Iwasaki 6500k: NO or VHO actinics?

[kwirky]

I'll be running dual 250w Iwasaki 6500k bulbs in my 120g tank I'm getting together (48x24x24). They'll be supplemented by two 36" 39W T5 actinics.

But the question is, the EYE ballasts are on backorder from J&L Aquatics.

How much more "optimal" is it to run Iwasaki's on the PFO EYE ballasts compared to the PFO TAR ballasts? Does it affect bulb life, light output, colour spectrum? Should I just place my order and wait until they get the EYE ballasts?

 

[Douglas S Lehman]

Hello
I'd wait for the M37 EYE ballasts as the are much better at powering up Iwasaki 65K bulbs. I have both ballasts (EYE, M58) and the Iwasaki's burn whiter with more PAR using the EYE37 set up. Iwasaki's are actually mercury vapor bulbs, and the M37 is the correct ballast to use (MV). The real advantage is, they can be used for 18+ months with little PAR loss!
Add a pair of actinics and your good to go...

 

[kwirky]

what kind of wattage of actinics would I need to match dual 250w iwasaki's? the tank's 48x24x24 and I aim for sps and anemones in the future.

I was thinking in the mean time, to go with two tubes of NO 48" Actinic-03, then when I need more than 5w/gallon of lighting, upgrade to an icecap ballast and get a full set of 110w's

 

[Len]

Aim for four 110W IMO. But it's subjective; I find the Iwasaki very yellow and require lots of actinics to balance them out. NO bulbs won't do much; it'll get washed out by the halides.

 

[Anonymous]

I would go VHO also for the reasons Len stated. Try 2 and if you do not like it you can always add 1 or 2 more.