Opinions Wanted

Cathic

Fish Wrangler
So here is the deal. I recently started doing a lot of research involving lighting with MH and with T5's etc etc. I know here at living reefs we thrive to understand a situation completely before coming to conclusions on products. I have spent the past several days reading through pages and pages of forum discussions from here and other sites such as reefcentral. I have also been linked to reefcentral before to use as a guide for other things (DIY, Mods, product review, etc.) So I will again use them as a reference for this discussion.

Now on to the meat of the subject. We have all heard horror stories of ebay lights and off brands (Odyssea) catching fire, burning a house down, stealing your soul and molesting new borns. Recently I came into the business of hunting some MH lights. (I'll save that for later) at any rate, Everyone knows of the relative cheapness of the Odyssea setup, roughly 179 bucks for a 36in setup including a 250w halide and 2 39w T5's and about 259 for a doulbe 250w halide setup with 54w T5's. That is cheap. dirt cheap. Now the debate has always been whether these were trustworthy effective and whether they will burn your house down.

In comes the discussion, in chat Ryan had warned me of such lights which got me on the subject of trying to prove or debunk the myths behind these lights. I scoured roughly 97 pages from reefcentral and discovered a few things.

Problems with these lights in the past,

Burning/Overheating

This was supposedly due to the magnetic ballast as opposed to an e ballast, there was also some indication that the lights were probably not cooled effectively by the fans.

The other issue involved placement of some certain wire (i cannot remember) and its connector which apparently was prone to shorting and melting, hence being fire prone.

What i found out: yes these lights are prone to fire in the pre 2007 model, however the 2007-2009 models changed the wiring location and changed from magnetic to electronic.

The fans were replaced with external fixtures and were made larger.

This is all well and such but i did more digging and found this,

The ballast were electrically inefficient pulling roughly 67-72 percent of said power reducing a 250 watt to a 169ish watt making the 250 basically pointless, however the light was still effective at coral growth , just frustrating for people buying a product labeled 250 and then having that reduced to a 150 effective level.

Upon more digging I found that the ballast could be replaced, with (icecaps?) or other more reliable ballast hence making the total cost of the unit go up to 369 if you replaced both the ballast. People were relatively happy with the quick effective swap of ballast and had no complaints.

secondly the 2007-2009 model retained the CF's or PC's (cant remember which) and people were able to switch the mountings to fit a T5 fixture upping the par rating of the total fixture (i have these links somewhere I will post those results).

Onward still I have done some more digging and found that the newer 2010 models have replaced the ballast with solid ones that pull 90% or more of their rated output, and also discontinued the PC/CF models and switched them with HO T5 fixtures from the get go.

Now I just want general debate on this if anyone has any input or thoughts. I would also like to avoid the brand flaming, since everyone has heard the story of these things.


*EDIT* Needs to be moved to lighting.
 
Well, I can't speak to the output of the 250w ballast/bulb combo but, I've got one of the 48" models they sell and I've been very happy with it. I've only had it for 5 months now and up to this point I have no complaints, we'll see long term how they workout though. I'd like to get a PAR meter sometime next year so that I can actually test this fixture.
 
and do you have a Kill a watt meter to see what you are actually pulling through the bulb?

Not sure why that double posted, sorry. /edit
 
I've got the 48" 2x250w, 4x54w T5. I'm assuming it's the 2010 model as I got it august of this year. I don't have a kilowatt meter but I've got a multimeter, not sure if it can be used in the same manner.
 
the 2010 is supposed to have fixed all issues, of course we would want some proof of that if you could test it eventually. Did you replace your bulbs? or were the 15k's they sent good?
 
I used the stock bulbs up until a month ago, they were decent. I couldn't test the output obviously but, they had good color and I got better then average growth with them. Last month I upgraded to XM 15000k bulbs. The color on those is definitely bluer/brighter then the stock bulbs.
 
supposedly the reeflux bulbs at 12k or the pheonix bulbs at 14k are really nice, i was just wondering how the stock output was.
 
I don't have that fixture but how good do you feel about a company that has had such a long list of problems? Yes they may have fixed some,most or all of them but I would not trust my house and family to a companies product that has such a bad history.

This is just my opinion. I am a business owner and if my company had that many issues with our product we would not be around long. You get watt:D you pay for.
 
really the list was stemmed from one experience of a melted part, which started the whole burn your house down. The story grew from there. The mods i dont consider problems, as some people mod expensive high end name brand products as well.
 
Hey Im not saying don't get it or don't mod it. Im sure it would be a fine fixture lets face it this hobby is expensive! Im all for saving money on hardware and spending it on corals! If it was just one problem it may have been resolved. It sounded like there was a long list of problems with there product.
A lot of my competition was trying to get a big slice of the market by being the cheapest, and they did. That only lasted for 2 years now they are gone.
 
Back
Top