Bigger tanks are easier myth or truth?

[rovster]

Going back to the origional question, are you talking from a pure "maintenance" perspective, or are you asking if its easier to be successful? If its purely maintenance, then the nano wins hands down IMHO. If you are talking about chances of success, I go back to my origional comment and say it depends on how prepared you are and what your plans are for the system. Just thought I'd throw that out there

 

[miniwhinny]

One of the biggest problems I see with smaller tanks is people wanting to stock them like big ones. 6 fish in a 10 gallon is going to cause all kinds of issues from water quality to territory issues.

I think I've personally found the perfect size for myself, a 40b. Big enough to allow for some awesome coral growth/placement/stocking but small enough that it's quick and easy to maintain and not very costly.

 

[RubberFrog]

I would say false. My first and only tank has been a 14 gallon biocube, and I have to say it's been a lot easier than I thought. I'm in the planning stages of a larger tank so I'll let you know, LOL. Honestly though, I think it depends on how prepared/informed you are and what you are intending to do. If you are planning an SPS dominant nano as a first tank, I say that's ultra difficult. If you want a nano with just fish or easier corals, I say it's pretty easy as long as you have a good idea of what you need to do.

In theory, big tanks are more forgiving of ERRORS on your part. That is the only advantage.

Knowing what I know now, I'd say something in the 25-55 gallon range would be pretty easy from a maintenance standpoint.

That sounds like a qualified opinion to me. Why even read further?

 

[blt]

IMO, there's a curve to it. The bigger you get, the more stable the water parameters are. The bigger you get, the more difficult it can be to work in the tank as well, though. And then the potential difficulty of keeping your finances in order when running larger and larger tanks

Sweet spot is around 75-90 Gal (again, IMO) when starting for several reasons, but smaller tanks certainly aren't as difficult as people used to consider them.

 

[Sk8r]

IMO 100 is a great beginner size for a person sure they want to be in the hobby. I have a 54 only because I was in an apartment at the time. I mourn my 100g that I left in Oklahoma. It afforded so much more freedom of what to keep and more room for moderate-sized fish. The littlest fish are delicate, as a group, requiring particular conditions, and one mis-acquired 'show' fish can wipe out every 'little' fish you've got, sometimes by competition, sometimes just because fish that are crowded can decide to reduce the population to just-them.

 

[jong11]

My first and only tank is a 10 gallon. I haven't had any challenges that one wouldn't have encountered on a larger tank. Maintenance is easy, 1 gallon water change a week. Low power, equipment, and supply costs as well.

 

[Leafer]

Folks so far have not mentioned something that is a big factor to me. "œJam Job frustration". I have a 55 gallon and it was such a challenge getting stuff under the stand. I was limited to a small sump and fudge and it was a major challenge to get everything in there and service stuff. After countless F@(ks and floods I am getting a large tank and moving to a basement sump for this very reason. It will be wonderful. Now, with larger tanks you will have more room in that stand to organize as you want to.

 

[jason2459]

I find my water change only 20g easier to maintain then either my 55g or now 180g.

 

[Reefing Newbie]

Honestly it deepends on how much you want to put effort into the tank. If you have a heater mishap where it stops heating, the temp in the tank will fall to room temp much faster in a nano that say a 75-100 gallon tank will. I personally am starting off with a 125 gallon tank because I like tangs are some larger fish. You have more livestock options with larger tanks, and your water chemistry is a little harder to change than in a smaller tank.

 

[greech]

While I would love a larger tank, I honsetly could not afford to do have anything much bigger than what I have now. A post above mentions that startup costs for large tanks are higher but maintenance is cheaper. I don't see how this could be the case by simply gauging the cost of salt and water alone. A 180 gallon would need an approximate 20 gallon+ change per week verus the 6 to 8 gallons/week I do now. I would think the cost of maintaining a tank has to be somewhat linear as the size increases.

 

[rovster]

That sounds like a qualified opinion to me. Why even read further?

Nice attitude bud. It is qualified because I like most people on here have a saltwater aquarium and I have my opinion on it and I'm just sharing my experience. There is a lot of misinformation on nanos. They are not overly difficult to keep like most on here assume.

