main light.
Example, underwater, the Phoenix 14k put out 191 PAR by itself at just 4" below the water. With actinics, the Phoenix put out a combined 355 PAR. Almost 2x the PAR. The above tests as well as the below tests show that the actinics are penetrating the same at that depth, both above and below they seem to add around 150PAR. As soon as the MH hits the water, the higher end wavelengths break down faster than the lower end and only the blues are left to reach the bottom. As seen with the tests, MH lights very quickly lose their PAR once they hit the water, while the actinics do not.
So, I believe actinics are just as, or possibly more important to the health of corals than the main lighting, but I do not believe either one should really be run alone. Actinics are the "Media Reactor" to your MH lights would be the best way I could put it.
If one chooses to go with just a MH bulb without actinics, say going with a 20k because of the larger blues, then they must be aware of how fast the bulbs shift in order to know when to replace them or else their 440nm is going to go down from day 1. With actinics at least you have a buffer in place to boost that area when your MH does shift spectrums over its life, and the all do.
So, by the above tests if we were solely looking for most PAR and that was the sole reason for growth the 3 month old XM10k would be the obvious choice. Here is the problem, looking at the bulb under a spectrometer, (please don't bash me for calling it that, I know it really doesn't compare to the real thing, but it does work pretty well after to get used to it IMO), the XM has just a small amount of blue in the bulb, no peaks at all in the blues, and large amounts of greens, yellows, orange, and a little red. My corals had stopped growing for the most part, obviously not every coral came to a complete stop, but a few did, and others really slowed down. Within the first 7 days of replacing the 3 month old XM with a Phoenix 14k I started to see quite a bit of new growth from all the white tips on corals, within 2 weeks there was visually more growth in the entire tank, and week 3 you could see some corals really starting to shoot off on certain branches. Again, if PAR=Growth, I should have had much less growth with the Phoenix from those numbers above, but I had the opposite. From looking at the Phoenix there is a very strong blue peak and well as a small green and larger orange peak. Those are just the peaks that stand out, the lights put out almost the whole spectrum, but the Phoenix leaned much more towards the blue side than the XM did, and that is why I believe it is very important to make sure you have a sufficient amount of the 440nm wavelength for corals. It isn't about overall PAR, it is about the blue side to them. Yes, you need it all for corals to be their most happy, but it is much harder to get the 440nm into the tank via just a MH as my tests show, and again, why I feel that actinic bulbs are just as important, if not more important, than the main light.
Example, underwater, the Phoenix 14k put out 191 PAR by itself at just 4" below the water. With actinics, the Phoenix put out a combined 355 PAR. Almost 2x the PAR. The above tests as well as the below tests show that the actinics are penetrating the same at that depth, both above and below they seem to add around 150PAR. As soon as the MH hits the water, the higher end wavelengths break down faster than the lower end and only the blues are left to reach the bottom. As seen with the tests, MH lights very quickly lose their PAR once they hit the water, while the actinics do not.
So, I believe actinics are just as, or possibly more important to the health of corals than the main lighting, but I do not believe either one should really be run alone. Actinics are the "Media Reactor" to your MH lights would be the best way I could put it.
If one chooses to go with just a MH bulb without actinics, say going with a 20k because of the larger blues, then they must be aware of how fast the bulbs shift in order to know when to replace them or else their 440nm is going to go down from day 1. With actinics at least you have a buffer in place to boost that area when your MH does shift spectrums over its life, and the all do.
Last edited:
Also, just to throw an oddball into the mix, I measured my 29G which has 6 T5HOs, various bulbs and ages, but 4 actinics and 2 daylights on it and the PAR was 250 at 4" deep.
One more pic, these are the bulbs I used in the tests. Only the Phoenix 14k (top right) didn't come in a fancy box. Here are the bulb ages, XM-3mos, Phoenix-3weeks, Radium-1week, AquaMaxx-New.
Just wanted to post some pics that Guillo1 took today. It wasn't nearly as bright out today as it was last week when we first tested them but here are a few pics.
This one is just above the water on the center brace for his aquarium. This is under the center tube, he has 3 tubes over his tank.
This is a reading at the center of the solar tube, which is I believe about 14' long to the roof.
And another reading again at the same spot, PAR definately fluctuates quite a bit in natural daylight. Also, as expected, the spectral reading was pretty even all the way across, no visible peaks, which with sunlight I guess is expected. One thing we both observed though is there is definately a lack of strong blue in the spectrum, it is there but really faint. Good thing he has 8 actinics to go with the solar tubes. We tested the spectrum with a sheet of blue cellophane over the cover and it did add considerable blue to the spectrum, but it also reduced the PAR by about 1/4. He has been fighting/dosing like crazy to get his Alk/CA/Mg up to good levels and he is about there. One great thing with his tank is he has literally 0 Nitrates, and 0.00-0.001 Phosphates from the 2 back to back tests I did with my Phosphate meter.
This one is just above the water on the center brace for his aquarium. This is under the center tube, he has 3 tubes over his tank.
This is a reading at the center of the solar tube, which is I believe about 14' long to the roof.
And another reading again at the same spot, PAR definately fluctuates quite a bit in natural daylight. Also, as expected, the spectral reading was pretty even all the way across, no visible peaks, which with sunlight I guess is expected. One thing we both observed though is there is definately a lack of strong blue in the spectrum, it is there but really faint. Good thing he has 8 actinics to go with the solar tubes. We tested the spectrum with a sheet of blue cellophane over the cover and it did add considerable blue to the spectrum, but it also reduced the PAR by about 1/4. He has been fighting/dosing like crazy to get his Alk/CA/Mg up to good levels and he is about there. One great thing with his tank is he has literally 0 Nitrates, and 0.00-0.001 Phosphates from the 2 back to back tests I did with my Phosphate meter.
