Just set up a tunze nano 2002 in a 70 gallon tank

Frogmanx82 · 08/12/2009, 11:45 PM

I know its only rated for 52 gallons, but it was about my only option for an in tank skimmer. The visijet I had was a piece of crap, impossible to keep a steady foam production and microbubbles all over the tank.

The tunze is smaller, has a much larger capacity cup and is making foam from the get go. I only have about 2.5 inches opening in the back and the nano fit perfectly. The neck of the collection brings it just over the lid. Amazingly, there are almost no bubbles escaping. It's the reason I sprang $152 for the thing to start with and I'm not disappointed.

Anyway, I'm happy so far, it fit, it works, and now I can start thinking about getting more than some mushrooms.

james3370 · 08/13/2009, 01:33 AM

you mean the tunze 9002??

check out http://shop.mediabaskets.com/category.sc?categoryId=23
....the guy there has come up w/ a great square cup modification for that skimmer. it was originally designed for the biocube & similar AIO nano tanks to make it fit better in the rear chambers. think it holds more skimmate & aids in the bubble production too.

Frogmanx82 · 08/13/2009, 08:12 AM

typo, yes the 9002.

Thanks for the link. I have the round cup working but am thinking about getting the inTank model if the capacity is much greater. I would need the skinny one. I think the stock cup holds a cup. What is the capacity on the inTank cups? I didn't see that mentioned on the site.

james3370 · 08/13/2009, 10:36 AM

not sure. message him on his site. he is also a member & i think sponsor over on nano(dash)reef.com username of "steviet"

stanlalee · 08/13/2009, 05:02 PM

you dont have room for a hang on skimmer? that thing is doing little for a 70 gallon. doesn't even pass enough gallons per hour to be that effective on a 70g. that being said your tank would probably do oka without a skimmer so something is better than nothng.

Frogmanx82 · 08/14/2009, 11:52 AM

A full cup everyday (half cup liquid, half cup thick foam), so how can you say doing nothing? I get good aeration and no bubbles in the water, that alone would be worth it.

No room for a hang on. The tank is an inch from the back wall on a built in cabinet that is recessed about 6 inches into the wall as well. Only have 3 inches on either side at the back of the tank.

I got the inTank skinny cup. Its got twice the capacity of the stock cup and for a traveling person, that's a big plus.

stanlalee · 08/14/2009, 12:06 PM

I didn't say nothing, I said not much for that size tank. stock or aftermarket cup for the tunze is still a tiny cup. part of a skimmer being effective is how much tank water can be processed and alot of tank water on a 70g just aint seeing the nano tunze much at all per hour to be processed. I'm just saying its no way adequate by "typical" standards of what a decent skimmer for that size tank would be expected of. I'm sure it does something. perhaps the equivalent of adding a few more gallons to your routine water changes, who knows. if tunze says its too small why argue it.
1) like I said, many tanks are perfectly fine with no skimmer so if the tank is doing well who cares. use it for the little "extra" waste its removing. 2) the last article I saw with good skimmers only removing 10% of total organics in a small volume of water taken from a reef tank leads me to believe all skimmers do is help a little anyway except for specific things that have an affinity for being skimmed (which doesn't seem to be a high percentage of total tank water organics. they did remove all the synthetic organics used for testing). when you think about it ANY skimmer cup pales in volume to the system's total volume and I'm guessing 80% of whats collected has got to be water by volume (and I'm just basing that on frozen food labels being 80-95% water and the consistancy of skimate in comparison, nothing concrete). so just by volume alone it would seem a very good skimmer would be needed to make a substantial impact on "significant" waste removal.

moondoggy4 · 08/14/2009, 06:17 PM

Do you have a ATO system for your tank. I have a 9002 on my son's 33 gallon tank without a ATO I was not impressed and pulled it. It seems that either the Tunze work great or they do not. Nice to hear that yours is doing great.

Frogmanx82 · 08/14/2009, 11:39 PM

I don't have an ATO, but I have a very closed system and don't lose a lot of water.

08/12/2009, 11:45 PM	#1
Frogmanx82 Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 1,515	Just set up a tunze nano 2002 in a 70 gallon tank I know its only rated for 52 gallons, but it was about my only option for an in tank skimmer. The visijet I had was a piece of crap, impossible to keep a steady foam production and microbubbles all over the tank. The tunze is smaller, has a much larger capacity cup and is making foam from the get go. I only have about 2.5 inches opening in the back and the nano fit perfectly. The neck of the collection brings it just over the lid. Amazingly, there are almost no bubbles escaping. It's the reason I sprang $152 for the thing to start with and I'm not disappointed. Anyway, I'm happy so far, it fit, it works, and now I can start thinking about getting more than some mushrooms. __________________ Exodus 8:2 Check my homepage for tank pics and details. Current Tank Info: 90 gallon, 2x maxspect R420R LED, 4 Ocellaris Clowns, Yellow Eye Kole Tang, Flame Angel, Foxface Rabbitfish, Banggai Cardinals, Azure Damsel, rock flower anemone, cleaner shrimp, serpent star

