# Lighting system for 40 gal???!!!



## aquaphish (Jan 22, 2005)

I am currently rescaping my 40 gal and want to also upgrade the lighting system I currently have.

Right now I have a DIY lighting system using 4 36" ZOOMED Flourecsents. I use 2 Tropic Sun and 2 FloraSun which gives me 2.5wpg. I was thinking of replacing this setup with something from AHSupply. What will be a good setup that will give my better lighting for higher light plant requirements? Thinking of the 2X96 or is this too much?


----------



## epicfish (Sep 11, 2006)

Do you plan on injecting CO2 and fertilizing?

2x96w over a 40 gallon gives 4.8WPG, which is a lot. If you can find a way and get ~140watts for 3.5WPG, I think that'd be idea.

However, with a religious WC and fertilizing schedule, I think you'd be able to pull it off with the 2x96w set.

Another alternative would be to go for a T5 setup: 4x39w, giving 156watts, or 3.9WPG. I think this would be the best setup to go with.

Something like two of these would work out swell: eBay: T5 HO Retro kit 2 39 watt NEW light bulbs aquarium Reef (item 4339370310 end time Nov-13-06 09:03:32 PST)


----------



## MatPat (Mar 22, 2004)

I have to ask why? Is your current setup not working for you or do you just want to try your hand at higher lighting?


----------



## aquaphish (Jan 22, 2005)

MatPat said:


> I have to ask why? Is your current setup not working for you or do you just want to try your hand at higher lighting?


Actually my lighting system is working fine. I just want to experiement on other plants that require a higher than 2.5wpg light requirements. And see what higher lighting does for what I have now.


----------



## John N. (Dec 11, 2005)

When I was thinking about lights for a 40 gallon, I was considering a 2x96 watt setup to maximize the light, and get the best colors out of the plants. Knowing that this is a lot of light, you'll have to be prepared with pressurized CO2, ferts, and ready to experiment with noon burst effects and altering the photoperiod. 

So to answer your question, yes it's a lot of light, but will give you the means for rapid growth, and high color intensity from the plants, but ultimately at the risk of algae problems if ferts, CO2 and lights aren't balance appropriately. If you''re ready for the challenge then get the 2x96watt for your 40 gallon.

-John N.


----------



## aquaphish (Jan 22, 2005)

I do have a pressurized CO2 system and do add CSM+B, KNO3, K2SO4, and keep the PO4 up with KH2PO4. But with the 2X96 I will be looking at 4.8wpg. That is lots of light.

Right now I do get some nice color out of the "red" plants I have, but there are "green" plants that require higher wpg than 2.5wpg which I have right now.

Another consideration I was exploring is to keep two of the T8's and replacing the other two with a single 96w. This will give me about 3.65wpg. 

Now has anyone mixed T8's with PC's? If I go this route will the mix of flourecsent and PC lighting give me a good looking light appearance. Not too much yellow or too much blue or pink/reddish light color?

ED


----------



## MatPat (Mar 22, 2004)

aquaphish said:


> Actually my lighting system is working fine. I just want to experiement on other plants that require a higher than 2.5wpg light requirements. And see what higher lighting does for what I have now.


I was just curious as to your desire to add more light. It is always good to "experiment" with light and other nutrients. If folks had not experimented years ago with PO4 we may still be afraid to add that in the large amounts like we do today 

My only issue with your statement is I have yet to find any plants that will not grow well at around 2.5wpg, at least in a larger tank. Nearly 2 years ago, I kept a Tonina tank with T. belem, T. manaus, and T. fluviatilis along with other supposedly light demanding plants like P. stellatus, R. macrandra and Ammania gracilis in a 30g tank with about 3wpg of ODNO T-8 lights and no reflectors. Everything grew well at these lighting levels. They may have grown faster with more light, but I don't think "more" light would have made them look better.

The nicest, reddest R. macrandra I have ever grown was with about 1.8 wpg in my 75g tank. No algae problems in the tank at all and The R. macrandra had very nice, bright red color. I've never been able to grow it as well for any length of time since upgrading the lights on the tank. It did grow very slowly at those light levels but it looked very good. The tank was lit with three 9325K T-8 lamps and one 40w Nutrigrow bulb.

