Should I go 36"x36"x20" 112g or 30"x30"x20" 77g?

[kmu]

HI there,

Im currently running a 34g 20"x20"x20" reef cube and would like to upgrade it since the real estate is getting very tight.

Should I go with the 112g 36x36x20 cube or with the 30x30x20 77g cube?

The 36" cube is around 45% larger than the 30" cube so everything is goona be more expensive.

I would have the reef tank on the second floor so probably the maintenance would be alot easier with the smaller reef tank.

Where I live the eletric bill is very high because of the AC, it gets extremely hot during summer, so probably the smaller reef tank would be better.

The tank is gonna have LPS, mushrooms, zoas and ricordeas only and will probably not have SPS, and the lighting will be a 10x24 watt ATI fixture.

What concerns me more about the smaller tank is that I will have to have a smaller fish bioload and I really want a Regal Tang, Yellow Tang, Pair of perculas and maybe a school of 4 to 5 Anthias.

What should I go with and would the smaller reeftank hold the fish bioload? I could go with a nice skimmer like an Bubble King mini to help with the fish bioload

THX in advance

[Sisterlimonpot]

After reading your post I think it's a no brainer to go with the larger tank. However if finances are a problem go with the conservative approach and get the smaller tank. I don't think you'll be unsatisfied with whichever tank you choose.

[username in use]

Id go with the larger, especally with the two tangs. They will greatly appreciate the swimming room, so will the school of anthias.

[JeF4y]

I'd go bigger too....

My next tank will be a marineland deep dimension 200. I love the DEEP (front to back) tanks.

[TP123]

Also remember that 36" is a standard size for lighting. It looks like you've already picked it out, but it could be an issue later on.

[Doolin]

Originally posted by TP123
Also remember that 36" is a standard size for lighting. It looks like you've already picked it out, but it could be an issue later on.

+1

Although one MH on the 20" cube would be pretty sweet looking...

[nikon187]

I wouldn't put a regal tang in a 30" cube unless you have a bigger home for it within a year or 2.

[milkit]

Originally posted by Doolin
+1

Although one MH on the 20" cube would be pretty sweet looking...

I have one single 400w mh on a 30x30x30 cube with a lumenmax reflector. if anything, its way 2 much light. bleaching some of my corals!

[luther1200]

Get the bigger 1, you will regret it if you don't. I know I do.

[kmu]

Everyone suggest the larger tank, gonna have to think about that one...

For lighting I have my mind set on an ATI 24" fixture so the 30" or 36" length wont be a problem.

Do you guys Think the 36" will make that much difference for the fish VS the 30" cube, because Im willing to add a powerfull skimmer to compensate for the extra bioload from the fish?

2 Tangs, 2 perculas, maybe 4 Anthias thats probably it maybe...

[kmu]

Lets see, Both tanks will use the same lighting, also the same skimmer, controlers, return pump, powerheads, live rock, sand...

The 36" cube will be around $400 more expensive vs the 30" cube.

The 36" cube will use a larger chiller maybe 1/3hp instead of the 1/4hp I could use with the 30" cube.

For the 36" cube I need to do monthly 25g water changes and with the 30" cube I would need to do 15g water changes...

Thats about it, any other suggestions?

THX again

[eros]

I've been debating between building a 24x24x20 or a 30x30x20 so I'm in a similar situation. I'm having my tank custom built so I've decided to go with 28lx24wx22h, but that may change, I'm waiting for my lighting to get here before I make my final decision. I'm using 8x24watt T5's so I was also concerned with lighting coverage. I think if you are going to do the 36 inch cube you need to get a 36 inch fixture. I've seen some tanks lit with T5's that were too short and coverage was an issue, especially lengthwise. IMO, if room is not an issue get the larger tank, but get the appropriate lighting for it. You'll be glad you did.

[kmu]

Can someone please edit my last post, where I stated that the 36" cube would be around $400 more expensive vs the 30"cube I meant to put $70

THX in advance

[username in use]

it will make a differnce, but not because of the bioload, the issue is swimming space for the tangs. They need large amounts of swimming room, to the point that usually a 6 foot tank is required, therefore 30" cube is way undersized, but the 36" could get away with some of the smaller tangs. You really should consider the larger tank or ditch the tangs.

[widmer]

I'm surprised that no one's saying that both tanks are too small for the tangs. The mantra has always been 48" or longer.

And for what it's worth, I would go with the smaller tank. It's considerably less water volume to deal with should anything go wrong. And as far as the way the size appears, there's not a whole lot of difference in my opinion. That's just my personal preference though.

You might want to consider halide, so that you're not replacing ten T5 bulbs at $20+ apeice. Then again, it can be fun to try the different color combinations in T5. And especially with all those soft corals, I'm sure you could get away with a six- or eight- bulb ATI fixture.

[Tswifty]

I would go with the larger system. The difference in gallons isn't that much, so assuming you purchased oversized equipment in the first place. The same equipment should handle either tank.

For softies and LPS 10 bulbs is way overkill, and you'll more than likely bleach a lot of stuff. In fact, that many bulbs would probably be overkill for SPS. I would look into the 6 or 8 bulb unit instead... or look at 1 - 250w Metal Halide. There are some nice reflectors out there, and 1 may be able to cover the entire 36" x 36" footprint... especially since you are planning on lower light demanding corals.

The tangs will be fine... In EITHER tank... although a Regal isn't the best choice because of how big they can actually get. However, I see no problem with 2 or even 3 more appropriately sized tangs. A 36" x 36" footprint of a tank is VERY large. In fact either of those footprints would dwarf the normal tank dimensions that people are used to seeing at their LFS.

[ArmandoC]

Is this a custom tank that you are having built by someone or are you getting it off the "rack", so to speak? If it's custom, why not the best of both world's with a 36" x 30" x 20"? This way you get the length you want while maintaining the depth and height. It also decreases your tank volume considerably to allow you to have it in an upstairs apartment if you are worried about weight issues. Just make sure to check with your apartment management first to see if there might be any structural issues in their building (don't know how old they are). I would also suggest putting the tank in a corner of the room that it will be in for the maximum amount of stability from the floor joists meeting up with the main column of the support structure.

[username in use]

Originally posted by widmer
I'm surprised that no one's saying that both tanks are too small for the tangs. The mantra has always been 48" or longer.

thats true, however I think that it is assuming a more common tank dimension of 18 or 20" deep, where as this tank is 36" deep, which gives you nearly 6 feet point to point, thereby giving you the long swim line that they require.

[widmer]

Well I just calculated it, and although the hypotenuse as seen from top down is nowhere near six feet, it is virtually identical to that of a 48" long, 55-gallon tank.

[DT's_Reef]

Any particular reason you want a cube?

I like cubes too, but prefer a tank that's a bit longer than front-to-back, as visually, it's easier for me to achieve a balanced, natural look as far as rock and coral placement are concerned.

The longer single dimension allows me to place the rock in an "offset" (favoring one side versus the other) fashion, again, making it look more natural while having plenty of open sand.