Bubble Master 200 vs. ER RC-135

[Tennsquire]

I'm looking to upgrade my skimmer now, with an eye toward upgrading the tank (75 => 120) in the near future. How do these two skimmers compare? I know the pump wattage is pretty similar. I don't have a whole lot of room under my stand right now, and am currently running a ER CS-1 with a Sedra 5000 on it. It produces well, but like I mentioned, I'm getting ready to go bigger soon and am keeping that in mind for this skimmer. I know a 24" skimmer will fit, but I don't think I can cram the ER RC-180 in my sump. I've read a ton of Bubble Master threads, but didn't see many people (if any at all) comparing the recirculating ER's with the BM. Tank is 75 gallon mixed reef (lots of sps), shallow sand bed, over 100 lbs of rock, currently with a pair of mated percs and a two-spot goby. Fish load will eventually increase.

 

[Lumamae]

I think the BM160 800lph-900lph is a more comparable model to the RS135 700lph-800lph and capacity is similar. The BM200 1000lph-1100lph will perform better than RS135, closer to RS180.

 

[Wryknow]

The BM 200 is too much skimmer for a 75 or 125 IMHO. The BM line have a very wide (and short) neck, which means that while they reduce proteins quickly, they need enough waste to generate the volume of foam it takes to produce skimmate. If you over size them they don't work as well in my experience. They are great skimmers when they are correctly sized though. I think that you should look at the BM 160, which is more than adequate for a well-stocked 125.

 

[Paulairduck]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10799190#post10799190 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Wryknow
The BM 200 is too much skimmer for a 75 or 125 IMHO. The BM line have a very wide (and short) neck, which means that while they reduce proteins quickly, they need enough waste to generate the volume of foam it takes to produce skimmate. If you over size them they don't work as well in my experience. They are great skimmers when they are correctly sized though. I think that you should look at the BM 160, which is more than adequate for a well-stocked 125.

I agree my BM-200 on my 100 gallon was not the right match, not even enough bio-load.

 

[hansmatt]

With no bm experience, I'd agree that the 160 is better suited. Most argue that if you have a severely overpowered skimmer you don't get the full benefits as an appropriately sized one. Many ownwers of the BM skimmers have said this.

 

[Lumamae]

I need to agree with everyone that you should take a look at the BM160 instead of the BM200, more appropriately matched. Several hobbyists in our local forum posted that their new BM160 outperforms the ER that they replaced.

 

[Reef Sponger]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10799190#post10799190 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Wryknow
The BM 200 is too much skimmer for a 75 or 125 IMHO. The BM line have a very wide (and short) neck, which means that while they reduce proteins quickly, they need enough waste to generate the volume of foam it takes to produce skimmate. If you over size them they don't work as well in my experience. They are great skimmers when they are correctly sized though. I think that you should look at the BM 160, which is more than adequate for a well-stocked 125.

this advice is right on.

 

[Reef Sponger]

Here's a couple of new BM160 owner's comments on BM vs ER.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10647882#post10647882 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by taketz
I just switched out an older model RS-80 skimmer for a BM 160 and the comparison isn't even fair. I know, with the price and the size of tank that they are rated for, one would hope it would be significantly more effective. However, you also have to add the small footprint of the 160 into the equation, its pretty amazing really. I know, for my small amount of room that I had available, its the best option possible (besides possibly the extremely expensive Bubbleking).

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10678642#post10678642 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by revenant
I'm at about the same stage, hour 21. I am finally getting some decent skimmate also.. came home to that nice surprize.. woohoo! we have waste! This skimmer is about 3x more powerful than my previous one (E.R. RS80), so I am happy about that for sure.. so far so good.. I have to say the price was a bit steep, but oh well. you tend to get what you pay for with a lot of things.. I think this is one of them. Well, I hope so. Seems like from the positive reports of others this is the case though.

 

[disbjohn]

would a bm200 be suitable for a 180 then? do you know if the 200's have the same gate valve as the 160 and 250?

