Lighting ... or Correct Me if I am Wrong

[Homie]

I have been looking at the compact fluorescent lighting available
(e.g.,from all-glass: www.all-glass.com) to replace my current
standard fluorescent setup.

Now correct me if I am wrong, but it looks to me that if you have a
48" tank, for example, and you have two 55 Watt compact fluorescent
bulbs -- one on each side of the divider -- then the combined wattage
(110 wattage) is not really what the plants are getting. Instead, it
seems, that each side of the tank will receive approximately 55 watts
+ some small additional wattage indirectly from the other side of the
tank.

This seems to be less than my current setup where I have two 48" 40
watt bulbs. Here both lights are on each side of the tank and, given
an even distribution of 40 watts eminating from the bulbs, each side
would receive a total of 80 watts; arguably higher than the compact
light alternative.

Is this scenario incorrect in some way or does it make sense ?

[Ben]

Homie wrote:
> I have been looking at the compact fluorescent lighting available
> (e.g.,from all-glass: www.all-glass.com) to replace my current
> standard fluorescent setup.
>
> Now correct me if I am wrong, but it looks to me that if you have a
> 48" tank, for example, and you have two 55 Watt compact fluorescent
> bulbs -- one on each side of the divider -- then the combined wattage
> (110 wattage) is not really what the plants are getting. Instead, it
> seems, that each side of the tank will receive approximately 55 watts
> + some small additional wattage indirectly from the other side of the
> tank.
>
> This seems to be less than my current setup where I have two 48" 40
> watt bulbs. Here both lights are on each side of the tank and, given
> an even distribution of 40 watts eminating from the bulbs, each side
> would receive a total of 80 watts; arguably higher than the compact
> light alternative.
>
> Is this scenario incorrect in some way or does it make sense ?

The below is assuming that you're 2 x 40 look something like
http://www.all-glass.com/products/hoods/images/twintube_img.gif (or two
single strip 40 watt bulbs).

I think you may be looking at the 40 Watts bulbs wrong. The way I see
it is that a 40 watt bulb is 40 watts over the entire thing so the left
has 20 watts and the right has 20 watts. So basically with two bulbs,
the left and right halves are getting only 40 watts each. This new
compact light will increase it to 55 per each side. (And if you want to
get all technical, I think that you lose even more light with your two
40s since, again, I'm assuming here, that your 55G tank has a divider in
the middle which is removing that width of light from the bulbs.
Assuming that the divider is 2 inches wide, it's 4% of your 48 inch
bulb. 4% of 40 watts is 1.6 watts x 2 bulbs = 3.2 watts lost because of
the divider. So in theory, you lost a couple of watts on the divider
alone on a 48 inch strip light.)

Rambling helps with boredom at work! :-)
-Ben

[stir-fry]

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:55:00 -0500, Ben > wrote:

>Homie wrote:
>> I have been looking at the compact fluorescent lighting available
>> (e.g.,from all-glass: www.all-glass.com) to replace my current
>> standard fluorescent setup.
>>
>> Now correct me if I am wrong, but it looks to me that if you have a
>> 48" tank, for example, and you have two 55 Watt compact fluorescent
>> bulbs -- one on each side of the divider -- then the combined wattage
>> (110 wattage) is not really what the plants are getting. Instead, it
>> seems, that each side of the tank will receive approximately 55 watts
>> + some small additional wattage indirectly from the other side of the
>> tank.
>>
>> This seems to be less than my current setup where I have two 48" 40
>> watt bulbs. Here both lights are on each side of the tank and, given
>> an even distribution of 40 watts eminating from the bulbs, each side
>> would receive a total of 80 watts; arguably higher than the compact
>> light alternative.
>>
>> Is this scenario incorrect in some way or does it make sense ?
>
>The below is assuming that you're 2 x 40 look something like
>http://www.all-glass.com/products/hoods/images/twintube_img.gif (or two
>single strip 40 watt bulbs).
>
>I think you may be looking at the 40 Watts bulbs wrong. The way I see
>it is that a 40 watt bulb is 40 watts over the entire thing so the left
>has 20 watts and the right has 20 watts. So basically with two bulbs,
>the left and right halves are getting only 40 watts each. This new
>compact light will increase it to 55 per each side. (And if you want to
>get all technical, I think that you lose even more light with your two
>40s since, again, I'm assuming here, that your 55G tank has a divider in
>the middle which is removing that width of light from the bulbs.
>Assuming that the divider is 2 inches wide, it's 4% of your 48 inch
>bulb. 4% of 40 watts is 1.6 watts x 2 bulbs = 3.2 watts lost because of
>the divider. So in theory, you lost a couple of watts on the divider
>alone on a 48 inch strip light.)
>
>Rambling helps with boredom at work! :-)
>-Ben


