Please Vote on Tank Dimensions and Design

[Patrick Cox]

I am weighing the pros and cons of an internal vs external overflow design along with associated tank dimensions and I would appreciate your vote for one and then any comments you might like to contribute. I am always looking to learn from the great experience found on this site! Thanks!

Option 1 - 48x24x18 - With External Overflow
Pros:
-Better water circulation I would imagine.
-Popular design for a reason I would guess.
-I would say the plumbing is easier to access once up and running
Cons:
-The back (outside) is very messy and visible in my application
-Tank sits further from wall to accommodate overflow box


Option 2 - 48x28x18 - Internal Overflow
Pros:
-More water volume than option 1
-Back (outside) of the tank is much cleaner and is very visible in my application
-Tank could sit closer to the wall
Cons:
-If there are plumbing issues, I worry the internal overflow allows less access?
-Normally I would say the overflow takes up internal space but since i will extend the aquarium footprint I am actually getting more space. But I guess it is more cluttered.
-Circulation may not be as good as a wide external overflow box would be.

Option 3 - 48x24x18 - Partial internal overflow that exits back wall. (Miracles calls this a "cup" overflow.) This may also be "coast to coast" inside of tank?
-I would say this is similar Option 1 without the external overflow.
-It is a bit cleaner on back than option 1
-I think the external overflow box puts a bit more stress on aquarium frame.

[moondoggy4]

External, it can be much quieter.

[Patrick Cox]

Originally Posted by moondoggy4

External, it can be much quieter.

Thanks for your comment! Is this true even if I run a Herbie or Bean Animal on either?

[Raul-7]

Use a ghost overflow; best of both worlds.

[moondoggy4]

I have an internal overflow but only have one pipe so it is very difficult to make it quite,so I feel it would be more difficult with an internal but it can be possible with a custom job. I was not aware of this when I bought my tank. So my next tank will be external, funny close to your current tank size but I want a 36''x30''x22''.

[rfgonzo]

I think 48x24x18 with a external overflow is a great footprint for a beautiful reef tank.

[Patrick Cox]

Originally Posted by moondoggy4

I have an internal overflow but only have one pipe so it is very difficult to make it quite,so I feel it would be more difficult with an internal but it can be possible with a custom job. I was not aware of this when I bought my tank. So my next tank will be external, funny close to your current tank size but I want a 36''x30''x22''.

Thanks, yes, whichever way I go it will be custom and I will have a herbie or bean animal on any of them. Good luck with your tank.

[Patrick Cox]

Well, of course the voting is very even!

Just to clarify, Here are example pictures of each option. Thanks for your comments and voting!

Option 1: External Overflow - 48x24x18
This is what my current overflow looks like...



Option 2: internal Overflow with larger tank dimension front to back - 48x28x18



Option 3: Partial "Cup" Overflow with Pipes out back - 48x24x18
(Mine would not be "coast to coast" on the overflow. Only about 18".)

[Raul-7]

Why not this?

[goreef170]

I say go with the wider 28" tank. Gives you more room to plan, and you can keep the rock scape off the back wall.

[Patrick Cox]

Originally Posted by Raul-7

Why not this?

Yes, those Reef Savvy tanks are nice but I am afraid it will be too costly. I will price them again along with Miracles and maybe Coast to Coast but I'm guessing that Miracles will again be the best value and the quality is excellent. Thanks for the suggestion!

[Raul-7]

You can it custom made by modular_marine on eBay; just the overflow box and either install it yourself or send it directly to whoever is making your aquarium to install it.

[Patrick Cox]

Originally Posted by goreef170

I say go with the wider 28" tank. Gives you more room to plan, and you can keep the rock scape off the back wall.

Thanks, yes I definitely will keep the rock work off the back wall. And I plan to have less rock than I have in my current tank. I want lots of swimming room for fish and lots of room for flow through the tank.

And it does seem like if I need an extra four inches behind my tank for an external overflow, why not make the tank 4 inches wider and go internal overflow and then gain some internal space and water as well and also clean up the back of the tank? It just seems smart to me unless I am missing something else.

