I dangle mine personally an animal should NEVER EVER come between a probe and a heat source for long. It blocks the heat with its body and causes the t-stat to kick in to full gear. I used my specific temps as a example as that is what I have this month. 130º gives me 90º on the top most surface a snake can lay, and 94º on the most dorsal surface of the animal (if there were an animal in my test enclosure) I never want any of mine to have a relatively small area heated beyond this as it is the point where body function becomes effected.
I just ask for simple fact. You claim they are more efficient, and yet they are higher wattage, and your example they lose up to 100ºF. I set uth to 91-2º and get basically 90º give or take half a degree here and there, for less power and lower purchase price. To my mind that is efficient. Unbiased opinion? Oxymoron. Opinions by nature are biased on experience. I use RHP in arboreal set ups they are super efficient this way, heat where and how you want it. I 100% recommend them this way as they were designed to be used. Terrestrial set ups I do not believe they are efficient or do what many claim, heat air. They cost more, lose more heat, (100º still blows me away) and need more power (in most cases 4x) to generate the same hot spot.
I personally do not feel that a snake should be subjected to higher temps on a surface they can lay upon greater than 94ºF the animals safety is paramount. This in my case means I cannot get the 'floor' warmer than 88ºF with out compromising this basic principal. RHP heats down not up. So the nearest thing to the panel two inches over it (thickness of the snake) should never be allowed to be greater than 94ºF.









. I set uth to 91-2º and get basically 90º give or take half a degree here and there, for less power and lower purchase price. To my mind that is efficient. Unbiased opinion? Oxymoron. Opinions by nature are biased on experience. I use RHP in arboreal set ups they are super efficient this way, heat where and how you want it. I 100% recommend them this way as they were designed to be used. Terrestrial set ups I do not believe they are efficient or do what many claim, heat air. They cost more, lose more heat, (100º still blows me away) and need more power (in most cases 4x) to generate the same hot spot.
Reply With Quote