I think another thing to consider is the intensity of the lights.
compact lights are double tubes, so i'd assume this means each light
is giving out double the intensity..

remember, watts are only a guidline, intensity in lumens is what you
really have to consider.

btw, i have a 36" setup with 2 bulbs in it.. i have been running it
for over a year with very good results.

[stir-fry]

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 20:05:35 GMT, "stir-fry" >
wrote:

>On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:55:00 -0500, Ben > wrote:
>
>>Homie wrote:
>>> I have been looking at the compact fluorescent lighting available
>>> (e.g.,from all-glass: www.all-glass.com) to replace my current
>>> standard fluorescent setup.
>>>
>>> Now correct me if I am wrong, but it looks to me that if you have a
>>> 48" tank, for example, and you have two 55 Watt compact fluorescent
>>> bulbs -- one on each side of the divider -- then the combined wattage
>>> (110 wattage) is not really what the plants are getting. Instead, it
>>> seems, that each side of the tank will receive approximately 55 watts
>>> + some small additional wattage indirectly from the other side of the
>>> tank.
>>>
>>> This seems to be less than my current setup where I have two 48" 40
>>> watt bulbs. Here both lights are on each side of the tank and, given
>>> an even distribution of 40 watts eminating from the bulbs, each side
>>> would receive a total of 80 watts; arguably higher than the compact
>>> light alternative.
>>>
>>> Is this scenario incorrect in some way or does it make sense ?
>>
>>The below is assuming that you're 2 x 40 look something like
>>http://www.all-glass.com/products/hoods/images/twintube_img.gif (or two
>>single strip 40 watt bulbs).
>>
>>I think you may be looking at the 40 Watts bulbs wrong. The way I see
>>it is that a 40 watt bulb is 40 watts over the entire thing so the left
>>has 20 watts and the right has 20 watts. So basically with two bulbs,
>>the left and right halves are getting only 40 watts each. This new
>>compact light will increase it to 55 per each side. (And if you want to
>>get all technical, I think that you lose even more light with your two
>>40s since, again, I'm assuming here, that your 55G tank has a divider in
>>the middle which is removing that width of light from the bulbs.
>>Assuming that the divider is 2 inches wide, it's 4% of your 48 inch
>>bulb. 4% of 40 watts is 1.6 watts x 2 bulbs = 3.2 watts lost because of
>>the divider. So in theory, you lost a couple of watts on the divider
>>alone on a 48 inch strip light.)
>>
>>Rambling helps with boredom at work! :-)
>>-Ben
>
>
>I think another thing to consider is the intensity of the lights.
>compact lights are double tubes, so i'd assume this means each light
>is giving out double the intensity..
>
>remember, watts are only a guidline, intensity in lumens is what you
>really have to consider.
>
>btw, i have a 36" setup with 2 bulbs in it.. i have been running it
>for over a year with very good results.


This is, of course speculation on my behalf.
I don't know lumens and watts from the hole in my ass.

just my opinion

[seeOtwo]

Here, let me confuse things a little in an effort to make my point
clear:

AHSupply and other vendors sell reflectors that claim to increase the
light that hits the water by up to 196%.

Also T5 type bulbs are advertised as up to 400% brighter than regular
fluorescents.

Now, if you get a 55 watt bulb with a Miro reflector does that mean
that you actually have 55 + (55 * 196%) = 55 + 107 = 163 watts?

And is a skinny T5 tube that is 54 watt actually 54 + (54 * 400%) = 54
+ 220 = 274 watts?

Also - a 10,000 Kelvin Coralife VHO appears totally white to the eye
while a 10,000 Kelvin URI VHO appears violet-pink.

Well, I suppose at this point most folk are confused.

