Tall vs long tanks?
- Thread starter cornraker
- Start date
muttley000
MTS Sufferer!
+1 on a longer tank. One mistake I think people make is to go 6 feet long for those big fish, but only get 18" front to back which in my opinion is not enough for a 10" fish to turn in comfortabley, especially with rock work in the way. My dream tank is 96x36x30, but that is years down the road!
frozenreefer
New member
i am as well a fan of longer and wider tanks looks alot better to me plus keeps fish happy to swim side to side not up and down just my opinion
khaosinc
The cyborg reefer
If I had to give up 1 dimention of the 3 (I like huge...) height would be the first to cut down on especially on a larger tank. Lengh the depth last. I would prefer a 48x24 or even a 36x24 over only having 15-18" depth. Just having that extra 6" makes a world of diference when it comes to 'scaping and how it looks when it grows in IMO/
uncleof6
Active member
Putting personal preference, aside for a moment, and looking at gas exchange:
Surface area is what is needed, yes, but for gas exchange is is the width to depth ratio that counts. Basically a tank that has a width that is = or > than the depth is going to "breath" better than a tank where the width is < the depth. This is independent of the length. A tank that is 72" x 18" x 24" is not going to breath much better than a tank that is 48" x 18" x 24". But a 120 (48 x 24 x 24) will breath better than either. This has been very long term concept, directly related to marine systems. Why do they still make tall skinny tanks? It is because the bulk of the aquarium trade is still freshwater tanks, by a considerable margin. Generally, and excluding true "cube" tanks (all dimensions equal) for smaller tanks, you don't get a "good" one till a 40 or 50 breeder, and then it skips to the 120, 150, 180, 240. A 175 bow front is a nice tank, but it don't breath worth snot
The "best" marine tanks are always going to be wide (front to back) and relatively shallow.
Jim
Surface area is what is needed, yes, but for gas exchange is is the width to depth ratio that counts. Basically a tank that has a width that is = or > than the depth is going to "breath" better than a tank where the width is < the depth. This is independent of the length. A tank that is 72" x 18" x 24" is not going to breath much better than a tank that is 48" x 18" x 24". But a 120 (48 x 24 x 24) will breath better than either. This has been very long term concept, directly related to marine systems. Why do they still make tall skinny tanks? It is because the bulk of the aquarium trade is still freshwater tanks, by a considerable margin. Generally, and excluding true "cube" tanks (all dimensions equal) for smaller tanks, you don't get a "good" one till a 40 or 50 breeder, and then it skips to the 120, 150, 180, 240. A 175 bow front is a nice tank, but it don't breath worth snot
The "best" marine tanks are always going to be wide (front to back) and relatively shallow.Jim
Robb_In_AZ
New member
Im running a 110T but it was chosen as a compromise of space and water volume. Here is what I have found.
My first consideration was where in the house I was going to be able to put a tank. Tank had to fit the house, rather than having the house have to work around the tank. Im limited on length and "width", ie floor space for the tanks foot print, but I also have extra high ceilings. The tall tank matches with the high ceilings and gives me the extra water volume I wanted.
My first iteration on this one had a 6" DSB so the 110t was more like a 90G.
Easy to maintain on a weekly basis but it was right at the edge of my reach. I later rescaped the tank after C. racemosa took over my display.
Second iteration has removed the sandbed in the Display tank down to less than an inch, and I now have to use some plant tongs to do much, as well as stand on a step stool. Without tongs, Im up to my armpit in water to get to the bottom. I have rock within 6 inches of the surface by creating a foam/rock wall that is about 3" thick up the back side so that my tank doesnt look I coulndt afford to fill it, but I dont have a pile of rocks against the glass in the front. It helps with the illusion of width/depth too, while being very stable.
I do like that I can put high lighting critters near the top but still have room for those that dont like as much light, towards the bottom and sides which is helpful for a mixed tank. With a single 250w Halide on a lumenbright reflector, my BTA's (5 of them) are all on the bottom half of the tank still (maybe 1/3 of the way up, so I feel Im getting the light that I want.
