Which is easier? Big tank or little tank?

[Sk8r]

Elaborating the 'reef is easier than FOWLR or fish-only' ---first of all, corals aren't plants. They're animals. They expand and contract, they eat, they excrete, and some of them move. They also grow and multiply fairly fast once they get established.

Why easier than fish? They don't jump, don't get ich or lymphocystis or flukes---though they have their own parasites, a dip in medicated water is an easier protocol, and they don't get a whole range of fishy ills. Their diet is partially light, partially floating food: they have photosynthetic bacteria in their skin that provides them sugars when exposed to light.

They also, unlike fish, don't just keel over dead. They tell you early when the water's 'off' or the conditions aren't good. They tell you that by tucking up and not expanding. If I walked past my tank and saw the corals contracted even a little, I'd immediately run for the test kits to learn what's wrong with the water---even though my fish are bravely swimming about, not complaining until they just die of the problem.

Fragile---not so much. Physically, you don't want to tear their skin, which prevents them from inflating. But in the presence of bad water, they expel water and flatten until the water's better...which lets them survive ammonia, eg, that would kill a fish within three days.

I never have to wonder whether the water's good, between my routine tests. The corals also provide additional folded space, hiding places for the smaller fish, a pleasant sensation, apparently, for others, who like to hang out in it or sleep in it at night.

 

[newbie2014]

Small is great though. I had a 29g bio cube 10 years ago and it was one of my favorite tanks I have ever owned and I have tanks ranging in size from 10g all the way up to 625g

Me thinking: if I can manage the 40G, then I can do a future 125G blindfolded.:dance:

 

[Psychomantix]

Actually, I think a FOWLR is harder than a reef.

I agree with this. Corals are a much faster indicator of when things are off, allowing you more time to catch it and fix it. By the time fish starts showing signs that something is wrong, you're pretty much hooped.

 

[davocean]

Because a larger volume of water will be more forgiving.
Just for example a fish dies in a 10g it's going to have a much greater affect than a fish dying in a 100g tank.
Temps are more stable in a larger volume of water, a power outage for example can drop a small tank volume temp much faster.
It's more critical your dosing has to be correct.
It's definitely easier to keep params stable in a larger volume of water.
There does come a point when going large definitely becomes more expensive, and more work, but for the most part I do agree it's easier to keep a larger volume of water stable.

 

[newbie2014]

Elaborating the 'reef is easier than FOWLR or fish-only' ---first of all, corals aren't plants. They're animals. They expand and contract, they eat, they excrete, and some of them move. They also grow and multiply fairly fast once they get established.

Why easier than fish? They don't jump, don't get ich or lymphocystis or flukes---though they have their own parasites, a dip in medicated water is an easier protocol, and they don't get a whole range of fishy ills. Their diet is partially light, partially floating food: they have photosynthetic bacteria in their skin that provides them sugars when exposed to light.

They also, unlike fish, don't just keel over dead. They tell you early when the water's 'off' or the conditions aren't good. They tell you that by tucking up and not expanding. If I walked past my tank and saw the corals contracted even a little, I'd immediately run for the test kits to learn what's wrong with the water---even though my fish are bravely swimming about, not
complaining until they just die of the problem.

Fragile---not so much. Physically, you don't want to tear their skin, which prevents them from inflating. But in the presence of bad water, they expel water and flatten until the water's better...which lets them survive ammonia, eg, that would kill a fish within three days.

I never have to wonder whether the water's good, between my routine tests. The corals also provide additional folded space, hiding places for the smaller fish, a pleasant sensation, apparently, for others, who like to hang out in it or sleep in it at night.

Understood. Fish can be a timed bomb, while corals have warning signs. Thanks for the explanation.

But don't corals require more specific and "cleaner" water parameters just to get started? Alk, Phos, Ca, Mg......? They don't just drop dead, but get wilted away slowly. And that's not even factoring in the need for specific light spectrum and intensity, carbon, and to an extend GFO and skimmer.