The point that I try to make is "use what works for you".
Calculations are exactly that - just calculations and nothing else.
:-D

--Nikolay

[[email protected]]

(seeOtwo) wrote in message >...
> Here, let me confuse things a little in an effort to make my point
> clear:
>
> AHSupply and other vendors sell reflectors that claim to increase the
> light that hits the water by up to 196%.
>
> Also T5 type bulbs are advertised as up to 400% brighter than regular
> fluorescents.
>
> Now, if you get a 55 watt bulb with a Miro reflector does that mean
> that you actually have 55 + (55 * 196%) = 55 + 107 = 163 watts?
>
> And is a skinny T5 tube that is 54 watt actually 54 + (54 * 400%) = 54
> + 220 = 274 watts?
>
> Also - a 10,000 Kelvin Coralife VHO appears totally white to the eye
> while a 10,000 Kelvin URI VHO appears violet-pink.
>
> Well, I suppose at this point most folk are confused.
>
> The point that I try to make is "use what works for you".
> Calculations are exactly that - just calculations and nothing else.
> :-D
>
> --Nikolay


Good points:)
I see all sorts of figures and such but you have to question some of
the supposed benefits of certain light/Kelvin temps etc.

I think in answer the the question, the PC lighting is about 2x as
bright as the 80w set up. Bulbs last longer, you'll get more watt per
$ of electric.

Regards,
Tom Barr

[magus kent]

(Homie) wrote in news:59266412.0401271034.2ab85444
@posting.google.com:

Comments in line:

> I have been looking at the compact fluorescent lighting available
> (e.g.,from all-glass: www.all-glass.com) to replace my current
> standard fluorescent setup.
>
> Now correct me if I am wrong, but it looks to me that if you have a
> 48" tank, for example, and you have two 55 Watt compact fluorescent
> bulbs -- one on each side of the divider -- then the combined wattage
> (110 wattage) is not really what the plants are getting. Instead, it
> seems, that each side of the tank will receive approximately 55 watts
> + some small additional wattage indirectly from the other side of the
> tank.
You have a total of 80 watts of fluor light on your entire tank.
>
> This seems to be less than my current setup where I have two 48" 40
> watt bulbs. Here both lights are on each side of the tank and, given
> an even distribution of 40 watts eminating from the bulbs, each side
> would receive a total of 80 watts; arguably higher than the compact
> light alternative.
This would give you a total of 110 watts for the entire tank.
I run a 70 gal with four 55watt compact fluors on it. Two on each side
of the tank as it where. Two switches, so I can start with one lamp on
each side, then as the day progresses I turn on the other two lamps.
Three kinds of swords, three types of crypts, val, sag,hygro, java fern,
water sprite and not sure of what else right now. No CO2, but at least
once a week I have to trim plants down/out enough to fill a good sized
salad bowl!.m

> Is this scenario incorrect in some way or does it make sense ?

[Alan Silver]

In message >, magus kent
> writes
>I run a 70 gal with four 55watt compact fluors on it. Two on each side
>of the tank as it where. Two switches, so I can start with one lamp on
>each side, then as the day progresses I turn on the other two lamps.
>Three kinds of swords, three types of crypts, val, sag,hygro, java
>fern, water sprite and not sure of what else right now. No CO2, but at
>least once a week I have to trim plants down/out enough to fill a good
>sized salad bowl!.m

Care to share more details ? Without CO2, how do you get good growth
without an algae explosion ? That's some high lighting there.

Please fill in the other details. Anything you can think of. Ta. Any
pics available ?

--
Alan Silver
PSG Fish Tanks - http://fish.alansilver.co.uk/

[magus kent]

Alan Silver > wrote in news:3DHGlmGJz
:

> In message >, magus kent
> > writes
>>I run a 70 gal with four 55watt compact fluors on it. Two on each side
>>of the tank as it where. Two switches, so I can start with one lamp on
>>each side, then as the day progresses I turn on the other two lamps.
>>Three kinds of swords, three types of crypts, val, sag,hygro, java
>>fern, water sprite and not sure of what else right now. No CO2, but at
>>least once a week I have to trim plants down/out enough to fill a good
>>sized salad bowl!.m
>
> Care to share more details ? Without CO2, how do you get good growth
> without an algae explosion ? That's some high lighting there.
>
> Please fill in the other details. Anything you can think of. Ta. Any
> pics available ?
>
Nothing fancy..just a lot of plants using up the available nutrients.
With a limited supply of nutrients available, the higher plants get as
much as they can use, and the algae gets whats left. Tank has a
collection of smaller fish such as tetras and corydoras. Only two larger
fish are two doradid cats that have been in there probably for twelve
years. Fed once a day (and not much then) flakefood and shrimp pellets
for the doradids. Weekly twenty percent water change. Fluval 303
cannister filter gets cleaned about once a month. The sag and val go to
the surface and then curl around which ends up blocking a fair amount of
the light too. Also use a dose of Flora Pride twice a month, laterite in
the gravel, chunk-form, primarily near the swords. I haven't checked
PH/nitrates/nitrites/ammonia/whatever in five years. I used to use a
shoplight with two Triton lamps but that was expensive after awhile. I
need to have my LFS order me a couple of Otocinclus to get what little
algae there is. Two bulbs on from about nine AM to one PM, then all four
bulbs on till about eleven PM. The 'secret' is to start a tank with a
lot of plants, adding nutrients until the fish add enough themselves,
adjusting light duration until everything gets going. Works for me, and
has been that way since I started the hobby in the sixties. Back then it
was hard to get enough wattage on a tank but with the power compacts its
a piece of cake!...m

[Alan Silver]

>>>I run a 70 gal with four 55watt compact fluors on it. Two on each side
>>>of the tank as it where. Two switches, so I can start with one lamp on
>>>each side, then as the day progresses I turn on the other two lamps.
>>>Three kinds of swords, three types of crypts, val, sag,hygro, java
>>>fern, water sprite and not sure of what else right now. No CO2, but at
>>>least once a week I have to trim plants down/out enough to fill a good
>>>sized salad bowl!.m
>>
>> Care to share more details ? Without CO2, how do you get good growth
>> without an algae explosion ? That's some high lighting there.
>>
>> Please fill in the other details. Anything you can think of. Ta. Any
>> pics available ?
>>
>Nothing fancy..just a lot of plants using up the available nutrients.
<snip>
>The sag and val go to
>the surface and then curl around which ends up blocking a fair amount of
>the light too.

Yup, been there. I used to have a bunch of val that propagated and grew
so much that it filled up about one third of my tank. I ripped out most
of them in the end.

> Also use a dose of Flora Pride twice a month,

That's interesting. The bottle gives a far higher dosage rate than that.
How much do you add ? Do you do any other fertilisation ?

<snip>

Thanx for the info. I'm just working out how best to revive my tank
after some months of neglect and poor growth (see the thread "How do I
rescue my planted tank ?" in this group) and am looking for ideas. I
would like as low maintenance as possible (not due to lack of interest,
more due to lack of time).

Ta ra

--
Alan Silver
PSG Fish Tanks - http://fish.alansilver.co.uk/

[magus kent]

Alan Silver > wrote in
:

Snippage

> Yup, been there. I used to have a bunch of val that propagated and
> grew so much that it filled up about one third of my tank. I ripped
> out most of them in the end.
>
>> Also use a dose of Flora Pride twice a month,
>
> That's interesting. The bottle gives a far higher dosage rate than
> that. How much do you add ? Do you do any other fertilisation ?
The Flora Pride I just use the recommended dosage..capful/ten gallons or
whatever it is. That and the laterite is all I use.
>
> <snip>
>
> Thanx for the info. I'm just working out how best to revive my tank
> after some months of neglect and poor growth (see the thread "How do I
> rescue my planted tank ?" in this group) and am looking for ideas. I
> would like as low maintenance as possible (not due to lack of
> interest, more due to lack of time).

A good vacuuming of the gravel and cleaning of the glass..including the
underside of the tank cover...healthy water change...lotta light..maybe
that will be all that it takes? I dunno. Perhaps the plants did use up
some of the macro-nutrients that aren't being replaced by the fish or
fish food. I do not treat my tap water ..no de-ionization/R.O. and have
had good luck so far...m

> Ta ra
>

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:07:22 -0000, magus kent >
wrote:

Magnus

The placement of your comments confuses me. Are you saying my current
setup of two 40watt 48" bulbs gives me 80 watts and your four 55 watt
setup gives you only 110 watts?

If so, you seem to suggest that my logic was correct. True?

