2 Kessil H80's or 1 H830?

[Peter K]

Hey all,

So I currently have a refugium that is lit by a single Kessil H80 but I am not really seeing the results I was hoping for, based on how little par it actually puts out from BRS's video, I was wondering if 2 H80's would be comparable or at least 75% comparable to an H380 or if I should just bite the bullet and get an H380 and be done with it. Fuge is 12" x 14" and 10 inches deep. Thanks all

 

[Crabs McJones]

Hey all,

So I currently have a refugium that is lit by a single Kessil H80 but I am not really seeing the results I was hoping for, based on how little par it actually puts out from BRS's video, I was wondering if 2 H80's would be comparable or at least 75% comparable to an H380 or if I should just bite the bullet and get an H380 and be done with it. Fuge is 12" x 14" and 10 inches deep. Thanks all

Go H380, I did and have not regretted it ever since, reference the thread "Kessil H380 Discussion" in my signature for more information if you'd like

 

[madweazl]

Hey all,

So I currently have a refugium that is lit by a single Kessil H80 but I am not really seeing the results I was hoping for, based on how little par it actually puts out from BRS's video, I was wondering if 2 H80's would be comparable or at least 75% comparable to an H380 or if I should just bite the bullet and get an H380 and be done with it. Fuge is 12" x 14" and 10 inches deep. Thanks all

My refugium is literally the exact same dimensions and I've had good results with the H80. I would like to see a bit more grunt (50% is a good arbitrary number...) from the light to aid with deeper penetration once the algae gets really dense. I don't recall BRS' measurements of the light but I got right around 105 PAR (Apogee MQ500) from it just under the surface of the water.

This is a recent picture; I'm not sure why some people have issues and some have good results with it but I guess that is just like any other light source over tanks.

 

[Crabs McJones]

My refugium is literally the exact same dimensions and I've had good results with the H80. I would like to see a bit more grunt (50% is a good arbitrary number...) from the light to aid with deeper penetration once the algae gets really dense. I don't recall BRS' measurements of the light but I got right around 105 PAR (Apogee MQ500) from it just under the surface of the water.

This is a recent picture; I'm not sure why some people have issues and some have good results with it but I guess that is just like any other light source over tanks.

Is that caulerpa or chaeto in your fuge?

 

[madweazl]

Yes! LOL. It's both; there were three species of caulerpa; I'm not sure if all three remain as a different species has been dominant only to be taken over by another at various points over the last year and a half. The cheato wasn't introduced on purpose, it hitchhiked its way in with the caulerpa and there were literally only a couple strands of it for well over a year until it was crazy about two months ago. I think this is a big reason Triton recommends a variety of macro algae in the beginning.

 

[Peter K]

My problem with the H80 is I had two cheap ebay grow lights on my fuge for a total of maybe $30 and I am seeing the same growth if not slightly slower with the H80. Purely based on wattage though the H80 is only 1/3 of the two lights I had on it, which is leading me to believe the H380 will be the best solution and just saving the H80 for another tank down the line.

 

[madweazl]

My problem with the H80 is I had two cheap ebay grow lights on my fuge for a total of maybe $30 and I am seeing the same growth if not slightly slower with the H80. Purely based on wattage though the H80 is only 1/3 of the two lights I had on it, which is leading me to believe the H380 will be the best solution and just saving the H80 for another tank down the line.

I have little doubt the H380 that is six times stronger will outperform two 15w, H80s but I dont know that it will have significant, positive results for you either. Is there something specific you want to change in regard to tank parameters (e.g. increase pH, reduce heavy metals, phosphate, etc.)? I dont know where the point of diminishing returns is going to be so it's impossible to recommend one or the other. If I were to do it again, I'd probably just grab the H380.

 

[Peter K]

It is a combination of things, phosphate slightly high but my phosphate hovers between .04-.08 (mg/l) so wouldn't mind getting that a bit closer to .02-.03 more consistently. PH I have no issues with (8.3-8.4 during the day). Biggest thing I have been, and continued to be, frustrated with is battling cyano in our main display, it has never taken over but just seeing it patches makes my eye twitch. Nitrates are between 0-1 and everything else seems to be fine, we do dose No3po4x but at a tiny amount compared to their recommended dose. I started dosing coral snow / zeo back to try to help (as they claim to) but I haven't noticed any difference. We never have it on our rocks it is only on our sand bed but siphoning the sand doesn't seem to really make that much of a difference as it just comes back in small patches after a few days. I was thinking that perhaps upping the power of the light on our fuge compared to our display tank might help either the chaeto to out compete it or keep the cyano in our sump. (Molybdenum was high in my last triton test, don't really know a whole lot about it but triton said that can also cause cyano, however, I haven't found any useful information in how to decrease it directly besides switching off no3po4x as it can contain it, however, I'm scared to get off it completely as everything else is doing so well in my tank besdies for a few cyano patches every so often)

 

[madweazl]

My opinion is that it wont change anything regarding your cyanobacteria issue. What is the volume of your refugium in regard to your total volume? Mine is a hair over 10% and I have no issues with it keeping nitrate and phosphate levels in check with two heavy feedings a day. I'm not a fan of running anything (N03Pox, GFO, etc.) and try to keep it natural as possible but if the refugium isn't large enough, that may not be a realistic option.

 

[Peter K]

It's roughly 10 gallons for a 180 gallon display, wish I had room to go bigger I might end up going with a chaeto reactor and getting off no3po4x. Thank you @madweazl for putting things in perspective lol, cyano makes me want to scream sometimes *all the time.