So my wife gave me the go ahead to upgrade. I'm currently running a 130gal (60x18x30) and it's been enjoyable, but maintenance hasn't been particularly easy. I'm wanting to do an in wall aquarium that can be viewed from both sides. I was thinking 180 (72x24x24) but a few people suggested 240 (96x24x24). What would be the benefits of going with that large of a system? I know there will be significant additional costs (tank, stand, larger sump, more salt, more water, bigger water changes). I'd love to hear from people who have gone bigger and if they were glad they did or wish they had stayed small
Is bigger really better?
- Thread starter bfrench
- Start date
nuxx
.Registered Member
More swimming room for fish like tangs.
Larger water volume, which means more stability.
Last active tank I actually had running was a 55, then tried a 135 and 240 but they never worked out.
Ended going to a 470 (650 system) and have loved it. It's pretty much on autopilot. Automatic daily water changes via a Neptune DoS was the best thing I've done.
Larger water volume, which means more stability.
Last active tank I actually had running was a 55, then tried a 135 and 240 but they never worked out.
Ended going to a 470 (650 system) and have loved it. It's pretty much on autopilot. Automatic daily water changes via a Neptune DoS was the best thing I've done.
Acrononomus
New member
How much water are u changing out daily w the dos? And is it loud?
sfsuphysics
Active member
Well I went from a 180 (4'x3') w/55 gal sump to a 375 (6'x5') w/270g sump , and bigger was most definitely not better. Due to the added size the thickness of the acrylic impacted which pumps I could use, I had 5 Vortech MP40s + 1 MP60 on the 180, the 375 I ended up using cheaper pumps that I could put a heftier magnet on.
The added size also had issues with actual water flow, counting up the GPH of the pumps in the tank I was pushing somewhere in the range of 15-20k GPH, but it just wasn't quite right. It was like there was too much flow near the pump, but it peetered out far away, so my idea of doing a peninsula changed to a 2 sided tank, to a screw it I'm putting pumps on all 4 sides and damn the looks. I do acknowledge there the the geometry of the tank (wasn't long and skinny) definitely had something to do with it.
Larger tank means more maintenance, there's zero ways around it too, quickly found out that 40G brute I used for water changes on the 180 was no where near as useful. So I got a 100G water container, and ended up having a saltwater reserve there. And while water changes were better, it brought a whole new slew of issues, need to change filters on my RO/DI unit that much more. And yeah the cost of it does add into things.
I'm of the mindset that more volume does not mean more stability after a certain point, of course this is going to differ based on certain issues each person has. I view more volume as a larger boat, sure it can hold off bad things for a while, but if something goes unchecked you're trying to do a tight turn with the Titanic to avoid that iceberg... just ain't going to happen. So back to water changes, if you need to do 2 50% water changes in a hurry to fix something*(whatever that is) it's easier to do with a smaller system, with a larger system you need to have that system in place to do that, which I did not.
Electricity... from larger area to light, to larger volume of water I need to keep at 80F when the ambient is closer to 60F, yeah it adds up in a hurry
Cleaning... so 3 sides viewable eh? Acrylic eh? You better make sure you can pencil in an appointment every week to clean off 22 square feet of acrylic, because if it builds up, then get overwhelmed in a hurry. Of course YMMV on this.
So overall I'm not saying things couldn't have been better, it's just very easy to not be prepared for a larger tank. And it can quickly overwhelm you, and then it's like a rising tide of trying to catch up with it.
That said, 180 vs 240 isn't a huge difference in size as far as needing to get on top of it, and nothing says you NEED a bigger sump either. Enough to hold your equipment, enough to catch all the water in case of a power outage.
The added size also had issues with actual water flow, counting up the GPH of the pumps in the tank I was pushing somewhere in the range of 15-20k GPH, but it just wasn't quite right. It was like there was too much flow near the pump, but it peetered out far away, so my idea of doing a peninsula changed to a 2 sided tank, to a screw it I'm putting pumps on all 4 sides and damn the looks. I do acknowledge there the the geometry of the tank (wasn't long and skinny) definitely had something to do with it.
Larger tank means more maintenance, there's zero ways around it too, quickly found out that 40G brute I used for water changes on the 180 was no where near as useful. So I got a 100G water container, and ended up having a saltwater reserve there. And while water changes were better, it brought a whole new slew of issues, need to change filters on my RO/DI unit that much more. And yeah the cost of it does add into things.