Thanks


(Homie) wrote in news:59266412.0401271034.2ab85444
:
>
>Comments in line:
>
>> I have been looking at the compact fluorescent lighting available
>> (e.g.,from all-glass: www.all-glass.com) to replace my current
>> standard fluorescent setup.
>>
>> Now correct me if I am wrong, but it looks to me that if you have a
>> 48" tank, for example, and you have two 55 Watt compact fluorescent
>> bulbs -- one on each side of the divider -- then the combined wattage
>> (110 wattage) is not really what the plants are getting. Instead, it
>> seems, that each side of the tank will receive approximately 55 watts
>> + some small additional wattage indirectly from the other side of the
>> tank.
>You have a total of 80 watts of fluor light on your entire tank.
>>
>> This seems to be less than my current setup where I have two 48" 40
>> watt bulbs. Here both lights are on each side of the tank and, given
>> an even distribution of 40 watts eminating from the bulbs, each side
>> would receive a total of 80 watts; arguably higher than the compact
>> light alternative.

>This would give you a total of 110 watts for the entire tank.
>I run a 70 gal with four 55watt compact fluors on it. Two on each side
>of the tank as it where. Two switches, so I can start with one lamp on
>each side, then as the day progresses I turn on the other two lamps.
>Three kinds of swords, three types of crypts, val, sag,hygro, java fern,
>water sprite and not sure of what else right now. No CO2, but at least
>once a week I have to trim plants down/out enough to fill a good sized
>salad bowl!.m
>
>> Is this scenario incorrect in some way or does it make sense ?

[magus kent]

wrote in :

> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:07:22 -0000, magus kent >
> wrote:
>
> Magnus
>
> The placement of your comments confuses me. Are you saying my current
> setup of two 40watt 48" bulbs gives me 80 watts and your four 55 watt
> setup gives you only 110 watts?
>
> If so, you seem to suggest that my logic was correct. True?
>
> Thanks
I work third shift so sometimes my early AM posts show a brain
desperately in need of sleep. My fixture (four 55 watt lamps) is for a
total tank wattage of 220 watts. Your two 40 watt fixture yields a total
of 80 watts for the tank. This is discounting any differences such as
I've heard that compact fluors are twice as bright per watt as standard
fluors. All I know is that it does put out a lot of light. And one
thing I haven't mentioned is that the lamps I'm using are at 6500K which
is fairly close to what the plants need (5700K)..m

[Homie]

Thanks...

Can I pick your brain for one more thing? I am wondering why all-glass
chose to use 32watt bulbs (T8) and not 40watt bulbs (T12) in their
setup. There is little gain for me to buy 3 bulb 96watt setup over my
current 2 bulb 80watt setup. If, however, I could get a triple tube
40watt setup, this would be worthwhile. Any thoughts as to why this
might be the case?

Also, have you (or anyone) heard of 40watt T8 bulbs available?

I can empathize re: 3rd shift. I used to do security at a hotel
overnight while in college... no easy task at all... does powerful
things to the body and mind.


magus kent > wrote in message >...
> wrote in :
>
> > On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:07:22 -0000, magus kent >
> > wrote:
> >
> > Magnus
> >
> > The placement of your comments confuses me. Are you saying my current
> > setup of two 40watt 48" bulbs gives me 80 watts and your four 55 watt
> > setup gives you only 110 watts?
> >
> > If so, you seem to suggest that my logic was correct. True?
> >
> > Thanks
> I work third shift so sometimes my early AM posts show a brain
> desperately in need of sleep. My fixture (four 55 watt lamps) is for a
> total tank wattage of 220 watts. Your two 40 watt fixture yields a total
> of 80 watts for the tank. This is discounting any differences such as
> I've heard that compact fluors are twice as bright per watt as standard
> fluors. All I know is that it does put out a lot of light. And one
> thing I haven't mentioned is that the lamps I'm using are at 6500K which
> is fairly close to what the plants need (5700K)..m

[magus kent]

(Homie) wrote in
m:

> Thanks...
>
> Can I pick your brain for one more thing? I am wondering why all-glass
> chose to use 32watt bulbs (T8) and not 40watt bulbs (T12) in their
> setup. There is little gain for me to buy 3 bulb 96watt setup over my
> current 2 bulb 80watt setup. If, however, I could get a triple tube
> 40watt setup, this would be worthwhile. Any thoughts as to why this
> might be the case?
>

