120 gal 60" vs 72"
- Thread starter Tingy99
- Start date
MiddletonMark
Premium Member
What are the exact dimensions of each?
The front-back glass depth, IMO is a worthy consideration. If going for a full-scale reef, IMO the more front-to-back space you have, the more aesthetically pleasing to my eye.
When making a live rock landscape, having a 12" front-back tank makes it difficult, even with 18" I wish I had more. While for fish you may want a long tank for swimming - for aquascaping that's tricky.
Also, for lighting a reef - a longer tank may require more bulbs/expense ... and then power bill. I would pay attention to finding a good light fixture before getting the tank - 60" IMO is a better option but lighting might turn to be more expensive.
Depending on your lighting plans + stocking plans - maybe one makes more sense.
Personally, I lean toward the 4' x 2' 120, as the aquascaping gives more options - and for lighting 2 MH will do the trick, where more would be needed if the tank was longer. But that's so I can re-use my current lighting. If I used just T-5 or VHO - it might be less of a difference - your lighting/stocking plans might not be impacted as much.
That's my take on tank-dimensions. Many others out there, I'd encourage you to find as many as you can
You just might have a different idea of what you want than I do of what I want.
The front-back glass depth, IMO is a worthy consideration. If going for a full-scale reef, IMO the more front-to-back space you have, the more aesthetically pleasing to my eye.
When making a live rock landscape, having a 12" front-back tank makes it difficult, even with 18" I wish I had more. While for fish you may want a long tank for swimming - for aquascaping that's tricky.
Also, for lighting a reef - a longer tank may require more bulbs/expense ... and then power bill. I would pay attention to finding a good light fixture before getting the tank - 60" IMO is a better option but lighting might turn to be more expensive.
Depending on your lighting plans + stocking plans - maybe one makes more sense.
Personally, I lean toward the 4' x 2' 120, as the aquascaping gives more options - and for lighting 2 MH will do the trick, where more would be needed if the tank was longer. But that's so I can re-use my current lighting. If I used just T-5 or VHO - it might be less of a difference - your lighting/stocking plans might not be impacted as much.
That's my take on tank-dimensions. Many others out there, I'd encourage you to find as many as you can
You just might have a different idea of what you want than I do of what I want.
crumbletop
New member
I agree. The 4x2 120 (48" x 24") would be a better dimension for a 120. That's like my 90 with 6 more inches of depth. a 60" will likely be 18" depth, and a few inches taller than my 90. That will be harder to clean unless you have arms like Sam Perkins, and light will not penetrate to the bottom as well, so you'll be more limited in what you can keep, and what lighting you can work with. 6" extra depth would be nice for aquascaping.
Jack
Jack
