So I'm looking at upgrading my existing 75G tank to something much bigger. Right now I think I'm leaning toward a 72x24x30 220G, but I keep looking at a 84x24x30 265G tank. Are there any fish that would do well in the 7 foot tank and not in the 6 foot or does that extra foot not make much of a difference? This would be a reef, so I'm only looking at reef safe fish.
Fish selection for a 7 foot tank vs a 6 foot tank
- Thread starter BrettDS
- Start date
Yeah, it is and I love the idea of the 265, but it's considerably more than the 220 in terms of tank cost as well as lighting for that extra foot, plus I'll need more rock and sand to fill it and I'm just not sure I can justify spending 1.5 times more for an extra foot of tank. I did find a cheaper 265 on Craigslist, but buying a used tank scares me too.
Dmorty217
Saltwater Addict
I was going to say if used is what your after look at giantaquariums.com, its all the tanks 300g and larger for sale around the country. If the tank your buying used is acrylic you have little to worry about. I purchased my 625g used and couldn't be happier with it. Found it on the website I mentioned above
bat21
New member
The man is deciding whether to splurge for the extra 45 gallons of a 265 and you show him a website for 300+ gallon tanks. You are not helping one bit
scooter31707
New member
IMO, I would do the 265. I think something like a Hippo or Naso would benefit from a 7ft tank than a 6ft tank. Same thing with some of the Large Angels if you go that route. All the other species shouldn't be no difference of the 2.
My choice would be 8' x 2' x 2' 240g, if you have the room. Even though it's longer you do not need to fill the tank full of rocks nor have to light the whole length of the tank. If cost of rocks and lighting is a concern. Your fish will have a lot of more room to swim. You will have a lot more flexibility when it comes to fish selection with an 8' tank.
I'm looking at standard size tanks, so unfortunately I can't easily reduce the height by a few inches. I'm also afraid that 8 feet would be too long for my space. I just went ahead and placed an order for the 220. I loved the 265, but I just couldn't justify the extra expense for an extra foot.
Dmorty217
Saltwater Addict
The man is deciding whether to splurge for the extra 45 gallons of a 265 and you show him a website for 300+ gallon tanks. You are not helping one bit
So whats another couple of gallons!?
haha... the 265 was already the end of that slippery slope for me. It started when I realized that I would need to move my 75G tank. As I was thinking about the logistics of the move I realized that it would be much easier to move things into a new tank over a short time period rather than try to get everything out at once, then tear down the tank and move it and set it up again while everything was sitting in buckets. Of course, if I'm going to be getting a new tank anyway, then I may as well get a bigger new tank, so I started looking at a reasonable 72x18x24 150, which seemed like a big enough upgrade. Then someone suggested that a 24 inch wide tank would be easier to aquascape, so I started looking at the 72x24x24 180. And then I realized that the 72x24x30 220 would be the same footprint with a nice tall front... and from there I just added 12 inches to the width to get to the 265. But there was no room left in my budget or my house to go any bigger than that
MondoBongo
Obligate Feeder Obsessed
oh god dude. why did you have to tell me this exists?
:fun4:
i mean, i don't need a table in my dining room...
Back to the original question for a moment ....
I keep a few fish in my 265 that I didn't in my prior 180. Hippo tang, Achilles tang and larger anthias that I simply wouldn't have attempted in a 6' foot tank. Trouble is, after living with the 7 footer I wished I'd gone with an 8 footer.
I keep a few fish in my 265 that I didn't in my prior 180. Hippo tang, Achilles tang and larger anthias that I simply wouldn't have attempted in a 6' foot tank. Trouble is, after living with the 7 footer I wished I'd gone with an 8 footer.
CONSPICILLUM
New member
Like real estate is about location, location, location... saltwater aquatics is about surface area, surface area, surface area for maximum disolved oxygen in the water.
The extra length is additional surface area to support more fish and/or coral life.
The extra length is additional surface area to support more fish and/or coral life.
Gonna have to say I agree with that. I really wanted to go 8' myself but 7' is the limit in my application. I also have to deal with 27" openings in multiple locations to get the tank where I wanted it. Instead of opting for a taller tank I decided to go wider, going with a 7' long by 3' wide by 2' deep tank.
Besides 180's are everywhere, and this let me break the 300g display marker so I was happy lol. (well will be when it's all here and set up)
CONSPICILLUM
New member
Yes, I had the choice of:
8Lx4Wx3H for $3,162/ea
8Lx3Wx4H for $4,884/ea
8Lx4Wx4H for $5,589/ea
I originally intended to do an 8Lx4Wx4H FOWLR and 8Lx4Wx4H Reef, but with the price differential I decided to do 4 tanks and settle for the height reduction.
The 8Lx4Wx3H units give the same surface area as the 8Lx4Wx4H; but the price difference is almost two-for-one, and it only means giving up the extra foot of "show" height. But it also means better canopy access with a standard residential 8' ceiling height and a 32" stand height.
I want the most surface area for disolved oxygen to have maximum fish/coral count/size. Length and width is the key to that, and the length is also preferable for the larger fish I prefer.
For the OP's reef, room for bigger fish isn't a factor, but disolved oxgen always is. Longer and wider is better. Always. Taller is an optional luxury.
Last edited:
Unless I'm putting it in a wall and have someone else maintaining it 3 ft high is my max. I'm up to my shoulder getting in the bottom of my 65
CONSPICILLUM
New member
That's probably a good practical consideration overall.
Surface area to volume isn't nearly the issue it was back in the early days of reefkeeping. Modern reef tanks have access to circulation pumps that render such concerns largely moot. Most tanks, adequately circulated will approach oxygen saturation without large swaths of surface area. The 6 versus 7 foot tank is more about swimming room IME.
Similar threads
