what size tank is ' best'

I had a 180 for 12+ years before building my 600 reef that i currently have. I learned so much over that period of time, reading all the books (several $100 worth) and when I setup the 600 I ran into lots of issues still. Thought I knew it all, but all tanks are different. Had I not been through issues with the 180 and conquered them, I might have thrown in the towel on the 600.
A 600 is a big tank, easilly over $15,000 and that was me doing a ton of stuff myself. You really need a room or rooms for the equipment, and en electrician and a plumber to do it right IMO.
Whats wrong with picking up a 120 or 180 and experiment with things. I used to be die hard PC light user, now I love my halides, Imagine changing out several thousand dollars worth of lights? in a 120 that would be hundreds, not thousands.
Same with a skimmer, say you buy a euroreef for $2K and decide a $3K bubbleking would be better, in 120-180 gallon terms thats $200 vs $500 maybe and thats a lot easier to justify.

I dont care who you are or how rich you are nobody can honestly say "money is not an issue" It always is if you are smart.

Chris

BTW Patience is 99% of this hobby the other half is money ;)
 
IMO it is all up to the individual. I am setting up a 525 gallon tank as we speak 120x48x24. I was told by many that I should go 120x48x30 but in all honesty this thing is large and with the height of 24" I will be able to reach all areas of the tank. If I went 30" I am not too sure I would have been able to reach the middle of the tank without standing on it and I really would rather not do that. So it's a matter of preference. If someone don't like it too bad it what you like.

Good Luck

Vic
 
Like you, I was looking for a tank size and shape that would give me the ability to aquascape it in such a way that I could achieve a true natural ocean feel and view. I looked at tons of dive pictures and diving reef videos and documentarys and the thing that always caught my eye was the 'depth' of field that brought out the true nature of the 'reef'. I noticed that in natural reefs, fish swim through/around, up/down, back/forth, but most importantly and most often, they swim ABOVE the corals and rockscape. Reefs aren't just long narrow brick walls of rock that fish swim back and forth in front of like a tennis ball bouncing back and forth.
If you want a truly 'natural' looking reef tank, get a large cube/cubish tank, or as some have already stated, a long but very wide tank like 96"x48"x24".
I've been told by many hobbyists both locally and here on RC that my tank, even though its rather small, is one of the most 'natural' looking in terms of what a 'reef' really looks like. By no means is it the 'best looking' or most 'mature' or 'most stunning', but the uniform dimensions, full 3 sided viewing, and the varied depth/height aquascaping, definately make it more appealing than a standard rectangular tank in which viewing it mostly from one static viewpoint along its front.
My tank is 48"x48"x24", 240 gallons. Big enough for a fair amount of livestock, but not too big in terms of equipment needs and maintenance.
Here's a video of my reef from a few months ago. I've since switched from SPS to an anemone/softy tank which I enjoy even more!
Of course, I'm a bit of a hypocrit in that I'm in the closing stages of finalizing plans for my upgrade to a 72"x72"x36" tank ;)
http://s3.photobucket.com/albums/y90/sonofgaladriel/?action=view&current=Reefunder20Ks.flv
 
Ooooo, you said it right there... 96x48x24... thats one of my dream tanks... that and 96x96x30 or 72x72x24...which you also mentioned. I ended up helping a guy setup and design a 96x96x36 tank in Chi-town with a 6x6 skylight for light. I just love the look of it... viewable from all sides, with the overflow hidden in the center island that drains through the floor. I just love it.

But yeah, sonofgaladriel, you did it the smart way.. get something big, but not too big. Learn, find out what you really really want to do and what you like, then go from there. Thinking back, I remember what I considered my 'ultimate' reef tank. Now that Ive been in it for a while, that has changed 100%. It wouldnt even be the same tank, size, or equipment. When I started, I thought closed loops with huge pumps, huge beckett/downdraft skimmers, plenums, flow eductors, large sump return pumps, and halides were the way to go. Not so anymore. What can I say... I joined a bunch of German forums...lol.
 
Last edited:
Sonofgaladriel, I think your tank is quite stunning. Thanks for that video...

If I were to change your setup at all, I'd add 2 ft. on each side for some open sand area, but 99.9% of tanks lack that IMHO. Mine included. I love the way the BTA's are right in there next to the SPS and that you even allow them in the tank at all, for that matter.

I'd love to see video of it as it is now.
 