I dunno. I'm sure they have some economic reason. Perhaps the ballasts
they use would fire three 32 watters but not three 40 watters?
Have you had a chance to check out AH Suppy at:
www.ahsupply.com
They seem to be a very good source for lighting....m

> Also, have you (or anyone) heard of 40watt T8 bulbs available?
>
> I can empathize re: 3rd shift. I used to do security at a hotel
> overnight while in college... no easy task at all... does powerful
> things to the body and mind.
>
>

[Dunter Powries]

Homie > wrote in message
m...
> ...I am wondering why all-glass
> chose to use 32watt bulbs (T8) and not 40watt bulbs (T12) in their
> setup.

What I always wonder is why All-Glass bothers to make lighting at ALL, since
their hoods and 'reflectors' are invariably cheap and inefficient pieces of
crap. The best thing that can be said for All-Glass hoods is that they make
decent platforms for retrofitting somebody else's lighting kits.

kush

[Harry Muscle]

"Homie" > wrote in message
m...
> Thanks...
>
> Can I pick your brain for one more thing? I am wondering why all-glass
> chose to use 32watt bulbs (T8) and not 40watt bulbs (T12) in their
> setup. There is little gain for me to buy 3 bulb 96watt setup over my
> current 2 bulb 80watt setup. If, however, I could get a triple tube
> 40watt setup, this would be worthwhile. Any thoughts as to why this
> might be the case?
>
> Also, have you (or anyone) heard of 40watt T8 bulbs available?
>
> I can empathize re: 3rd shift. I used to do security at a hotel
> overnight while in college... no easy task at all... does powerful
> things to the body and mind.
>

32watt T8 bulbs put out the same amount of light as a 40watt T12 bulb.
There was a post regarding this long time back, which basically said that
you could count a 32watt T8 bulb as a 40watt bulbs when comparing watts per
gallon. So for the purpose of wpg, three T8 32watt bulbs would produce an
equevalent of 120watts of flourescent light.

Hope that makes sense,
Harry

>
> magus kent > wrote in message
>...
> > wrote in :
> >
> > > On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:07:22 -0000, magus kent >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Magnus
> > >
> > > The p ment of your comments confuses me. Are you saying my current
> > > setup of two 40watt 48" bulbs gives me 80 watts and your four 55 watt
> > > setup gives you only 110 watts?
> > >
> > > If so, you seem to suggest that my logic was correct. True?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > I work third shift so sometimes my early AM posts show a brain
> > desperately in need of sleep. My fixture (four 55 watt lamps) is for a
> > total tank wattage of 220 watts. Your two 40 watt fixture yields a
total
> > of 80 watts for the tank. This is discounting any differences such as
> > I've heard that compact fluors are twice as bright per watt as standard
> > fluors. All I know is that it does put out a lot of light. And one
> > thing I haven't mentioned is that the lamps I'm using are at 6500K which
> > is fairly close to what the plants need (5700K)..m




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Giancarlo Podio]

I find the AGA tripple T8 fixture to be a great product. It has been
working very well for me without any problems at all. The reflector is
good, the bulbs are very valid and it uses an efficient electronic
ballast, what more do you want for under $100?

Giancarlo Podio


"Dunter Powries" <fech.redcap@spedlin> wrote in message >...
> Homie > wrote in message
> m...
> > ...I am wondering why all-glass
> > chose to use 32watt bulbs (T8) and not 40watt bulbs (T12) in their
> > setup.
>
> What I always wonder is why All-Glass bothers to make lighting at ALL, since
> their hoods and 'reflectors' are invariably cheap and inefficient pieces of
> crap. The best thing that can be said for All-Glass hoods is that they make
> decent platforms for retrofitting somebody else's lighting kits.
>
> kush

[RedForeman ©®]