Thanks again!

[Skim]

If it was me I would go with the 28" and the coast to coast over flow as most of what you want to filter and feed to your skimmer will be on the surface. When I first seen that design I loved it wish I would have done it. I believe it will keep your tank cleaner as the surface proteins don't have to swirl around your tank until it makes its way to the corner or middle. If your are looking for efficiency the coast to coast would be the way to go.

Good luck on your build.

Skim

[moondoggy4]

Looking at the back of your tank I was thinking if you needed to adjust one of the valves could you reach back there on the 48'' long tank?

[Patrick Cox]

Originally Posted by moondoggy4

Looking at the back of your tank I was thinking if you needed to adjust one of the valves could you reach back there on the 48'' long tank?

Hi,
That is a good question that I have considered. While I do have access to both ends of the tank, one end is easier to navigate than the other as one end is totally open but then the other has my desk and computer so I need to move the desk or climb over it to reach that side. However I am considering putting the plumbing offset to one side (open side) on the new tank and/or putting the gate valves in the sump area. So I am still making these decisions.

Thanks for your comments!

[Patrick Cox]

Originally Posted by Skim

If it was me I would go with the 28" and the coast to coast over flow as most of what you want to filter and feed to your skimmer will be on the surface. When I first seen that design I loved it wish I would have done it. I believe it will keep your tank cleaner as the surface proteins don't have to swirl around your tank until it makes its way to the corner or middle. If your are looking for efficiency the coast to coast would be the way to go.

Good luck on your build.

Skim

Hi,
This sounds logical to me but to be honest, I don't see that many new builds with coast to coast overflows. I would think if it was that important of a concept more people would do it. Can you comment on that? Thanks for your participation!

[Patrick Cox]

I have been reading many build threads and thought of a question relevant to this decision. On an internal overflow, should I have any concern about poor water flow inside the overflow box? It seems like since the drain is really located at the top of the overflow box that the water in the bottom of the overflow box will just sit there and never really circulate through the system. Is this a valid concern? Thanks.

[Patrick Cox]

Well, I am back planning this build. Any new comments on these options? Thanks!

[d2mini]

Originally Posted by Patrick Cox

Hi,
This sounds logical to me but to be honest, I don't see that many new builds with coast to coast overflows. I would think if it was that important of a concept more people would do it. Can you comment on that? Thanks for your participation!

I always do a coast to coast, or almost coast to coast. And no teeth.
This setup provides the best surface skimming.
All those proteins, extra food, etc that float to the top of the water surface are skimmed right off and sent to your sump.

[ca1ore]

Assuming you mean varying the width dimension (front to back) then all things equal, wider is better, so 28" get my vote. I also much prefer an external overflow - either fully external or a narrow profile internal skimmer and external scupper box to maximize space use inside the tank. Other than cost, the only reason to do an internal overflow is if you just cannot accommodate the extra 6" or so the tank will stick out into the room.

[Patrick Cox]

Originally Posted by ca1ore

Assuming you mean varying the width dimension (front to back) then all things equal, wider is better, so 28" get my vote. I also much prefer an external overflow - either fully external or a narrow profile internal skimmer and external scupper box to maximize space use inside the tank. Other than cost, the only reason to do an internal overflow is if you just cannot accommodate the extra 6" or so the tank will stick out into the room.

Thanks for your comment. On the external overflow, I have a full glass external overflow on my current tank and while I have had no problems with it, it seems like there is a lot of weight just hanging onto the back of the tank by I guess adhesive and caulk. I worry about problems down the road. To me it seems like a box that is mounted through bulkheads would be more secure and you'd be less likely to have problems down the road. Like the following...



What are your thoughts on this?


Thanks

[ca1ore]

Originally Posted by Patrick Cox

What are your thoughts on this?

I would find something like that perfectly acceptable. BTW, for your current setup, I'd advice supporting the plumbing that comes out of the external box. While I think you may be worrying unnecessarily about the box, supporting plumbing is always a good idea.