I wish I could have a wider and longer tank, but I cant. Id have to buy a different house with a different floorplan first. I worked with what I could do and ended up "Tall", though its even taller than I originally planned with the lack of DT DSB.
Theres always a compromise.
good luck !
My first consideration was where in the house I was going to be able to put a tank. Tank had to fit the house, rather than having the house have to work around the tank. Im limited on length and "width", ie floor space for the tanks foot print, but I also have extra high ceilings. The tall tank matches with the high ceilings and gives me the extra water volume I wanted.
My first iteration on this one had a 6" DSB so the 110t was more like a 90G.
Easy to maintain on a weekly basis but it was right at the edge of my reach. I later rescaped the tank after C. racemosa took over my display.
Second iteration has removed the sandbed in the Display tank down to less than an inch, and I now have to use some plant tongs to do much, as well as stand on a step stool. Without tongs, Im up to my armpit in water to get to the bottom. I have rock within 6 inches of the surface by creating a foam/rock wall that is about 3" thick up the back side so that my tank doesnt look I coulndt afford to fill it, but I dont have a pile of rocks against the glass in the front. It helps with the illusion of width/depth too, while being very stable.
I do like that I can put high lighting critters near the top but still have room for those that dont like as much light, towards the bottom and sides which is helpful for a mixed tank. With a single 250w Halide on a lumenbright reflector, my BTA's (5 of them) are all on the bottom half of the tank still (maybe 1/3 of the way up, so I feel Im getting the light that I want.
I wish I could have a wider and longer tank, but I cant. Id have to buy a different house with a different floorplan first. I worked with what I could do and ended up "Tall", though its even taller than I originally planned with the lack of DT DSB.
Theres always a compromise.
good luck !
Mavrk
New member
Putting personal preference, aside for a moment, and looking at gas exchange:
Surface area is what is needed, yes, but for gas exchange is is the width to depth ratio that counts. Basically a tank that has a width that is = or > than the depth is going to "breath" better than a tank where the width is < the depth. This is independent of the length. A tank that is 72" x 18" x 24" is not going to breath much better than a tank that is 48" x 18" x 24". But a 120 (48 x 24 x 24) will breath better than either. This has been very long term concept, directly related to marine systems. Why do they still make tall skinny tanks? It is because the bulk of the aquarium trade is still freshwater tanks, by a considerable margin. Generally, and excluding true "cube" tanks (all dimensions equal) for smaller tanks, you don't get a "good" one till a 40 or 50 breeder, and then it skips to the 120, 150, 180, 240. A 175 bow front is a nice tank, but it don't breath worth snot
Jim
With today's powerheads, sumps, skimmers, etc. I don't know if that holds as true as it used to. Still, it is a valid point.
US Marine Coral
New member
My tank is 30 in tall and I like how it looks but it ias hard to reach the bottom.
JMartin104
New member
I picked up a 110g T in August. Reason 1) It's a smaller footprint in my living room (keeps the spousal unit, aka wife, happy) and 2) the price was too good to pass.
After a month or so, I've concluded, it's too tall. Arranging my rock is difficult and making it stable as I stack it two feet high is unnerving. Cleaning and moving and generally getting low in the tank requires I take off my shirt (which scares the wife :worried
so I can stick my arm in all the way to the shoulder.
Lighting is another issue. I have 250's and I'm told that's adequate for this tank. In fact, the LFS has the exact same setup and they have pretty good growth even at the bottom. It'll be a while before I know.
Summary: hard to clean, less light at the bottom.
After a month or so, I've concluded, it's too tall. Arranging my rock is difficult and making it stable as I stack it two feet high is unnerving. Cleaning and moving and generally getting low in the tank requires I take off my shirt (which scares the wife :worried
so I can stick my arm in all the way to the shoulder.Lighting is another issue. I have 250's and I'm told that's adequate for this tank. In fact, the LFS has the exact same setup and they have pretty good growth even at the bottom. It'll be a while before I know.
Summary: hard to clean, less light at the bottom.
