250 HQI vs 400W 10K, any solid data available?

[Anonymous]

All I have is this
spectral analisis of MH lamps

I am not sure if it has what you are looking for, but I hope it helps.

B

 

[THillson]

Can anyone point me to solid data on the German 250W HQI bulbs. I'm thinking of adding either one of these or another 400W'er to my tank. I've seen the 250W HQI on a few tanks and they look great. However, if the output is far below a 400W 10K then I'm sticking with them. TIA

[ December 02, 2001: Message edited by: THillson ]</p>

 

[THillson]

Thanks, Iron

I didn't know the 2002 MRF was out. I'll have to get a copy.

 

[Iron]

if you look at Marine Fish and reef 2002. there a new lighting testby Sanjay. The 400w have lest par but peak out double the light in the blue range. the hqi has more par cuz in the yello,orange red range theres more light. 400w 10k hardly any. So theres more than just par. Iwaski has alot of par alot of blue/violet. more than some 10k but alot of the other colors as well. So par isn't everything but daylight sun is 5.5k. Makes it hard to choose bulbs iwaski or ushio. I use Iwaski but may try ushio. Anyway the mag is worth a look.

 

[golfish]

I use two 250 watt double ended HQI's on my 4 foot 150 gal reef. I also use a 400 watt Iwasaki. I agree with Brad, I also think this maybe the reason double ended HQI's are said to put out more light then most 400 watt bulbs. The light from the mini pendants are concentrated in a smaller area.

Mark

 

[Brad Ward]

Hi Todd,

Just a caveat to the 250 HQI'S. The fixtures that are available in the hobby tend to be very compact and tend to be more like spotlights. Depending on the area you are lighting, they might be better on smaller tanks or on accenting a certain area in the tank than larger reflectors associated with 400 watt moguls. There are commercial fixtures available that will cast a larger footprint on the market but they are pricey, and you lose a lot of usable intensity the further you get away from the water/air interface.

Brad Ward

 

[Anonymous]

Iron, I do believe we are talking German 10K's here, NOT the Blueline, or ALS or any of the other blue bulbs on the market which IMO are POS and should be avoided.

 

[Iron]

250w 10k hqi put out more par than 400w10k. 250w hqi double end AB=110.9 but @23par in the violet ,17 par in the blue the rest is green -red. The 400w blueline 79par doesn't separate par but mostly all the light was in the blue range =SI 0.80 while the 250 was 0.45. So if your striving to get alot of blue the 400w has alot more.FWI the new Iwaski 250w had 130par had @ 17par violet and 22-23 par blue restgreen-red. The iwaski had more in the yellow and green only @5 par each and a couple more in the other colors to get to 130. Makes me wonder why they aren't as blue as the 250hqi when they had almost the same color range?? The book is worth reading. IMO But the test is only off 1 bulb this is why there could be different ## on different test. =20% error from what the author said. the test on the 400w wasn't hqi ballast either.So I belive the 400w will give you more punch

[ December 04, 2001: Message edited by: Iron ]</p>

 

[Iron]

The 250w was the double end and the 400w was the blueline = bulbs tested. we know ushio puts out more but there weren't any # in the 2002 test from sanjay. They measured ushio in the 2001 but measued differenly. these were just ideas= # to look at

 

[THillson]

I did get a copy of MF&R 2002. I wish Sanjay had looked at the 250W HQI, not the 150W HQI. It was interesting to see that the 150 HQI in a reflector out did a "naked" (no reflector) 400 W Iwasaki. Now what I want is the Iwasaki in that reflector!

Iron, the numbers you quoted were for a single ended non-HQI 250W bulb. The article was a bit hard to follow and I wish he would have included the numbers from last years test as well for even a broader comparison. I'm going to have to find last years mag and look up those numbers. I hope the methodology was kept consistent.

Has anyone seen the new Iwasaki mentioned in the article? Going from a CCT of 6535 to 7660 should have removed the yellowish look they had. The PPFD did drop 13 points though. I'd like to try two of the new 400W Iwasaki with 440 W of actinic. That should beat the pants off of 10K MH for coral growth and look good.

 

[Iron]

Your right I missed that. It blended together to me. The 150w hqi double end put out 246 par But that was tested with a reflector and without a uv shield. He also says thats more than the 400w Iwaski without a reflector. But using a reflector increased the bulbs 50-75% So even without the proper data seems like the 250w hqi would be a good choice if you don't need the spread. The least you will do is save electricity. But it depends on how much you will lose using a uv shied??