12000k xenon car lights

[BlueAbyss]

Originally Posted by dabandit

For all you pecemists out there,the black sheep project here on canreef is powering a 5.5g with the car variety xenon. The sps he's keeping have beautiful polyp extension his is a new setup so time will tell,but to my eyes anyway it appears to be working very well. Thanks for everyones input

I'm hoping it does work out well, this could be an excellent application for these lights. Again, I've looked around and even 70w MH lighting systems seem to be almost impossible to find, and I think 70w over a 5.5 would be too much.

[mark]

asked similiar in this thread

Here was a reply fr hillbillyreefer who tried them:

They are a PITA on a tank. I've got 4 on my 33 gal. You'll need a 10 amp powersupply for each bulb. You'll need to figure out some sort of reflector. The ballasts get really hot and burn out quickly. I think they would be better in a car as the airflow would keep them cool. Not sure how long the lamps themselves last as the ballasts all fried before the bulbs. The light is decent and the bulbs are available in various K ratings. I never did take pics of them when they were running, it's too late now.

Save your money and buy a MH, way less hassle and better life span, in my experience.

[dabandit]

Ok I feel these are getting a bad rap so lets go over the pro's and con's;ok people claim too much heat in ballast my guess is their calculations were wrong and the unit isnt being powered right(capactors and resistors) if not put a cpu fan on it,next they claim wrong spectrum...wrong they are allmost identical in every way,next they say they cost too much well...for a nano only 1 bulb is required...motorcycle units cost 89$and bulbs start at 9$ or you could split a car package worth 120$ with a fellow nano reefer the only other equip required is power source which go for 30$+ So then they say what about a reflector or hooking up supply....well if you cant figure that one out you shouldnt be doing diy lighting in the first place. From the research I've done I've found;they are cheaper to buy,run and replace bulbs ,the bulb produces less heat and is smaller and has equal par ratings.

In short if you have a nano 14g- and understand electronics I think it's a great technology that will only get better as more people use it,but I agree if you have a tank over 14g mh is the far better solution........but hey thats just one mans opinion

[sphelps]

Originally Posted by dabandit

next they claim wrong spectrum...wrong they are allmost identical in every way

Not sure where you got that from. The key to any lighting is the bulb. Have you noticed that bulbs for the hobby are more expensive than similar bulbs used for other applications? Even the cheap ebay bulbs aren't much good. I doubt those bulbs will provide the required spectrum over time, at least not in an efficient way.

So you can get a 30W unit for $90 which only included the bulb and ballast and you need to run some inefficient power supply, what about a reflector? Oh right they don't make one. Also you can get a 70W MH bulb and ballast for under a $100 if you know where to look, that way you get more than twice the output and a proven spectrum. Did you know my SPS corals get great polyp extension when the lights are off?

I just don't see any reason in pursuing this, sure if you want a 5.5g but not much of a market there and anything bigger would benefit more from a 70W light.

You're going to have to hook up a PAR meter and measure these lights before you can make any claims.

[dabandit]

Are you even reading what I'm typing? I mean really......the info i got was from much research online on one site they showed the par values which is why I mentioned the par value in my previous statement. Go online and look your self at the values;par is higher than mh 70w,10000k+ and wavelength is 430-470nm at 10000k now go check your mh specs,the only place it lacks is in the lumen department which aparently does'nt mean much to corals. There you have it...data....facts..... please show me something to prove otherwise because all I've heard so far is conjecture or one persons failed experience due to faulty wiring PLEASE someone direct me to data that says this cant work,otherwise open your minds!!lol

[sphelps]

Originally Posted by dabandit

the info i got was from much research online on one site they showed the par values which is why I mentioned the par value in my previous statement

Link?

[superduperwesman]

Originally Posted by dabandit

Are you even reading what I'm typing? I mean really......the info i got was from much research online on one site they showed the par values which is why I mentioned the par value in my previous statement. Go online and look your self at the values;par is higher than mh 70w,10000k+ and wavelength is 430-470nm at 10000k now go check your mh specs,the only place it lacks is in the lumen department which aparently does'nt mean much to corals. There you have it...data....facts..... please show me something to prove otherwise because all I've heard so far is conjecture or one persons failed experience due to faulty wiring PLEASE someone direct me to data that says this cant work,otherwise open your minds!!lol

Actually it's just hearsay

Originally Posted by dabandit

just bothers me when people dismiss something without either trying or researching it first.

I think that's why we're trying to get a link for the PAR ratings that you claim... so we can research such information ourselves

Originally Posted by dabandit

The fella here powering his 5.5 is happy with the light he claims no heat issues and looking at the pic his tank is glowing something fierce,his corals look happy and have good p.e. As for the comment that your corals have p.e even in the dark...well duh but try keeping them in the dark for a week or two (the time he's been running this light) and see what happens lol

The light may continue to work great for him, and I hope it does... but generally I don't like to base success on 1 to 2 weeks

Originally Posted by dabandit

Are'nt you friendly. I've spent a week researching this....think about it before you go accusing me of being a liar AGAIN Par value is the percentage of light that reaches the target after dissipation via heat and such is it not? Now take a mh bulb and compare how far the light goes to a headlight on a car better yet look directly into each because your beginning to annoy me

ahah I love it when people point out something like it's a problem and then do exactly the same thing ahah.

For the record I'm pointing out the problem of hypocrisy (which I try to refrain from), not a lack of kindness (which I wouldn't claim to always be or I'd be presently following suit on the hypocrisy). Can't always be friendly, sometimes we have to be cruel to be kind

Originally Posted by dabandit

Through my research I've found what I wanted to know and believe I've provide enough proof that this is a viable technology,if thats not good enough for you thats not my problem try google

Congrats I hope the light works for you, but in the mean time while you continue in your attempt to persuade everyone else as to how great the light will work, the fact that you're self satisfied isn't enough, so unfortunately it is still your problem.

Now hearsay = facts = proof??

Originally Posted by dabandit

then come apologize when your done

Pride always comes before the fall and unfortunately it is generally easier to truly prove something wrong before proving it right so you might have a little work ahead of you... unless self satisfaction is enough?? But that's never any fun because it's too easy to convince yourself... I mean even crazy people don't think they're crazy

Finally, it could work great??? I don't have enough information to decide yet...?

[dabandit]

Im new to forums and am trying my best to respond to every comment im sorry I havent met your burden of proof and I dont have time to meet everyones satisfaction. Im not trying to convince anyone,merely to educate myself and who ever wants to tune in. To you its mere heresay but I've seen it with my own eyes and thats good enough for me so Im going to leave it at that. Take my word for it if you want or check yourself

And I dont expect you to base anything on a week but its all theres been at the moment and its a good start. You may not believe me but I've seen k ratings,nm ratings,lumen ratings and par value combined with a sucessfull trial by 2 people who claimed the light emited was usefull thats enough for me. If you feel the need to disprove me thats your perogative not mine but I welcome it.

Cheers