 

[James77]

Completely false IMO.

With a reasonable amount of effort in maintenance and educating yourslef, a tank of any size will be succesful.

 

[gablett]

I must say my 220 costs a lot more to maintain than my 50 gallon did. Bad things seem to happen slower is all I notice. But the price tag for everything is super sized.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk

 

[stiltman]

I think this use to be true, but with the explosion of the Internet and all of its information(i.e other people's experience), both can be just as easy.

Actually, my 70g is more demanding than my daughter's 7g. I can go months without changing the water in her tank, and he sees no algae growth or bad signs. I fight algae weekly in my tank.

Throw in all the extra equipment in the big tank, and it's hard to say that bigger is easier. Obviously the bigger the volume the more room for error, but with auto-top off and a $100 controller for lights and temperature, small tanks can be a piece of cake if you aren't over stocked. For the record, I'm not advocating no water changes for months. She doesn't have any demanding corals, so that helps me get away with it. I don't understand how she gets literally no algae. It's really not fair.

Mark

Mark, can you recommend a good/cheap controller?

 

[Jocko]

Absolutely true. Which is not to say it's somehow impossible to keep a smaller tank. Which seems to be what many people are saying.

But the fact is, changes in water params are the primary problem most of us encounter most frequently. And with a larger volume of water, it takes more to move the params. This provides a larger buffer for error. It takes longer to get into a bad state and it's harder to freak out and "over-correct" when you do. So, fundamentally, easier.

But either way, controller is the way to go! Stiltman, you're going to want to look at either the Neptune Apex Lite or the Digital Aquatics Reefkeeper Lite.

 

[Danzig]

True, less fluctuations because the water is less concentrated with things like ammonia if say a fish were to die and you didn't notice. This situation could wipe out a smaller tank.

 

[Bosha]

Thanks again for everyone's input. I am still doing more research and reading on just about everything.

Some decisions that need to be made:
Tank location
Lighting - MH - T5 - LED
Sand or BB
Research husbandry needs for corals I like - want mostly SPS in the end

 

[stiltman]

Absolutely true. Which is not to say it's somehow impossible to keep a smaller tank. Which seems to be what many people are saying.

But the fact is, changes in water params are the primary problem most of us encounter most frequently. And with a larger volume of water, it takes more to move the params. This provides a larger buffer for error. It takes longer to get into a bad state and it's harder to freak out and "over-correct" when you do. So, fundamentally, easier.

But either way, controller is the way to go! Stiltman, you're going to want to look at either the Neptune Apex Lite or the Digital Aquatics Reefkeeper Lite.

Thanks!

I started with a BC 14. I would recommend against it. I had my tank get wiped out several times. I think a lot of people would have quit the hobby.

I think a larger (75 to 90gal) tank is more of a "beginner"tank" and anything much smaller or larger is better left to someone with more experience. (not saying anything about your experience in the hobby because I don't know how much you have. Just saying on general).

This is advice I laughed at from a LFS because I thought they were just trying to upsale me. I wish I had taken that advice. It would have saved me a bunch of money and less livestock would have gone to waste.

Plenty of people have started with nano tanks and done well. That doesn't necessarily mean it is the preferred method.

May I just suggest you should absolutely consider getting an RO/DI unit and an ATO. Makes your life way easier and your tank much more stable.

Good luck!

 

[SNAKEMANVET]

The main thing that really helped me was adding a ato on my 28 gallon nano and regular water changes.I had a large tank (240) and really enjoyed it,but the cost of salt and electricity was not.But a smaller tank is little harder to maintain/keep staple.

 

[Jocko]

I had a BC14 at one point. It had a MH retrofit in the hood. One random May day it was hotter than usual up into the mid-80s I think. Came home form work and the tank temp was like 89 degrees. That's an example of what I'm talking about. Don't pay attention to the weather forecast one day and you can get wiped out. Although as others have pointed out, you can certainly help prevent that type of situation with a controller (something I started doing not longer after that incident by the way!). But that's only one example.