08/13/2009, 01:33 AM	#2
james3370 Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: US ARMY - El Paso TX Posts: 3,678	you mean the tunze 9002?? check out http://shop.mediabaskets.com/category.sc?categoryId=23 ....the guy there has come up w/ a great square cup modification for that skimmer. it was originally designed for the biocube & similar AIO nano tanks to make it fit better in the rear chambers. think it holds more skimmate & aids in the bubble production too. __________________ Yes I hear voices in my head, but they speak spanish so I can't understand anything they say. there's no place like 127.0.0.1 It's a shame that stupidity isn't painful.... Current Tank Info: currently tankless....but planning an AIO

08/13/2009, 08:12 AM	#3
Frogmanx82 Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 1,515	typo, yes the 9002. Thanks for the link. I have the round cup working but am thinking about getting the inTank model if the capacity is much greater. I would need the skinny one. I think the stock cup holds a cup. What is the capacity on the inTank cups? I didn't see that mentioned on the site. __________________ Exodus 8:2 Check my homepage for tank pics and details. Current Tank Info: 90 gallon, 2x maxspect R420R LED, 4 Ocellaris Clowns, Yellow Eye Kole Tang, Flame Angel, Foxface Rabbitfish, Banggai Cardinals, Azure Damsel, rock flower anemone, cleaner shrimp, serpent star

08/13/2009, 10:36 AM	#4
james3370 Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: US ARMY - El Paso TX Posts: 3,678	not sure. message him on his site. he is also a member & i think sponsor over on nano(dash)reef.com username of "steviet" __________________ Yes I hear voices in my head, but they speak spanish so I can't understand anything they say. there's no place like 127.0.0.1 It's a shame that stupidity isn't painful.... Current Tank Info: currently tankless....but planning an AIO

08/14/2009, 11:52 AM	#6
Frogmanx82 Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 1,515	A full cup everyday (half cup liquid, half cup thick foam), so how can you say doing nothing? I get good aeration and no bubbles in the water, that alone would be worth it. No room for a hang on. The tank is an inch from the back wall on a built in cabinet that is recessed about 6 inches into the wall as well. Only have 3 inches on either side at the back of the tank. I got the inTank skinny cup. Its got twice the capacity of the stock cup and for a traveling person, that's a big plus. __________________ Exodus 8:2 Check my homepage for tank pics and details. Current Tank Info: 90 gallon, 2x maxspect R420R LED, 4 Ocellaris Clowns, Yellow Eye Kole Tang, Flame Angel, Foxface Rabbitfish, Banggai Cardinals, Azure Damsel, rock flower anemone, cleaner shrimp, serpent star

08/13/2009, 05:02 PM	#5
stanlalee Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: hampton roads, va Posts: 1,799	you dont have room for a hang on skimmer? that thing is doing little for a 70 gallon. doesn't even pass enough gallons per hour to be that effective on a 70g. that being said your tank would probably do oka without a skimmer so something is better than nothng.

08/14/2009, 12:06 PM	#7
stanlalee Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: hampton roads, va Posts: 1,799	I didn't say nothing, I said not much for that size tank. stock or aftermarket cup for the tunze is still a tiny cup. part of a skimmer being effective is how much tank water can be processed and alot of tank water on a 70g just aint seeing the nano tunze much at all per hour to be processed. I'm just saying its no way adequate by "typical" standards of what a decent skimmer for that size tank would be expected of. I'm sure it does something. perhaps the equivalent of adding a few more gallons to your routine water changes, who knows. if tunze says its too small why argue it. 1) like I said, many tanks are perfectly fine with no skimmer so if the tank is doing well who cares. use it for the little "extra" waste its removing. 2) the last article I saw with good skimmers only removing 10% of total organics in a small volume of water taken from a reef tank leads me to believe all skimmers do is help a little anyway except for specific things that have an affinity for being skimmed (which doesn't seem to be a high percentage of total tank water organics. they did remove all the synthetic organics used for testing). when you think about it ANY skimmer cup pales in volume to the system's total volume and I'm guessing 80% of whats collected has got to be water by volume (and I'm just basing that on frozen food labels being 80-95% water and the consistancy of skimate in comparison, nothing concrete). so just by volume alone it would seem a very good skimmer would be needed to make a substantial impact on "significant" waste removal. Last edited by stanlalee; 08/14/2009 at 12:12 PM.

08/14/2009, 06:17 PM	#8
moondoggy4 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: menifee So cal Posts: 11,042	Do you have a ATO system for your tank. I have a 9002 on my son's 33 gallon tank without a ATO I was not impressed and pulled it. It seems that either the Tunze work great or they do not. Nice to hear that yours is doing great.

08/14/2009, 11:39 PM	#9
Frogmanx82 Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 1,515	I don't have an ATO, but I have a very closed system and don't lose a lot of water. __________________ Exodus 8:2 Check my homepage for tank pics and details. Current Tank Info: 90 gallon, 2x maxspect R420R LED, 4 Ocellaris Clowns, Yellow Eye Kole Tang, Flame Angel, Foxface Rabbitfish, Banggai Cardinals, Azure Damsel, rock flower anemone, cleaner shrimp, serpent star