I'm of the mindset that more volume does not mean more stability after a certain point, of course this is going to differ based on certain issues each person has. I view more volume as a larger boat, sure it can hold off bad things for a while, but if something goes unchecked you're trying to do a tight turn with the Titanic to avoid that iceberg... just ain't going to happen. So back to water changes, if you need to do 2 50% water changes in a hurry to fix something*(whatever that is) it's easier to do with a smaller system, with a larger system you need to have that system in place to do that, which I did not.
Electricity... from larger area to light, to larger volume of water I need to keep at 80F when the ambient is closer to 60F, yeah it adds up in a hurry
Cleaning... so 3 sides viewable eh? Acrylic eh? You better make sure you can pencil in an appointment every week to clean off 22 square feet of acrylic, because if it builds up, then get overwhelmed in a hurry. Of course YMMV on this.
So overall I'm not saying things couldn't have been better, it's just very easy to not be prepared for a larger tank. And it can quickly overwhelm you, and then it's like a rising tide of trying to catch up with it.
That said, 180 vs 240 isn't a huge difference in size as far as needing to get on top of it, and nothing says you NEED a bigger sump either. Enough to hold your equipment, enough to catch all the water in case of a power outage.
jiminy_crime
New member
Is bigger really better?
Oh.....all the innuendos that can be made from that statement....
For some reason I can imagine Michael Scott asking this question and the staring at the camera with a greasy smile.
You are asking loaded questions that you hope goes off the tracks lol.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh.....all the innuendos that can be made from that statement....
For some reason I can imagine Michael Scott asking this question and the staring at the camera with a greasy smile.
You are asking loaded questions that you hope goes off the tracks lol.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
jeff240gallon
New member
Wow do you have a pic? Couldn't agree more I have a 240 and maintenance is very little. I started with a 36... Nightmare and a 75 which was manageable
nuxx
.Registered Member
2.5 gallons daily. It's in the laundry room, not too bad.
nuxx
.Registered Member
A few people have hinted here about the increase in overall costs. I think this is a thing to consider. Electricity will be higher, the cost of water changes higher (salt, water etc), dosing chemicals, Carbon, GFO, foods etc etc.
For example it can take me 4-6 weeks to go through a bag of salt on my 180 but my friend with a 340 its about 3. So that will almost double the cost of salt yearly.
If you are thinking the 180 then jumping to the 240 is not a big delta at all.
For example it can take me 4-6 weeks to go through a bag of salt on my 180 but my friend with a 340 its about 3. So that will almost double the cost of salt yearly.
If you are thinking the 180 then jumping to the 240 is not a big delta at all.
jeff240gallon
New member
Reefstarter2
New member
I started off with a 90 and ended up with 600 gallons in the end I settled on a 210 display and about 350 gallons total been chasing down electrical cost and almost have that under control . but I love it and nothing would stop me
Thank you sfsuphysics, Nuxx, and Reefstarter 2 for sharing your experience. I appreciate the variable points of view on this.
Not really hoping it goes off track, just really hoping to get feedback on the experience of others. Although I can appreciate the Michael Scott reference :lolspin:
Apologies if I posted this in the wrong place, but it seemed like the users of this subforum would have the experience of using larger tanks and could offer feeback.
I know 130 to 180 or 240 may not seem like a huge jump for some people, but buying a new tank and new stand from a manufacturer is an entirely new experience for me and the cost is considerable. My prior tank was purchased used off a local guy for about $900. The quotes I'm getting are all coming in at $4000 and up. Often the stand costs as much or more than the tank(seems reasonable for cabinetry not so much for a bare steel stand). While I've been given a budget of 6-7k that needs to include at least one additional Radion xr30w pro, a new sump, and a vectra return pump. Also will likely need to purchase additional dry rock. I'm debating about getting a Reef Genesis Renew and Storm system to make top off and water changes more manageable, but I don't have a fish room so I'm not sure how plumbing etc would work for that. I'll be calling the Reef Genesis later today to get more details.
Prior to my current 130 I had a 36gal bow front. It was a huge step-up to the 130, but has been enjoyable and allowed me to get two tangs and a few anthias. In browsing livestock, I'm just not seeing a significant difference if what I can put in a 240 vs 180 as far as selection goes. I understand the extra 60 gallons would allow for a greater quanity of livestock but not necessarily a significant change in choices.
Not really hoping it goes off track, just really hoping to get feedback on the experience of others. Although I can appreciate the Michael Scott reference :lolspin:
Apologies if I posted this in the wrong place, but it seemed like the users of this subforum would have the experience of using larger tanks and could offer feeback.