DIY for under $50... hee hee

--
RedForeman ©®




"Giancarlo Podio" > wrote in message
m...
> I find the AGA tripple T8 fixture to be a great product. It has been
> working very well for me without any problems at all. The reflector is
> good, the bulbs are very valid and it uses an efficient electronic
> ballast, what more do you want for under $100?
>
> Giancarlo Podio
>
>
> "Dunter Powries" <fech.redcap@spedlin> wrote in message
>...
> > Homie > wrote in message
> > m...
> > > ...I am wondering why all-glass
> > > chose to use 32watt bulbs (T8) and not 40watt bulbs (T12) in their
> > > setup.
> >
> > What I always wonder is why All-Glass bothers to make lighting at ALL,
since
> > their hoods and 'reflectors' are invariably cheap and inefficient pieces
of
> > crap. The best thing that can be said for All-Glass hoods is that they
make
> > decent platforms for retrofitting somebody else's lighting kits.
> >
> > kush

[Homie]

Well, even the two bulb 55watt setup at ahsupply is $65. This is
without any shell (hood)... and doesn't include the number of hours it
takes to put it all together. Sometimes, DIY is not all that much
cheaper.

"RedForeman ©®" > wrote in message >...
> DIY for under $50... hee hee
>
> --
> RedForeman ©®
>
>
>
>
> "Giancarlo Podio" > wrote in message
> m...
> > I find the AGA tripple T8 fixture to be a great product. It has been
> > working very well for me without any problems at all. The reflector is
> > good, the bulbs are very valid and it uses an efficient electronic
> > ballast, what more do you want for under $100?
> >
> > Giancarlo Podio
> >
> >
> > "Dunter Powries" <fech.redcap@spedlin> wrote in message
> >...
> > > Homie > wrote in message
> > > m...
> > > > ...I am wondering why all-glass
> > > > chose to use 32watt bulbs (T8) and not 40watt bulbs (T12) in their
> > > > setup.
> > >
> > > What I always wonder is why All-Glass bothers to make lighting at ALL,
> since
> > > their hoods and 'reflectors' are invariably cheap and inefficient pieces
> of
> > > crap. The best thing that can be said for All-Glass hoods is that they
> make
> > > decent platforms for retrofitting somebody else's lighting kits.
> > >
> > > kush

[RedForeman ©®]

2 bulb set up is not really a 2 bulb setup... it's a single bulb, with a 4
straight pin connection.... it is not quite the epitomy of DIY, but it's
close...

I built my canopy for my 55g, with scrap wood, 2 cans of paint, and 2 shop
lights, canibalized to save weight, and total cost was less than $40..

it can be done, but in the end, it's what you want out of it... sometimes
you NEED to go farther to get where you want to go, otherwise, you're just
coming up short.... and that is a life lesson I learned from someone right
here in this group... remember Jim Brown???

--
RedForeman ©®




"Homie" > wrote in message
om...
> Well, even the two bulb 55watt setup at ahsupply is $65. This is
> without any shell (hood)... and doesn't include the number of hours it
> takes to put it all together. Sometimes, DIY is not all that much
> cheaper.
>
> "RedForeman ©®" > wrote in message
>...
> > DIY for under $50... hee hee
> >
> > --
> > RedForeman ©®
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Giancarlo Podio" > wrote in message
> > m...
> > > I find the AGA tripple T8 fixture to be a great product. It has been
> > > working very well for me without any problems at all. The reflector is
> > > good, the bulbs are very valid and it uses an efficient electronic
> > > ballast, what more do you want for under $100?
> > >
> > > Giancarlo Podio
> > >
> > >
> > > "Dunter Powries" <fech.redcap@spedlin> wrote in message
> > >...
> > > > Homie > wrote in message
> > > > m...
> > > > > ...I am wondering why all-glass
> > > > > chose to use 32watt bulbs (T8) and not 40watt bulbs (T12) in their
> > > > > setup.
> > > >
> > > > What I always wonder is why All-Glass bothers to make lighting at
ALL,
> > since
> > > > their hoods and 'reflectors' are invariably cheap and inefficient
pieces
> > of
> > > > crap. The best thing that can be said for All-Glass hoods is that
they
> > make
> > > > decent platforms for retrofitting somebody else's lighting kits.
> > > >
> > > > kush

[Giancarlo Podio]

You must have a better source for hardware than I do :) Between
ballast, end caps, polished aluminum reflector, housing materials,
paint, wires and good bulbs I usually end up spending about the same
as the new fixture. If I have an old fixture or canopy then it's a
different story, a retrofit is a great money saver. Either way, even
if you can build it yourself cheaper it doesn't mean that their
product is no good, that's what I was referring to. I'm a DIY guy too,
but having used and pulled many of their light strips apart, I
disagree with the statement that they are useless. Actually I feel
they provide better bulbs in their fixtures than many other
manufacturers. Most of the times when you buy a fixture the first
thing you have to do is replace the cheap bulbs that come with it. The
bulbs AGA provides are actually quite good for planted tanks. Anyway,
just an opinion, we all have our preferences and reasons...