 

[gone fishin]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is startup cost... The bigger the tank the more it costs you for everything.

I agree. I like to recommend brand new folks to the 40B. That size will typically not break the bank and if after the new tank honeymoon is over the new person still has a passion for the hobby then they can always upgrade. In the mean time they have learned the basic ropes that a larger tank may have covered up due to the larger volume.

Other than the initial start up cost with a larger tank, there is the added operating expense of fixing the larger tank when the new person mistakes happen. I have known more than a few that got soured on the hobby when this happened.

 

[newbie2014]

Because a larger volume of water will be more forgiving.
Just for example a fish dies in a 10g it's going to have a much greater affect than a fish dying in a 100g tank.

How about 10 fish in a 100G? Would the water parameters in the 100G still be better? That was my original train of thought.

Temps are more stable in a larger volume of water, a power outage for example can drop a small tank volume temp much faster.
It's more critical your dosing has to be correct.

This makes sense.

It's definitely easier to keep params stable in a larger volume of water. There does come a point when going large definitely becomes more expensive, and more work, but for the most part I do agree it's easier to keep a larger volume of water stable.

So true.

 

[newbie2014]

I agree. I like to recommend brand new folks to the 40B. That size will typically not break the bank and if after the new tank honeymoon is over the new person still has a passion for the hobby then they can always upgrade. In the mean time they have learned the basic ropes that a larger tank may have covered up due to the larger volume.

Other than the initial start up cost with a larger tank, there is the added operating expense of fixing the larger tank when the new person mistakes happen. I have known more than a few that got soured on the hobby when this happened.

Yep.

Wait for $1/1G sale at Petco and Petsmart, or buy used tank/stand.

 

[Sk8r]

Re fish compared to corals...or 're coral water requirements.'

It's not all that hard to satisfy those requirements and keep them---but starting with an understanding what they are sure makes it easier to hit the target.

If you look at it, your tank starts out PERFECT for corals. If you use fish-only salt it'll support softie coral real well if you just bring the salinity up to 1.024. If you set up with reef salt (which has more calcium) it'll be perfect for stony coral and softie coral from the get-go.

How does it get not-perfect? Your rock and sand may not be fully conditioned, and release phosphate. And your fish, if too many for the early conditions (before the rock really 'sets up' to handle much) produce a lot of nitrate. This is where knowing just a teeny bit of chemistry helps you...and all you have to know is that corals and fish don't like either one much: you start out early monitoring the phosphate release from the rocks, and you run GFO until the rocks run out of phosphate. Generally sufficient GFO can keep up with the problem so that the corals will be fine. Too many fish too fast---well, the cure for that is water changes, which lower nitrate; and just not overloading your tank.

There's a side-bennie to setting up a tank for corals in this way. Your FISH love the clean water and tend to be much healthier, more resistent to problems, and to have a healthy appetite. Why? Because they're living in the fishy equivalent of clean air and sunshine.

The parameters for the least fussy soft corals is 1.024 salinity, 79 temperature, alkalinity 7.9-8.3, calcium 420 (for stony, but softies like it too), magnesium 1300 to 1500.

And another bennie: there's a limit to how many fish you can have, but if you love to shop in fish stores, there's no real limit to the number of corals you can have: they'll grow, so do allow for it; but as many places as you have to put them---you can have. They're also living filters, so they don't add to the bioload so long as they're alive and healthy.

Is that hard to run a coral tank? No: your salt mix is pretty well perfect from the start, with minor adjustments. So all you have to do is keep your tank that way through cycle, then let the natural process hammer down the nitrate/ammonia spike.

The one requirement in addition is appropriate light. You need at least T5, Metal Halide, OR reef-capable LEDs. Corals eat light, literally, to get sugars, and the quality matters. Softies prefer lower light than stony. Stony comes in two classes: lps, (the fluffy ones) which takes moderate to high light, and sps, (the colored sticks) which takes high light.

