acrylic tank

[ryshark]

Since I live in California I have decided on ordering an acrylic tank for my 180-upgrade 72x24x24, which I want to get started asap. I have my choices narrowed down to two acrylic tanks and I cannot decide. Please tell me if you would go with choice 1 or 2.

1. CASCO/Seaclear with 3/8" acrylic on the sides and 1/2" on top and bottom.
or
2.Clear For Life 1/2" acrylic all the way around for $82 more than the casco.

 

[rezaktp]

I would go with the 1/2".

Also please check the vendors waranty info, you cannot drill any holes or use MH lighting. I believe both will void the warranty. The heat from the MH has a tendancy to stress the top of acrylic tanks and a crack can develope in the bracing between the access panel and the overflow.

 

[spleify]

I would also suggest 1/2" acrylic

 

[ryshark]

thank you, that is what I am going to do. I will look into the warranty with halides because that is what I plan on running with vho supplement.

 

[hebygb]

what was said above is probably true, however I have an acrylic 65 gallon tank 3/8" all around and on top, and have been running 2 MH and two T5s over it for two years... no problems, no defects. Now I know that this is considered a nano to many of you, but the principle is the same. My tank originated from the eebay store in Phoenix AZ.

 

[lizardarm]

The heat from the MH has a tendancy to stress the top of acrylic tanks and a crack can develope in the bracing between the access panel and the overflow

I'm sorry for pushing the thread off course, but can you explain better what you mean here. I'm not sure what you mean by access panel. I ask because I've got an acrylic aquarium that seems to have a leak between the overflow box and the rest of the tank that I've never been able to find. I run halides and have noticed that the top piece of acrylic does have a bit of a bulge in it.
To address the original question- I'd go with the 1/2" all the way around deal. I'm not really sure what the use is in having the top and bottom pieces being thicker; I'd think if anything you'd want it the other way around. The 3/8" acrylic is bound to bow quite a bit.
-Chris

 

[CMcNeil]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13788627#post13788627 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by rezaktp
I would go with the 1/2".

Also please check the vendors waranty info, you cannot drill any holes or use MH lighting. I believe both will void the warranty. The heat from the MH has a tendancy to stress the top of acrylic tanks and a crack can develope in the bracing between the access panel and the overflow.

it only stresses the tank IF it is underbuilt,saying that IMO 1/2" is underbuilt for a 72"x24"x24" tank.my old 5x2x2 was 3/4" top to bottom,built like tank and made to handle the added stress of a wavebox and halides.

 

[ryshark]

Another option I have with the 1/2" tank is I can pay another $125 and get 3/4" just on the top and then they would make the access holes 2" bigger in length and width. Opinions?

 

[ryshark]

Another option I have with the 1/2" tank is I can pay another $125 and get 3/4" just on the top and then they would make the access holes 2" bigger in length and width. Opinions?

 

[CMcNeil]

id rather have the tank walls built from 3/4 and the top and bottom from 1/2

 

[Acrylics]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13793979#post13793979 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by CMcNeil
id rather have the tank walls built from 3/4 and the top and bottom from 1/2

Exactly correct.
Keep in mind that then thicker the material, the less it will bow. The less it bows, the flatter the front pane, the easier it is to clean *without scratching it*.
The more a tank bows, the more scratches you'll get because the pressure is applied to the two outermost points of the scraper rather than on the full scraping surface. If the scraper is fully on the acrylic, the less chance of sand and other particulate matter getting in between the scraper and tank, therefore the less chance of scratching. It's a win-win for thicker material.

Lizardarm,
The top panel bulging up has to do with moisture absorption, not MH. It would happen the same way whether you use any other lighting or none at all.
I *think* what rezaktp was referring to was that if the mfr makes the bracing too narrow between the overflow access hole and the primary access hole, cracks can develop between them as heat stresses the area to the point of failure. This is also due to the mfr not using a larger radius in the corners. Hope this makes sense.

James