90 vs 75 for a mixed reef

Looking at the dimensions of a 120, I might just do that! I think tanks with the same height and depth look best. Thanks for your input Amay121. Keep it real, small
 
My first tank was a 90. I loved it.

reaching the sand was hard

I had 2x 150 10K MH and actinics

Great tank, I'd prefer the extra space at the top
 
Thanks for that thought and the lighting info. As I contemplate my options and inch up and up in size, I'm starting to worry a little about maintenance costs, particularly electricity. Anyone have any thoughts about running a 75 vs. 120 in terms of over-all maintenance costs? Salt, bulbs (t5HO), electricity, food, stocking, etc. If I go 24" high, I do think I'm going 24" deep as well as I really love that chunky look and the way you can work with the space. My original idea was to do a 50 and here's where I've found myself.:rolleyes: I need guidance.

Thanks, smalls
 
If you have the room, Id do the 120 over the 90 in a heartbeat. Initial costs would be a bit higher perhaps but water changes wouldnt be signifigantly higher.

My future upgrade will be a 24" deep (front to back) tank ... either 6 feet or 8 feet long. But it will be an inwall so I may look for a 20" tall tank for maint./accessibility reasons ... or have one custom built.

We contemplated a 120 when we got the 90 but the 90 replaced a custom built tank in a fish room and was the same footprint. Just didnt have the room for the extra 6" width in the tiny fish room. But I would have done it if at all possible. Glad I didnt now with the upgrade in the plans but IMO that extra depth can make for a nicer tank.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15047658#post15047658 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by small alien
Thanks for that thought and the lighting info. As I contemplate my options and inch up and up in size, I'm starting to worry a little about maintenance costs, particularly electricity. Anyone have any thoughts about running a 75 vs. 120 in terms of over-all maintenance costs? Salt, bulbs (t5HO), electricity, food, stocking, etc. If I go 24" high, I do think I'm going 24" deep as well as I really love that chunky look and the way you can work with the space. My original idea was to do a 50 and here's where I've found myself.:rolleyes: I need guidance.

Thanks, smalls

:lol:

Now you're considering a 120 over a 90 gallon?

Well,it's go BIG or go home.:rollface:
 
If you are going to go bigger, get a six foot 125 instead of a five foot 120. I have the five foot 120 and while it is bigger, I think a 125 would give you more options for aquascaping.
 
While the 125 gives you length, you also lose some width.

As to your 120g questions:

1) You can get a Tek light. It's a very good light, not super duper like an ATI but you'll save over $800 for other goodies. If you have the money, get an ATI, if not, go the poor man's route and get a Tek (8 bulb version).
2) Return pump - you'll probably use something along the lines of a mag 9-12 or eheim 1262 for a return. For me personally, go with a pump that is a little more Mag 18, or even external Reeflo Snapper. You can always throttle back, or create a T'd manifold from the return to other gear (skimmer, media reactor, calcium reactor, etc. etc.).
3) Salt, so you use a few extra cups of salt mix, no biggie. Containers come in 150g-200g mixes.
4) Stocking - This is totally up to you, but you'll be limited in some sense. Don't expect to keep the larger tangs, but I have seen some folks keep purples,yellows, and hippos (for a certain time before donating them or selling them), in 120s. You'll have to decide how you want to aquascape, and how much room that leaves for your livestock to run around in.
5) Flow - depending on what type of tank you'll be setting up (FOWLR, SPS, Mixed), you could get away with some of the smaller pumps (Koralia 4, MJ1200 with SureFlow kits, etc. etc.) If going with SPS, check out the used section, there's a massive amount of Tunze (controllable) being sold at the moment, only dislike about them, they're fairly chunky in the tank. Quite a few folks love the Vortechs, but $370+ each pump is pushing things for me.
6) Skimmer - Expect to pay between $400-$1000+. Once again, depends on what you want to get. If you have $550, you can get the ATB Cone 850 from PremiumAquatics (demo unit) right now.

Everything depends on what you want to do and how much you're willing to pay for it. On here, you'll see guys you have nano tanks ~10-20gallons who've spent thousands of dollars on and you'll see some folks who'll DIY and have tanks that are just as great for a fraction of the cost.

Remember, this is a hobby to enjoy, don't fret too much about it and start enjoying it. :)
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15050776#post15050776 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by DarG
If you have the room, Id do the 120 over the 90 in a heartbeat. Initial costs would be a bit higher perhaps but water changes wouldnt be signifigantly higher.

My future upgrade will be a 24" deep (front to back) tank ... either 6 feet or 8 feet long. But it will be an inwall so I may look for a 20" tall tank for maint./accessibility reasons ... or have one custom built.

We contemplated a 120 when we got the 90 but the 90 replaced a custom built tank in a fish room and was the same footprint. Just didnt have the room for the extra 6" width in the tiny fish room. But I would have done it if at all possible. Glad I didnt now with the upgrade in the plans but IMO that extra depth can make for a nicer tank.

I agree with DarG. I've had my 90 for 3 years and if I were to do it again, I'd buy a 120 because of the width of the tank. I think you can do a lot with the xtra 6" in width.
And if you plan on doing T5's you can fit more under the canopy. Like you, when I was planning my first tank, all I thought I wanted were LPS, but once I got a few Acros and Montis in my tank... All I want to do now is take out all of my LPS. With the addition of more SPS corals, I wanted to add more T5's but I'm maxed out with 6 bulbs because of the width of my tank.
Granted it will cost more initially, but in the long run if you're like me it would cost a whole lot more to upgrade from a 90 to a 120.
 
Thanks, everyone, for taking the time to share your thoughts. It really helps me wrap my mind around the various parameters. Y'all are awesome. -small
 
I planningfor 120 myself. The narrow tanks seem to have limitations with what you can do with the rock stack. My second choice is to get a 3 by 2 by2 = 90. Don't forget you get an additional 6 inches for room for sump and other crap with the 24" wide. Also you can get away with a single overflow(i like the center mount) on a 4' tank.

Downside is you need 3/4" thick glass if you want to avoid having a center brace for 120. This is a bit more costly.

The 3.2.2 uses 1/2" glass and does not require a center brace.

Happy reefin
 
Back
Top