Is it possible to start with corals instead of fish? Yes. With the hardier ones. You can add the corals, THEN add the fish, if you like.

You do need the tests and supplement for alkalinity: everybody, including fish-onlies, needs that; and additionally the tests for calcium and magnesium if you're going stony reef.

 

[davocean]

How about 10 fish in a 100G? Would the water parameters in the 100G still be better? That was my original train of thought.

If 10 fish die you got other problems!
I'm just saying a little amonia or waste in a small tank will have a much greater affect than in a large tank

 

[kmbyrnes]

I've had a small tank and bigger is easier IME.
The small tank was finicky on water chemistry, as Sk8r pointed out.
Now that it is established, my reef chugs along with pretty much just weekly maintenance. Ditto with the FOWLRs.
Once you get past the startup costs, if your wallet is ready for the ongoing costs, bigger will give you less headache, until you start getting into XXXL tanks.

 

[Sounds Fishy]

As others have said,having some extra gallonage makes it a lot safer when dosing,because there is a bit of a buffer for errors.If you are hard of sight,or visually impaired a big aquarium is easier to view inhabitants.It enables the ability to have larger and more specimens,than a small tank.The environment,opens up space for more complex landscaping.Unfortunately,IMO, one advantage of a small aquarium is proportionally less hydro costs since less wattage is required for lights and pumps.Hydro is a big consideration,as well as the price of salt(in Canada the Canadian dollar is pretty low and the price of salt is always rising...hydro too).

 

[snakeybird]

Another consideration is ease of maintenance; personally, I know that I am more inclined to perform routine maintenance on smaller tanks, as it is much easier for me. I loved my 72 gallon bowfront, but had to get out the step ladder to clean it properly (I am a somewhat vertically challenged lady), which meant that it wasn't maintained as well as my 30 gallon or ten gallon tanks. As a result, my water parameters were generally much better in the smaller tanks, so *for me* a 30 gallon is easier than a 72 bowfront (at least the way I had them set up).

 

[Sk8r]

Once you get the chemistry of a large tank on even keel, maintenance becomes mostly sump-based, and less frequent. I have to get on a stepladder to service the dt also, and am very glad to report it's rare that I have to get in there.

 

[brett559]

My 42g is way less work than my 90g was. It's literally half the work - half the time spent making/mixing water, half the time doing water changes, half the time scraping glass, half the top-off water needed (although I do have ATO).

There is no way a bigger tank is the same work as a small tank.

 

[Sk8r]

You really shouldn't be having to scrape algae after your first year...you might need a GFO reactor. And physical labor of mixing water: that can be cut way down if you have a marked gallonage on your salt water mixing tank, and a measuring cup/container for salt. Dump one measure into the other and put a stout pump, like an Eheim, to work on its own overnight, and it should be crystal clear and ready to use by morning.

I'm a tad on the lazy side, so my version of water change is (basement sump) to snag up a few gallons of water from the sump and dump them out, then fill with an equivalent number of gallons from the salt water reservoir, never having even cut the pump off.

Hope that might make tank-handling a little easier.

 

[Mrs. Music]

You really shouldn't be having to scrape algae after your first year...you might need a GFO reactor. And physical labor of mixing water: that can be cut way down if you have a marked gallonage on your salt water mixing tank, and a measuring cup/container for salt. Dump one measure into the other and put a stout pump, like an Eheim, to work on its own overnight, and it should be crystal clear and ready to use by morning.

I'm a tad on the lazy side, so my version of water change is (basement sump) to snag up a few gallons of water from the sump and dump them out, then fill with an equivalent number of gallons from the salt water reservoir, never having even cut the pump off.

Hope that might make tank-handling a little easier.

I like this idea.

 

[adam.sandor88]

Littler the tank with bigger the filtration