Planning next tank. Suggestions?

[cdalmost]

Hi all, after I move into my new apartment in August I'm going to set up a new reef tank. Right now I'm in the planning stages and would appreciate any comments you might have.

It will be a mixed "garden" style reef with deep sand bed, with some of the easier SPS (Montipora, Pocillopora, etc.), some fleshy LPS (frogspawn, Caulastrea, "brain" coral, etc.), and maybe a clam or two. For fish I plan to get a flame angel, two pairs of shrimp gobies with snapping shrimp, and either a small school of blue-green Chromis or a harem of Anthias.

A tank in the 75 gallon range is the largest I am able to go. I am trying to decide between:
(1) standard 75 (48x18x20) with 6x54W T5-HO lights (ATI Sunpower or similar fixture) OR
(2) 70 cube (30x30x18) with one 400W Radium and a Lumen Max reflector.

In either case, I will run a protein skimmer, sump, refugium, and MP-40w for circulation. I've heard good things about the Reef Octopus DNWB-110. Is it worth the extra $50 to buy a recirculating protein skimmer?

 

[Misled]

Is it worth the extra $50 to buy a recirculating protein skimmer?

IMO yes it is. You can feed your skimmer with the outlet from the tank and that allows "all" water passing through your sump to flow through the skimmer first. You have to be careful with the flow through the sump and keep it at what the skimmer"s flow rate is, but IMO it makes for a more efficient sump.

 

[raynist]

Are you limited to a 75 because you are limited to a 4 ft tank? There are some other great size 4 ft tanks that would offer much better aquascaping options.

 

[raynist]

Flame angels are hit and miss. Some pick at corals some don't. That is pretty much the case with all of the dwarf angels.

 

[hybridazn]

Are you limited to a 75 because you are limited to a 4 ft tank? There are some other great size 4 ft tanks that would offer much better aquascaping options.

x2

even a standard 90 gallon would be nicer than a 75, much more you can do with aquascaping because of the deeper dimensions

 

[raynist]

If you are limited by weight to a 70g system, then I would go for the cube as the 30 inches of depth (front to back) is going to lend itself to some nicer aquascaping.

Otherwise I would go for the 93g cube which is the same dimensions on the foot print but several inches higher. Lighting would be cheaper too on the cube as you could get away with one MH bulb. I would go with a 250w bulb instead of 400. I don't think you need that much light for what you want to keep. Check out the aquaconnect 250w 14k SE bulbs.

If you are limited in space to 4 ft and not weight I would go for a 120g tank (4x2x2).

---Ray

 

[Misled]

Name the apartment building and type of construction. I run apartments and in my style/build I've kept 90's with 55 sumps with no problem.

 

[cdalmost]

Hi guys, weight is part of the issue, but a bigger part is cost. I agree with your assessment that the dimensions on the 120 are better for a reef tank. But then the tank is more, the stand is more, more lights are needed, etc. Plus a lot more live rock is needed and more animals are needed to fill it up. For equipment alone (not necessarily getting the best deal, to get an idea of cost), the two options I gave above are in the $1800 range, but a 120 with comparable equipment is in the $2500 range. I was hoping to spend under $2500 total for the first six months (i.e. including rock, sand, salt, and "miscellaneous")...

Now that I write it all down, the 120 doesn't seem that much more. Maybe I shouldn't have asked for suggestions! :hmm5:

It's also an aesthetic thing. I'll be in a little one bedroom apartment, so a 120 would take up half of my living room, whereas the (thinner, shorter) 75 would merely be "big". When things get too out of balance (like when I start talking about setting up a fourth tank, or about how I'll have a "fish room" when I get a permanent home) my non-reefer friends start to look at me sideways. You know what I'm talking about!

Regarding the cube tank, do you think one 250W bulb over the 93 cube would be enough? Do any of your guys have experience with using acrylic rods to make interesting aquascapes?

 

[raynist]

I think a 250 over it would be fine with a good reflector and good bulb.

Mike (captive reef) lights his similarly sized tank with a 250w phoenix 14k bulb.

I think he uses 2 24w t5's because he likes it really blue.

 

[Misled]

Not to screw your thought patern up anymore, but there's also corner tanks that help with small spaces. Mines a 54, but there's also 92. This is an older pic, but it shows the stand and light. The light is a 250 se in a Luminbright reflector.

 

[cloakerpoked]

The 93 "cube" is a really neat sized tank. I have a 60 cube, and I really like the aesthetics as well as the room, but the 93 would be even cooler. I use 1 250 SE light now, with a very basic reflector, so I'm positive you could cover a 30x30 footprint with one light if you upgraded the reflector.