 

[kdblove_99]

I would get the ER Especially since its a Recirc skimmer and very well built

 

[Lumamae]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10800348#post10800348 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by disbjohn
would a bm200 be suitable for a 180 then? do you know if the 200's have the same gate valve as the 160 and 250?

From the photos on the ReefGeek sponsored forum and their website, no, it is an external gate valve, not built into the body. BM200 is fine for 180g, but too big for the 120g you mentioned earlier.

 

[sjm817]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10800149#post10800149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Reef Sponger
Here's a couple of new BM160 owner's comments on BM vs ER.

I would hope the $460 BM160 would outperform the $180 RS80.

 

[lvpd186]

I would have to disagree a little bit with saying that the BM200 is too big for a 120g tank. I have a BM250 on my 120g. tank and it consistently performs fine. I will admit that it is over sized and the BM200 would probably be a better fit, but a BM160 is only rated for a "heavily stocked 100g tank" where as a BM200 is rated for a tank up to 250g. I think just about everyone would agree that skimmer ratings are usually inflated a bit and every tank is a little bit different. IMO I think it is better to over-skim a little bit. The argument that it is better to be a little undersized so that the skimmer always has something to skim doesn't make much sense to me. I would rather have the skimmer get everything out that it can as soon as it can then have it constantly trying to keep up.

sjm817 - your tag line says that you run a BM250 on a 180g tank, do you think you are way oversized/overskimmed or is it a fairly good fit?

 

[lvpd186]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10800348#post10800348 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by disbjohn
would a bm200 be suitable for a 180 then? do you know if the 200's have the same gate valve as the 160 and 250?

I think the photo that reefgeek is using is out of date. According to the description "Complete with collection cup, built-in gate valve..." there is a built in gate valve. The first series of BM200s did not have a gate valve, but I think all the new ones do. IMO I think the BM200 would work great on a 180g tank whereas the BM160 would be a little undersized.

 

[sjm817]

I'd say it is a fairly good fit. I have ~ 250G total volume including sump and fuge. It skims a bit better than my previous skimmer, an ER RS250. I think a BM200 would have been a downgrade. I pretty much ignore skimmer "ratings" since they are generally quite inflated.

 

[Tennsquire]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10804497#post10804497 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by sjm817
I would hope the $460 BM160 would outperform the $180 RS80.

I currently have an older Euroreef CS6-1 with an oversized pump, and it does a pretty good job. My choice was between the re-circulating ER or a Bubble Master. I'm assuming that the performance on a re-circulating ER would be somewhere between what I have now and the Bubble Master?

I appreciate the feedback on the BMs and the importance not to go too big. I always try to buy equipment with an eye toward upgrading in the future, but it sounds like that's not the best thing to do in this instance.

 

[Lumamae]

When I commented on the BM160, it was a better comparison to the ER135 you were considering. The BM200 would be more closely compared to the ER180. I don't know the BM line very well, my comment on the BM160 being a better match for you 120g is from this post. This guy seems to have tried a lot of high end skimmers and know what he's talking about.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10716867#post10716867 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Freds
Ed is on smack to recommend a BM 200 for a 90 gallon tank. I think it was on zeo but it may have been a European forum, Oliver stated that people should NOT be buying oversized BMs for their tanks. I ran a BM 200 on a Bare bottom heavy stocked, heavy fed 90 and it was WAY too big a skimmer. It pulled out tar for the first two weeks and then nothing (symptom of too big a skimmer syndrome). It would pull out nasty skimmate after I fed but then go back to idle until more food was given.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10721899#post10721899 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Freds
I disagree, having owned many of the high end skimmers such as H&S and Deltec. IME the BM200 is comparable to the Deltec AP701. My only issue with both of those skimmers is the they would both perform better with a larger reaction chamber, such as in the AP851. The contact time of the BM200 could be better. That being said the air draw and bubble size of the BM series blows the doors off the Deltec and H&S models however the small contact time somewhat evens them out.