Is my skimmer good enough???

H

Hooknose5

New member
I currently have a 95 gal tank with a mixed reef but i am looking for it to be predominantly sps's and i run a corlife needle-wheel skimmer...is that going to be good enough in the long run or should i make the upgrade...any suggestions??? Any input would be much appreciated!!!
Thanks!!!
 
If you have a really light bioload and do regular water changes it may be just fine. But I have always been a proponent of having an oversized skimmer, so if it were me I would upgrade. What skimmer you upgrade to really depends on your bioload and more importantly your budget.
 
McCrary said:
If you have a really light bioload and do regular water changes it may be just fine. But I have always been a proponent of having an oversized skimmer, so if it were me I would upgrade. What skimmer you upgrade to really depends on your bioload and more importantly your budget.
Click to expand...
My skimmer is rated up to 125gal and i do atleast a 10% water change everyweek...i about 200-300 to spend on a skimmer, what do you suggest? what do you run in your tank if you dont mind me asking and your size tank etc???
 
Coralife's skimmer is not a bad option when you are budgeting. It is not the greatest, but I have used it before and for the money I paid for it, I liked it.
 
well I had it on my 100g mixed with sps and CLSS125 several years ago (about a year after these skimmers came out) with no problems. ran cheato in the fuge and did 15g water changes every two weeks. I had a high bioload (four anthias, two tangs and midas blenny). fed twice a day. I think its all relative though. I could have had a $1000 skimmer and tank that looked like crap or no skimmer and still done alright. equipment plays a role but it isn't everything. its a quirky skimmer for sure compared to the ones I've had since. I certaintly wouldn't "buy" this skimmer now but if I had it...well I do, its collecting dust and I upgraded.....if your tank is doing well with what your doing dont fix it. on THAT tank where I ran the coralife I wouldn't have upgraded. I dont fix what aint broke and I was perfectly happy with the water quality as was. however I did move on after that tank.

c4sumpfinal.JPG


skimmeraction.jpg


julyfithteenthfullview1.jpg


sept5centershot.jpg


sept5rightsidecorals.jpg


sept5croceaclamtop.jpg


augcenter3.jpg
 
First off, stanalee your tank looks great, love how you have it set up! and yes you are right it is quirky at times and i totally believe in "if it aint broke dont fix it" but ive had it for two yrs and ive never actually compared anything to it so i dont know if my tank could be doing better w/ bioload content cuz i dont know if the skimmer is pulling out what it should be able too. And i want to be able to put more difficult pieces of coral in with peace of mind that the skimmer is keeping my tank in check etc etc.... everything looks good but i feel like i could have better water quality so im curious to see if i can improve water quality with a higher quality skimmer and i could take my tank to another level all the way around. (Im not that great with putting my thoughts onto paper so be patient!) LOL Thanks for your input it was much appreciated!
 
tkeracer619 said:
No I don't think it is enough.

With your tank and budget I would grab a SWC 160 cone
http://www.swcskimmers.com/product2.html

a good link to some pics of one running on a tank similar to yours
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1816165&page=3
Click to expand...

Second off, this skimmer that was recommended...you think that a skimmer of this quality is going to show me a difference that is "night and day" over my coralife??? cuz i was looking into this type of skimmer to replace my one that is in my sump now! Thank you too for your input!
 
On my current tank I've had:

a) coralife superskimmer 125
30gallonsetup4.jpg


b)octopus PS120 with upgraded pinwheel (just like current NWB minus semi cone top)
30gallonsetup66.jpg


c) SWC 160 cone
30gallonsetup155.jpg


I would classify larger or more frequent water changes, running macro algae, less feeding, moderate bioload, carbon and GFO in media reactors (both together not one or the other) and most important of them all TIME to mature all more significant than skimmer upgrading.

for the record my problem with the coralife wasn't really production even though there's better to be had. it produced good enough but required adjusting all throughout the day. My problem is its way to sensitive to minor fluctuations in water height (even with ATO). it basically needs to be in a comparment designed not to fluctuate AT ALL. even the few millimeters of change from my ATO would rise the water level to where I didn't want it. I readjusted that skimmer about 4-8x a day. secondly even after boring the air intake port as much as possible its still more sensitive to clogging than other skimmers (that did help immensely though. I also modified the output using pvc as I didn't like the output and tossed the bubble trap from day one). Likewise I didn't change the octopus because it was inadequate. I always said I'd try a cone skimmer when they became more affordable and now is that time.

With having said that I'm almost 95% sure you'll be happy to trash the coralife skimmer for a real trouble free powerful skimmer but I wouldn't expect all the algae to immediately drop dead and corals to start growing out the water from JUST a skimmer upgrade.
 
I have been using the Coralife 125 for a while and it works just fine for me, although I do not have any SPS in that tank, my bioload is pretty high.

90G RR
20T sump with 5G sitting inside it for a fuge, was all a DIY test, baffles all that, works great though
 
well i have done alittle more research, and along with ALL OF YOUR HELP i think im going to go with the SWC 160...thanks again!
 
fishsuse29 said:
Stanlalee

How does the SWC compare to the octopus is it worth the extra price?
Click to expand...

way better. its in a whole other leaque (more skimate, quieter, comes apart, more air, better looking, better footprint, you name it). I would say its definately worth the price difference but to be fair the dimensions, price and ratings of the octopus I had are closer to that of the 120 cone.
 
stanlalee said:
way better. its in a whole other leaque (more skimate, quieter, comes apart, more air, better looking, better footprint, you name it). I would say its definately worth the price difference but to be fair the dimensions, price and ratings of the octopus I had are closer to that of the 120 cone.
Click to expand...

It out performs the Octopus cone? The pump does that much better than the bubble blaster?
 
cham said:
It out performs the Octopus cone? The pump does that much better than the bubble blaster?
Click to expand...

no he asked compared to the octopus I had prior (shown above). I have no experience with the octopus cone BUT until the octopus XP-1000 comes out next month there is no direct competitor for the 160 cone. the XP-1000 will come in sump saver form (pump in skimmer like the cone 160), run the bubble blaster 1000 with advertised air draw of 900lph, have simular dimensions and cost $10 more than the 160 cone. until then all octopus cones are too big to compare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Adapting a Venturi to old reef octopus skimmer
Replies
2
Views
1K
wvned
wvned
J
My dream of a fleece roller
Replies
2
Views
496
SantaMonica
S
A
First SPS coral. Is this bleaching?
Replies
6
Views
592
apavlik2
A
S
Novice Aquarist - Sump & Equipment Questions
Replies
9
Views
346
wvned
wvned
J
Corals for the first time!
Replies
14
Views
3K
griss
griss
Back
Top