ZOBBIEBEANO Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 This company offers 250 Watt Metal Halide Ballast Kit Multi-Tap Ballast 120/208/240/277 with 250W Metal Halide Bulb 20k Mogul (ED28) Base ANSI Ballast Type M58 & Mogul Socket. All for 78.00 delivered. Is this a good deal? They have from 50 watt MH to a 1500 watt kit. Sounds like gold but what do you people think? Link to comment
madness Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 No. Dude. Really. What company? Link to comment
ZOBBIEBEANO Posted February 25, 2004 Author Share Posted February 25, 2004 does it sound good? Link to comment
ZOBBIEBEANO Posted February 25, 2004 Author Share Posted February 25, 2004 sorry took awhile here you go. http://www.lightingcloseout.com/search_results.cfm Link to comment
toefu Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 It states that the bulbs emit 20000 lumens, not that it's 20k coloration. Not a bad price for mogul base and ballast though, but it's nothing special. Link to comment
zzpw3x Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 I don't know much about MH light, but it looks like a gem. Anyone have more insight? I'm not too sure I'd buy the bulb there but the kits look great. Dale Link to comment
jasontatro Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 Multi tap = magnetic = No thanks Link to comment
ZOBBIEBEANO Posted February 26, 2004 Author Share Posted February 26, 2004 I wrote the company and the responce was 42000k as to the kalvin rateing on the buld. Link to comment
Littleoceans Posted February 26, 2004 Share Posted February 26, 2004 Originally posted by jasontatro Multi tap = magnetic = No thanks I agree with jasontatro.... magnetic... Heat issues..hums... burns your bulb quicker.... high power consuption....No thanks!! Link to comment
Von digity Posted February 26, 2004 Share Posted February 26, 2004 For 78.00 bucks? To me, thats a good retail price, even if the bulb needs to be swapped. No where will you find a 250 watt ELECTRONIC ballast & socket set up for 78 bucks (shipped). Also, 250 watt 20k bulbs are available on ebay for around 50 bucks. So the project would still be rather cheap. This is a good place to start if you can't afford Hi-tech cool running electronic ballasts. Link to comment
Von digity Posted February 26, 2004 Share Posted February 26, 2004 Originally posted by ZOBBIEBEANO I wrote the company and the responce was 42000k as to the kalvin rateing on the buld. You probly added an extra 0 to 4200k. But, apparently there are bulbs made with super high kelvin ratings. General reef keeping rule is anything above 6500 K is acceptable. Link to comment
Gerard the fish Posted February 26, 2004 Share Posted February 26, 2004 Over the long run you will pay quadruple what you would pay if you bought a electronic ballast in electricity and bulbs Link to comment
Von digity Posted February 26, 2004 Share Posted February 26, 2004 True, but thats over the long run. Some ppl may not have the funds present to spend that much money on their lighting. Either way, it meets the requirment for sps and clams. (but then again, this all depends upon what types of coral the person is planning on keeping. I'm assuming that ZOBBIEBEANO is looking to keep sps, etc) It also depends on what your electricity rates are in your area. I don't see spending 78 dollars on a magnetic 250 watt halide ballast being a waste. Even if that person does decide to uprgrade to electronic in the future. Its always good to have a spare ballast lying around for emergencies anyways, things happen. *edit* How do you work it out to being quadruple the amount in bulbs and electricity? I can see maybe double, but not quadruple. If a ballast has a general life span of maybe 3-4 years (before they start wearing down), and bulbs generally last 12 months, how does that work out? Link to comment
Von digity Posted February 28, 2004 Share Posted February 28, 2004 Ok, so I guess I'll try to do the math. According to Icecap's web page (icecap ballast review) A 150 watt BlueLine ballast puts out 174 watt, Their Icecap ballast puts out 197, and tar ballasts put out 209. (*See edit on bottom*) So, I'll compare the 2 ballasts with the most extreme difference, the BL(blue line) Vs. Tar. Keep in mind these are 150 watt ballasts, and it's very hard to find 150 watt tar ballasts. I don't know what electricity costs in my area (I don't pay bills) but I do know how much electricity costs in San Diego, per MrKrispy's thread, and thats .16 KWH, so I'll use that as a basic guidline. Using RC's calculators based on 12 hr a day periods we get: BL@174watts per hour= $10.16 per month Tar@209watts per hour= $12.21 per month that comes down to yearly rates: BL=$121.92 Tar=$146.52 And lets give em 3 year life span?: BL=$365.76 Tar=$439.56 thats a $73.80 dollar difference over a 3 year span assuming that the Tar ballasts can run 3 years, and that you could find a 150 watt tar ballast. Now I couldn't find price for BL, but Icecaps are $130 online. Keep in mind they only save 12 watts of electricity. I could not locate a 150 watt ballast, tar or magnetic, but I can only assume that they would be fairly cheap. 175 watt Magnetic ballasts are like 50 bucks. So, you can subtract whatever a 150 watt tar/mag ballasts costs from the 73.80 dollar difference, and thats roughly how much more a you'd be spending. Of course, it might be different comparing it to a 250, but hey, I gave it a shot. Of course, there are other factors that could come into play, like higher elctrical rates, ballast degradation, etc... I still don't see quadrupal the amount, even if you were to replace the magnetic ballast halfway through the 3 years. And as far as bulbs, I'm pretty sure electronic or not, after 12 months bulbs need to be replaced. So, the bulb rate, should be the same, unless your really anal about the quality of bulbs and rate the par every 2 weeks with a meter. So, the most I could see it being is like, double, max. HTH... And please, if I'm way off on this, tell me. *edit, I'm sorry, upon further examination of Icecaps web page, the ballasts appear to all be 175 watters. *double edit* my head hertz.. Link to comment
1fish2fish Posted February 29, 2004 Share Posted February 29, 2004 Nice well thought out post Von! Link to comment
Gerard the fish Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 Great breakdown! However there is one thing we gotta factor in to all this and thats efficiency. Just because it says 250 watts doesnt mean its only pulling 250 watts especially with magnetic ballasts as alot of the energy is lost as heat which worsens over the lifetime of the ballast. In otherwords the magnetics are using more watts and putting out less lumens. That being said your math is right on the money... I stand corrected :-D it works out to more like 20% savings... Here are some interesting links to look at :-D http://www.universalballast.com/literature...he-el_flyer.pdf http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/egi/english/lightin...ntView=N&Text=N - g Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.