Thanks Angel*Fish! That's my plan with the 72"x72", open sand and open water all along the periphery.
Don't want to hijack this thread though, sorry.
 
i've had sw tanks for a long time---this last times been at least 7 years---before that was for 10---i started sw tanks when i was in jr. high---started a 55 with real salt water and fish right from belmar---collected them myself---i've seen the oregonreef site---nice setup----my setup is going to be in the basement---with the possibility of a ' fish room'---been thinking bout having it setup where theres coral and enough open space to have schools of fish swim around--schools of fish meaning 6-7 of each type that i have in the tank---i've looked at some of the pics on this site of the ' large ' tanks---gonna start measuring to see what 6, 8, 10 ft long and 2 or 3 ft wide looks like in the basement---
sure--theres alot i'm not sure about--but like i said before--with the knowledge on this site---i shouldnt have any problem putting together a system---
steve
 
Well, its not so much getting a functional system, but one that follows the theories and practices that you agree with most, and those opinions are going to change most likely as your experience progresses. There are so many opinions that vary, like deep sand beds vs, bare bottom, or something in between. They both have their merits, and so its not a matter of getting it 'right' but getting it how you want it. You might start with Beckett skimmers, and after a year or two, decide a needlewheel is the better idea. There is no black & white, right or wrong... there are many 'rights', and varying opinions. Making your system based on the varying opinions of the RC collective might not be a good idea at all. Sometimes a singular theory or method is a better idea because some methods work against each other in used together (like berlin with jaubert).

Okay, if you are so certain, let me ask you some questions:

1. what do you want to keep for corals? SPS? LPS? Softies? Zoas? Disk/Shroom/ricordea types? Gorgonians? Dendros?

2. What fish do you want to keep? Angels? Large show fish, or multiple smaller ones? Tangs? Gobies? Jawfish?

3. Other inverts? Crabs, shrimp, snails, clams?


If you know what you want, you should build your system based on the inhabitants you want to keep. What do you want to keep? Not planning your system up front based on this can lead to disasters.

I have been in the Aquarium hobby for over 20 years now, and I had an early reef tank in the 90s (when boiling the rock was done weekly and anemones couldnt be kept alive, and wet-drys were used). I can tell you that when I got back into it in 2001/2002, things had changed alot, and keeping a reef was nothing like my tanks before. Almost nothing I had learned before prepared me for what I needed to learn and do with a reef. So many old practices and methods were abandoned. Honestly, the best prior experience I could draw from ended up being from my freshwater planted tank. The fully functional eco-system of a planted tank, with its attention to light, flow, and chemistry and water treatment, not to mention plant and animal husbandry, applied more to reefkeeping than my earlier saltwater tanks did.

The only way you are going to get something even close to what the oregon reef looks is through experience and skill. You can tell in the aquascaping that this was a very well planned and thought out reef... not a first or second attempt. Frankly, I dont think a first or second attempt would be able to get those kind of results (except by chance maybe)... the system was planned out too exact around the intended inhabitants. Those colonies were grown over years and moved up to larger tanks as that person's experiences built up. Its a freakin' masterpiece of a tank, and very few can sit down and do what leonardo, raphael, or michaelangelo did on the first try.
 
to setup and get running a ' oregon reef ' -----now that would be amazing----but---i have just stared to ' plan ' my reef---
fish---small---many of the same kind----jsut like you'd see if you were diving---
corals--not sure yet---thats why i've joined rc---to read and learn--
hahnmeister---i do respect your opinions, experience, and knowledge---i just dont see myself going small --then big----i'm gonna start planning my setup--and--yes---there's gonna be many questions about many things-----and surely i'll buy something that wont fit or work right---but thats the fun , to me, of setting up and running a tank---
been thinking along the lines of a 8 ft tank---not sure of the width of height yet---a sump and refugium
more to follow
 
Well, I dont like going more than 2' tall, unless the proportions just dictate that I must go 30" or 36"... but thats tops. I would never go more than 3' tall... the lighting requirements get insane, and reaching inside the tank becomes a pain.

24" tall is the ideal for me though. The depth to me would depend on how many angles I want to view the tank through. IF the tank is going to be viewed/accessed from two sides, then 3-4' wide is a good idea. If its only going to be viewed/accessed from one side (the front), then I wouldnt go more than 30" front-to-back. 36" at the most... 24" would be good. So with an 8' tank, I would consider a 3'depth and a 2' height. This makes for a 300g tank. If you are going to make it a 2 or 3 sided viewing tank, then 8'x4'x2' would be great. Thats a 478g moose of a tank... plenty for most anything... even flocks of larger fish.
 
i'm planning on viewing the tank from all 4 sides----possibly with the middle section of the tank coral and either end less coral and more ' swimming room '---i undersand bout the depth---the deeper you go, the more light intensity you need which means more dollars for the lights
steve
 
Accessability is much tougher as well. I find it hard enough to reach across a 2'x2' cross section, and Ive got monkey arms.