Regards
Giancarlo Podio




"RedForeman ©®" > wrote in message >...
> DIY for under $50... hee hee
>
> --
> RedForeman ©®
>
>
>
>
> "Giancarlo Podio" > wrote in message
> m...
> > I find the AGA tripple T8 fixture to be a great product. It has been
> > working very well for me without any problems at all. The reflector is
> > good, the bulbs are very valid and it uses an efficient electronic
> > ballast, what more do you want for under $100?
> >
> > Giancarlo Podio
> >
> >
> > "Dunter Powries" <fech.redcap@spedlin> wrote in message
> >...
> > > Homie > wrote in message
> > > m...
> > > > ...I am wondering why all-glass
> > > > chose to use 32watt bulbs (T8) and not 40watt bulbs (T12) in their
> > > > setup.
> > >
> > > What I always wonder is why All-Glass bothers to make lighting at ALL,
> since
> > > their hoods and 'reflectors' are invariably cheap and inefficient pieces
> of
> > > crap. The best thing that can be said for All-Glass hoods is that they
> make
> > > decent platforms for retrofitting somebody else's lighting kits.
> > >
> > > kush

[RedForeman ©®]

I do, I guess it's unfair to use my sources in comparison, but some are
actually bought at home depot, etc....

example
55g canopy
1 shoplight fixture, ballast included $19.99
2 general bulbs @$4 each
1-12' poplar - 11.99
1 4'x8' plywood - 17.99

I didn't actually have to buy the shoplight or bulbs, I had it laying around
from other jobs/construction, so my total cost will be roughly $40, because
I use foil tape as the reflector, or white paint....

For my 29g, I did the ahsupply 1x55pcf kit, and the DIY ideas started
flowing... if the AG fixtures are as good, then great.... ah has a great
reflector, but all the rest can be had elsewhere....

--
RedForeman ©®

"Giancarlo Podio" > wrote in message
m...
> You must have a better source for hardware than I do :) Between
> ballast, end caps, polished aluminum reflector, housing materials,
> paint, wires and good bulbs I usually end up spending about the same
> as the new fixture. If I have an old fixture or canopy then it's a
> different story, a retrofit is a great money saver. Either way, even
> if you can build it yourself cheaper it doesn't mean that their
> product is no good, that's what I was referring to. I'm a DIY guy too,
> but having used and pulled many of their light strips apart, I
> disagree with the statement that they are useless. Actually I feel
> they provide better bulbs in their fixtures than many other
> manufacturers. Most of the times when you buy a fixture the first
> thing you have to do is replace the cheap bulbs that come with it. The
> bulbs AGA provides are actually quite good for planted tanks. Anyway,
> just an opinion, we all have our preferences and reasons...
>
> Regards
> Giancarlo Podio
>
>
>
>
> "RedForeman ©®" > wrote in message
>...
> > DIY for under $50... hee hee
> >
> > --
> > RedForeman ©®
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Giancarlo Podio" > wrote in message
> > m...
> > > I find the AGA tripple T8 fixture to be a great product. It has been
> > > working very well for me without any problems at all. The reflector is
> > > good, the bulbs are very valid and it uses an efficient electronic
> > > ballast, what more do you want for under $100?
> > >
> > > Giancarlo Podio
> > >
> > >
> > > "Dunter Powries" <fech.redcap@spedlin> wrote in message
> > >...
> > > > Homie > wrote in message
> > > > m...
> > > > > ...I am wondering why all-glass
> > > > > chose to use 32watt bulbs (T8) and not 40watt bulbs (T12) in their
> > > > > setup.
> > > >
> > > > What I always wonder is why All-Glass bothers to make lighting at
ALL,
> > since
> > > > their hoods and 'reflectors' are invariably cheap and inefficient
pieces
> > of
> > > > crap. The best thing that can be said for All-Glass hoods is that
they
> > make
> > > > decent platforms for retrofitting somebody else's lighting kits.
> > > >
> > > > kush