I'd like to see evidence of your claim.
I like to see some evidence that refutes the claim. :wave:
To bad it would be so hard to run a true test and put two equal skimmers side by side one cone one not and see how it turns out. I know they both work, but it would be cool to see if one had a small edge over the other.
It been done with many different skimmers. The problem is people dont like the finding and company do not want their skimmers used.
The last test only 30% of DOT were removed by any of the skimmers and bubble king skimmer didnt perform the best.
Buddle king Cone was i believe the worst .
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/1/aafeature#section-4
But again marketing has won. Just look at the results of these poll in these thread.
"Many factors contribute to the "value" of a skimmer to an aquarist, including quality of construction, size, footprint, noise level, ease of cleaning, energy efficiency of the pump, and of course, the ability to remove organic waste from aquarium water. Our data show that there are not compelling or remarkably large differences in measurable skimmer TOC removal metrics among the seven skimmers tested, although the Reef Octopus 150 consistently underperformed compared to the other skimmers. However, in the larger picture, it is equally apparent that if an aquarist runs a skimmer continuously (24/7), then any of the skimmers tested would perform adequately in terms of rate of TOC removal; the only practical differences might involve the frequency of skimmer cup cleaning. A perhaps more interesting observation to emerge from these skimmer studies involves not the rate of TOC removal, but rather the amount of TOC removed. None of the skimmers tested removed more than 35% of the extant TOC, leading to the conclusion that bubbles are really not a very effective medium for organic nutrient removal. If fact, the presence of refractory, or unskimmable, TOC, coupled with the likelihood that endogenous TOC consumers (bacteria, among others) also do not remove all of the TOC present (cf. Fig. 4), suggest that in an operational sense, TOC can be categorized as follows:"
You know all this from experience? Most every person i have heard from that owned them say they do make a difference in perfromance. Not night and day, but they do. If the small volume hurt them, not one of those people would say they were better. IME it is not enough to be a dealbreaker for standard skimmers though. .
You can have crap cone skimmers and great standard ones, and vicer versa. I have seen manufacturers state it is more expensive to make cones and there is less profit margin.
See point above. Testing been done already. Not second hand info from people who just spend, most of the time, more on a skimmer than they did for their fish tank....[for example most ATB, bk owners....]
But you are right cones do effect performance.... but its for the negative....