But yeah, I know it might look cool, but anything more than 2' just starts to pile up the lighting. I shouldnt be soo general though. A wider tank that is 3' tall isnt so bad... like if its 4' deep or so. Its the narrow tall ones that I find a PITA. 90g, 150g, and 210g (48x18x24, 72x18x30, 72x24x30 respective) tanks are just too much of a challenge to pack enough of the right lights in, so comprimises need to be made. Besides... whats the point of a tank that tall? To have to spend all that extra money on fixtures and electricity to get the light down to the bottom... when its just easier to bring the bottom up. It also has to do with what you want on the bottom too though. I like to have clams, big maze brains, etc... some people might only have some very low light species on the sand, so 30", maybe 36" isnt so bad.

You could do a 72x72x24h with a central 18x18x24" tall overflow. That gives you the equal of four 180g tanks as far as display space is concerned, and 500g to work with, but only 27" from the front glass to the central overflow to have to reach into all around. Fish love it too. On the 8x8x3' tank I worked on in Chicago, the fish love it because instead of swimming back and forth all day (having to turn around at the ends), they swim in one large circle. Its really cool looking. We put dual Tunze Wavebox's on it too with six Tunze 6200 streams... whoah flow!!!
That tank is close to 1500g though, and natural daylight is provided so lighting the 3' height isnt so much a problem (there is a parimeter of 40 54wattT5 bulbs as well for supplimental blue and sun bulbs to add in winter when things are duller). A 6'x6'x2' is the largest I would want to consider w/o massive funding (like goodbye Lexus funding) for a reef that wasnt naturally lit. You could light it with only 6 250watt halides and a bunch of blue T5 bulbs. Thats one of my dream tanks, FWIW. 500 is huge, but not too huge it kills ya.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8655018#post8655018 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hahnmeister
.... w/o massive funding (like goodbye Lexus funding)
Click to expand...
:lol: you made me spill my coffee:lol:
 
hey hahmeister--now that tank size sounds like a really good idea--i hate seeing fish swim back and forth--round and round is a much better idea--ya see--with talking to each other---ideas come about---i was thinking about 2 tanks--each 6 ft long---but now i'm toying with the idea of a 8ft or possible now a square tank---
see -all ready--i havent spent a dime yet and already things might change---
massive funding---i like that---in my case---i dont look at things in dollars---iwant a nice setup--so--thats all that matters---
will talk again
steve
 
I say start with the big tank if that's what you want :)

Why not start out with a FOWLR

Save the reef part of the hobby for a year or so later, after you get everything nice & established :) You will also probably have a better idea of exactly what you want to do with the tank. Possibly more to the fish sind or more to the reef side of the hobby :)

With dimensions, nothing like a 10+ft long tank!!! 12ft would be amazing :) I have only owned 8ft tanks & another few feet on the end would make my fish so much happier. Same with the heigth & depth. +30 inches in heigth can definantly be a little interesting to clean however there are some magnets out there which do a awesome job of cleaning.
 
viggen: looking at your occupation there... so you get both bodies, repair one, and bury the other?

hurtback, 6x6x2 is a pretty sweet size, maybe 30" tall if you really want, but thats where I draw the line. My parents 3' tall planted tank is a PITA when it comes to arranging things... I cant imagine trying to do all my coral/rock scaping with nothing but tongs.
 
imo, tanks that are viewable on 3 sides and have widths that are at least bigger than 2/3 the lengths look the best. 48x36, 60x48, 72x48, 72x60
 
viggen----i was actually thinking bout something along the 10 ft length size---but then realized i could'nt get it into the basement--would have to build a new house and put the tank in before the first floor was built (lol)
but i really like the idea of being able to walk around the tank to see all 4 sides---i hate where my 55 is setup--along the wall--cant see whats going on in the back---
now a FOWLR sounds easier to start up and then start adding corals---
not sure bout a square tank---would be different tho---
steve
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8662192#post8662192 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hahnmeister
viggen: looking at your occupation there... so you get both bodies, repair one, and bury the other?
Click to expand...

I will put it this way.... everything I touch in my body shop gets buried or cremated :)



I definantly like the idea of being able to view from multiple sides ESPECIALLY when the tanks are over 24 in deep. I also like being able to view both long sides :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Harlequin Tuskfish, tank mates
Replies
4
Views
107
griss
griss
Z
Tank Size For Pairing Fish
Replies
7
Views
348
OrionN
OrionN
G
Best of the Best
Replies
7
Views
349
wvned
wvned
Carl_Lafon
Hello, everyone.
Replies
2
Views
212
Reefing102
Reefing102
Brian60077
Big project starting today......
Replies
7
Views
186
Dustin07
D
Back
Top