I know 130 to 180 or 240 may not seem like a huge jump for some people, but buying a new tank and new stand from a manufacturer is an entirely new experience for me and the cost is considerable. My prior tank was purchased used off a local guy for about $900. The quotes I'm getting are all coming in at $4000 and up. Often the stand costs as much or more than the tank(seems reasonable for cabinetry not so much for a bare steel stand). While I've been given a budget of 6-7k that needs to include at least one additional Radion xr30w pro, a new sump, and a vectra return pump. Also will likely need to purchase additional dry rock. I'm debating about getting a Reef Genesis Renew and Storm system to make top off and water changes more manageable, but I don't have a fish room so I'm not sure how plumbing etc would work for that. I'll be calling the Reef Genesis later today to get more details.
Prior to my current 130 I had a 36gal bow front. It was a huge step-up to the 130, but has been enjoyable and allowed me to get two tangs and a few anthias. In browsing livestock, I'm just not seeing a significant difference if what I can put in a 240 vs 180 as far as selection goes. I understand the extra 60 gallons would allow for a greater quanity of livestock but not necessarily a significant change in choices.
Greybeard
New member
Long, long ago...
I started small, like many people, and upgraded regularly, until I got into the >300g size range. Had a life changing event occur, and closed everything down. Was out of the hobby for nearly 10 years.
When I started back up, I took the prior experience, my current budget, and really gave some thoughts to what I wanted.
IMHO: There is a 'sweet spot' in the middle. Where water volume is sufficient to easily maintain water quality, and were maintenance costs do not overwhelm a budget. Exactly where that sweet spot is, can be a matter of some debate. At the low end, I'd say 40g. Much smaller, and it's a real struggle to keep things balanced. At the high end, I'd say 200g. Much more than that, and you start having to mortgage your home to pay for quality lighting, electrical consumption starts getting silly, you have to start accounting for humidity to keep your home from rotting away...
I _love_ looking at huge, beautiful reef tanks... but I will never again have one in my home. Just not worth digging into my retirement to fund.
I started small, like many people, and upgraded regularly, until I got into the >300g size range. Had a life changing event occur, and closed everything down. Was out of the hobby for nearly 10 years.
When I started back up, I took the prior experience, my current budget, and really gave some thoughts to what I wanted.
IMHO: There is a 'sweet spot' in the middle. Where water volume is sufficient to easily maintain water quality, and were maintenance costs do not overwhelm a budget. Exactly where that sweet spot is, can be a matter of some debate. At the low end, I'd say 40g. Much smaller, and it's a real struggle to keep things balanced. At the high end, I'd say 200g. Much more than that, and you start having to mortgage your home to pay for quality lighting, electrical consumption starts getting silly, you have to start accounting for humidity to keep your home from rotting away...
I _love_ looking at huge, beautiful reef tanks... but I will never again have one in my home. Just not worth digging into my retirement to fund.
jbvdhp
Active member
Is bigger really better?
I'd go at least 240. There's no point in doing a minor upgrade to a 180. I had a standard 180, downgraded to a standard 125 (don't ask) and I hated the width.
I just upgraded to a 240 and could never imagine going from 125 to 180 again, it just doesn't make sense or is worth it.
Personally if you're already at 130 and leaning towards 180, just save your money. It's pointless: you're only gaining a foot length.
If you have the space for it, go as big as you can. I almost went with an 11' tank to fit an 11' wall but the way it jutted into the walkway looked funny so I scrapped that idea. Next best would have been 10' but I didn't want to drop the cheese for it, got a nice 8'.
As they say in life: buy once, cry once. Especially in this hobby.
Sent using your IP address
I'd go at least 240. There's no point in doing a minor upgrade to a 180. I had a standard 180, downgraded to a standard 125 (don't ask) and I hated the width.
I just upgraded to a 240 and could never imagine going from 125 to 180 again, it just doesn't make sense or is worth it.
Personally if you're already at 130 and leaning towards 180, just save your money. It's pointless: you're only gaining a foot length.
If you have the space for it, go as big as you can. I almost went with an 11' tank to fit an 11' wall but the way it jutted into the walkway looked funny so I scrapped that idea. Next best would have been 10' but I didn't want to drop the cheese for it, got a nice 8'.
As they say in life: buy once, cry once. Especially in this hobby.
Sent using your IP address
Yes, it is better, but yes it is more challenging. Although the difference between a 180 and 240 is negligible. So 240. But if you went from say a 55 to a 500 then yes, things can get quite expensive and the average monthly costs get quiet large too. But since you are talking about 60g difference, then do the 240 as its nothing additional in monthly costs really. Few dollars probably
The only issue is the current tank has a solid blue back, so while I could keep it, it wouldn't be able to be installed and viewed from both rooms.
Nope, no fish room (maybe the next house). Will just have my office and will install an RODI unit in the laundry room
Similar threads