Just keep in mind that the more light you add, the more nutrients you are going to need to add. It is fairly easy to add more nutrients to prevent dficiencies but getting enough CO2 to the plants may become your limiting factor. I think some folks are beginning to find this out with the higher light levels we are using today.

All of that said, I am interested in hearing what type of light you decide upon and how your tank fares after the increase


----------



## aquaphish (Jan 22, 2005)

MatPat said:


> I was just curious as to your desire to add more light. It is always good to "experiment" with light and other nutrients. If folks had not experimented years ago with PO4 we may still be afraid to add that in the large amounts like we do today
> 
> My only issue with your statement is I have yet to find any plants that will not grow well at around 2.5wpg, at least in a larger tank. Nearly 2 years ago, I kept a Tonina tank with T. belem, T. manaus, and T. fluviatilis along with other supposedly light demanding plants like P. stellatus, R. macrandra and Ammania gracilis in a 30g tank with about 3wpg of ODNO T-8 lights and no reflectors. Everything grew well at these lighting levels. They may have grown faster with more light, but I don't think "more" light would have made them look better.
> 
> ...


Sorry it took so long to respond to this. It seems like you have much sucess with 3WPG with OD T8's. But I do not have OD T8's and 3WPG, 30 gal. like you had.

I am trying to find info on upgrading my light system and what I should use for a 40 gal. to increase my WPG. Right now I have like mentioned before 4 T8 25w. Not OD Lights are ZOOMED 2 Flora Sun and 2 Ultra Sun 2.5wpg.

If anyone has experience using lighting in a 40gal with 3.0+wpg let me know what you are using and I will consider what is presented.


----------



## epicfish (Sep 11, 2006)

2x96w from AHS is ~$215 I think, last time I checked.

If you check out this link, it'll cost $232.50 for 3 of those kits and get 234 watts out of it, ~5.9WPG if all the lights are on the same time. This kit uses Sunlight Supply Tek reflectors which are one of the top T5 reflectors out on the market. They're the same reflectors used in the Tek fixtures.

With 3 fixtures, you'll get a lot of options with your lighting photoperiod just in case you do experience problems with algae. ie: Have the middle bank on for 9-10 hours a day for at least 2WPG. During the middle of the day, have the front bank turn on for 2 hours, then turn off, and then the back bank turn on for 2 hours, then off. During the 4 hour span, you'll hit 4WPG.

The drawback is that the 3 retrofit kits will need quite a bit of space to fit over your tank. The plus of that is that you'll get even lighting front-to-back if all 3 banks of lights are on.


----------



## wantabe23 (Apr 6, 2005)

*I have a 40 g*

I have a 40g "breeder" that I have planted with one coral life 96w compact floresent and then a JBJ 36w floresent in the front, that is 3.3 wpg. I also have a timed preasurized co2 injected in this one with a cintered glass diffuser. I also use the Greg Watson fertalizers (I really like them). I have some gloso that is growing kind of high in the front, But I really like the set up but I am currently looking in to Tek T-5 lighting. The 4x39w 36" one that is about 260 USD. Personally I think that if the wattage is to much on the T-5 then I can take a bulb out, where on a compact floresent the bulb wattage comes in much large amounts so just taking out a bulb is not an easy option. On the other another choice could be getting one 96w and one 55w for the front, my problem with the 36w is the coverage is rather small so I end up moving it around a lot. Another thing with the T-5 that I am considdering is that the bulb replacement is not nearly expensive percentage wise and the bulbs last longer. For example a 96w bulb ran me at least 65 dollars, that is over half of what I could pay for a new fixture all together! Where as a t-5 bulb will run 25-30 dollars (I think) and will last about 1 1/2 years. I got a year out of my 96w CF but I think they begin go bad dramatically after six months. I am also interested in the t-5 because if you get the right ballast you can dim them. I am not sure if you can do this with cp. 
Well thats my 2 cents. Questions welcome.


----------

