Interesting numbers

Wrap your mind's around this:

Bulb: 6700K 96 Watt compact fluorescent PC96W67K
Watts: 96
Max Lumens: 29100
Rated Lumens: 8100
Efficiency: 0.28
PAR uE/s: 117
PAReff uE/s/watt: 1.22
PUR total uE/s: 56.1
PUR Blue uE/s: 27
PUR Red uE/s:16.7

Compare those numbers to these:

Bulb: Iwasaki 6500K metal halide
Watts: 150
Max Lumens: 37700
Rated Lumens: 12000
Efficiency: .23
PAR uE/s: 199
PAReff uE/s/watt: 1.33
PUR Total uE/s: 107
PUR Blue uE/s: 46.6
PUR Red uE/s: 35.2



These are the important numbers here:

PC Bulb
PAReff uE/s/watt: 1.22

MH Bulb
PAReff uE/s/watt: 1.33

That doesn't seem like the huge jump I would expect between MH and PC bulbs.

Lets say we had one of both these bulbs running at 100 watts. MH would give off 133 PAR and the PC bulb would give off 122 PAR.

Judging by these numbers and the fact that I kept SPS and anemones under PC lighting for over a year I'm beginning to wonder why lighting companies have convinced us the more expensive lighting works better.

If anyone could supply one I would love some kind of explanation.

All my number's were found here:
Aqua Botanic-light bulb comparison

 

That is interesting. I'm not sure exactly how all that number stuff works, but don't these numbers depend on the bulb more so than the fixture? Just wondering if that maybe a reason for those numbers?

Jake

 

I think penetration would have a slight factor in it as well.

 

These are numbers taken directly from bulb tests. The fixtures had nothing to do with this.

 

Yeah I understand that, but am wondering if, for example, the pc bulb was a higher end bulb with better numbers and the mh bulb was of lower quality to begin with? Just wondering, would really like to know, am starting a new tank here this week so will be following along.

 

The halide looks like a fairly high end bulb at $80 online price. Here it is:

150 Watt 6500K Metal Halide Bulb - Iwasaki, Medium Base

 

Just like there are advantages and disadvantages to Single end MH vs. Double end.. There are other things to consider. A MH bulb is putting out that much PAR out of a bulb that is 4 inches long. PC will require 4 96W sockets and a bulky area to equal the small spot that you can put one 400W MH bulb. You can't squeeze those PC bulbs PAR into the same area. Then there is the cost $30 a piece for four =$120 vs a MH bulb for way cheaper and a good one that puts out more PAR. 133 PAR X 4 =532 vs. 488. PC bulbs are expensive... thus the T5 lights are thinner less bulky and much cheaper.

 

That is VERY interesting....I wonder how T5's fit into to that equation?

 

Thanks, I'll look into that. It's just gonna be a predator tank, so don't need too much for lights, but I want room to upgrade the lighting later on if things change. So was thinking of going T5 now with room in the canopy to add MH later on if I wanted. But now you have me thinking lol.

 

Aside from technicals there is the the Aesthetics of a MH bulb. I love the shimmer . It looks more like sunlight.