 

[brettnleslie]

Corner Tank

Corner Tank

I agree that a corner tank is a good option for limited space.

Here is a picture of my 92 corner reef in my office. This is a great tank and gives depth. I may be interested in selling it around July/August as I need to make more room in my office and go with a nano.

The other tank is a 50 gallon acrylic corner I'm trying to get rid of.

Brett

 

[cdalmost]

You guys have pretty much sold me on the 93 "cube"! :spin1:

@cloakerpoked: Your 60 cube looks great, and will definitely be a big inspiration to me while I'm setting up mine. Do you have problems with shadows, since you are running one MH and have a "monolith" style aquascape? Do you think a T5-HO running down each side (or even just one in the front) would fix them? I like the look of having two or three "islands" off centre, but it would be a shame if the leeward sides were too dark to grow anything. Or would having a giant Lumen{max|bright|arc} reflector obviate the need for supplemental T5's?

Brett and Jesse: All three of those corner tanks look really slick! I especially like the built-in look. But I'm trying to avoid curved glass because of the distortion: looking through curved glass is head-ache inducing for my girlfriend, and it complicates photography.

 

[cloakerpoked]

Thanks. I do not have a huge problem with shadowing, because of how I have decided to set up the tank. Like I said before, I'm just using a "batwing" reflector with a SE 250w MH. There are definitely a few areas that are shaded a bit, but for the most part, the reflector disperses the light around the sides of the monolith left and right. If it was a better reflector, like a Lumenarc that also had reflective surfaces on the front and back, then the light dispersion would be even better. The 60 is great, and the rock I had really lended itself to this kind of aquascape, but having seen the 93 in elmers, I'm sure that you could achieve your "islands" look, and don't think you should have problems with the shading. I didn't expect to fill up my tank so quickly, so I now really wish that I had the extra square footage of footprint that the 93 would have afforded me. I suppose if you set it up, and were getting some shading, you could try the supplemental t-5's. I'm bent on having a pyramid look to my tank, which means that I want my canopy to be smaller than the tank, so I'm really staying away from a larger lumenarc reflector on purpose, and because of that decision, I may end up upgrading to two HQI units for the tank at some point.

 

[raynist]

When you buy the ballast get a Sunlight Supply Select a watt ballast.

You can buy one that has 250/250 HQI/400/400HQI selectable settings. That way if you decide that 250w is not enough you can upgrade just by getting a new bulb. I have 4 of them and love them. They are really no more expensive than a regular single setting ballast.

 

[cloakerpoked]

That is really awesome Ray, I never knew these existed. I found on online here for about $180 but that was just the first google link I found, and even at that, for the versatility and everything else seems well worth the money, especially since you're only using one bulb.

 

[raynist]

I actually bought the lumatek version, they are the same thing. Got them locally from Dave's Aquastock for quite a bit less than that. I got the 150/175/250/250 hqi version as i ran 400's once and don't see he need ever again unless I get a 3 ft deep tank. My vesion might be less than the 250/400 version. I don't see why someone would buy a single wattage ballast now that these are available.

 

[NaClH2Opgh]

I actually bought the lumatek version, they are the same thing. Got them locally from Dave's Aquastock for quite a bit less than that. I got the 150/175/250/250 hqi version as i ran 400's once and don't see he need ever again unless I get a 3 ft deep tank. My vesion might be less than the 250/400 version. I don't see why someone would buy a single wattage ballast now that these are available.

Great info. I'm going to need one more ballast. I was using the cap and coil temporarily for the third ballast until I found a good e ballast. They have them listed for $132.

 

[cdalmost]

Yeah, I would definitely buy a 250/400W selectable ballast. What is the difference between Lumatek and Galaxy? Is there a difference between the connectors? Sunlight Supply (Galaxy) has some proprietary plug for connecting it to their pendants, correct? Is the Lumatek plug different, or is the only real difference between them the colour of the housing? :hmm5:

 

[raynist]

Yeah, I would definitely buy a 250/400W selectable ballast. What is the difference between Lumatek and Galaxy? Is there a difference between the connectors? Sunlight Supply (Galaxy) has some proprietary plug for connecting it to their pendants, correct? Is the Lumatek plug different, or is the only real difference between them the colour of the housing? :hmm5:

I think they are both made by SLS, the lumatek is marketed towards pot growers....oops, I mean hydroponics . Same plugs as the Galaxy. The lumateks are purple vs the green of the galaxy. I preferred the purple color and I think they were a bit cheaper also.