The biggest lesson I learned, and maybe I'm a little late on this post, is if you have a spacific size in mind lenth wise try to go the next step up. The next step up is usually the distance from front to back that makes the difference, For example, I have a 55 gallon tank, it was my first reef tank I set up about 3 years ago, now that things are growing and its established I hate how shallow it is. I'm now looking into setting up a 75 gallon tank, the 55 and the 75 are the same from left to right and high but the 75 is a bit wider to allow more aquascaping. So if you wanted a 125 try for a 180 rather, know what I mean?
gweston
New member
Seems to be a common theme here. I'd agree. The longer, wider tanks are more preferable. The deeper a tank, the more lighting issues you may encounter. You'll need more wattage to reach the bottom. Plus.. its harder to work in a deeper tank.
My current temporary stepper tank is a 29. My in progress is a 125 long (72").
While the 29 works for me, and it is my first SW tank. I WISH I went with a 30B or a 40B instead. Even if it was only temporary. The 29 is 30" x 12" x 18". The 12" width is horrid. With the rocks in there I have hardly any sand bed. 18" would be far more workable. While the 30" length is fine.. I'd much rather have a less tall, wider tank.
18" is quite deep... measure your arm and see how far up it goes. Not fun to get the armpits wet. Plus the fish probably don't like stinky armpits in their water LOL A 150 gallon tank is 28" deep. A 180 is 25" deep (made up for with a -nice- 24" width).
My current temporary stepper tank is a 29. My in progress is a 125 long (72").
While the 29 works for me, and it is my first SW tank. I WISH I went with a 30B or a 40B instead. Even if it was only temporary. The 29 is 30" x 12" x 18". The 12" width is horrid. With the rocks in there I have hardly any sand bed. 18" would be far more workable. While the 30" length is fine.. I'd much rather have a less tall, wider tank.
18" is quite deep... measure your arm and see how far up it goes. Not fun to get the armpits wet. Plus the fish probably don't like stinky armpits in their water LOL
A 150 gallon tank is 28" deep. A 180 is 25" deep (made up for with a -nice- 24" width).Been following along and appreciate the comments.
After a while, bride and I have finally decided to take the plunge and get a big tank. We have a 96x36 footprint that we are going to use to section off a sitting room. The ceiling is 14 feet so height isn't a concern. The question really is how tall to get the tank. I like the "look" of a taller tank, but can understand the differences as noted above. We'll likely have some coral in there, but I was planning to rockscape some ledges to keep them closer to the surface. I was thinking a 36 height at the minimum. Would it be silly or detrimental to add 6-8 more inches? I'm 6'1" and I always seem to be stooping to look at tanks when I'm out and about. I wouldn't mind having some of the tank at eye (or slightly below) level.
As far as getting to the bottom of the tank, I have an array of graspers, handled baskets, etc. to help with that.
I really appreciate the information and comments.
After a while, bride and I have finally decided to take the plunge and get a big tank. We have a 96x36 footprint that we are going to use to section off a sitting room. The ceiling is 14 feet so height isn't a concern. The question really is how tall to get the tank. I like the "look" of a taller tank, but can understand the differences as noted above. We'll likely have some coral in there, but I was planning to rockscape some ledges to keep them closer to the surface. I was thinking a 36 height at the minimum. Would it be silly or detrimental to add 6-8 more inches? I'm 6'1" and I always seem to be stooping to look at tanks when I'm out and about. I wouldn't mind having some of the tank at eye (or slightly below) level.
As far as getting to the bottom of the tank, I have an array of graspers, handled baskets, etc. to help with that.
I really appreciate the information and comments.
Bent
I got nothin'
I think it's all in what you plan to put in it.
GimpyFin
Active member
With the way many of our tanks are setup, I don't think gas exchange is necessarily a valid argument for buying a wide vs. a tall tank. If you have a tall tank and a wide tank standalone side by side, I can see better gas exchange with just more surface area, all other things being equal. However, with an overflow(s), a decent sized sump, and a protein skimmer, there's plenty of gas exchange in addition to just the surface area of the main tank.
MichelleMas
New member
I like tall because of the viewing space. Also it fit better in the space that I wanted to put my tank in.
Similar threads
