Which of these size tanks do you like best and why?

Mark75 · 08/31/2008, 09:38 AM

I am preparing my return to reef keeping and would like some help. I have successfully kept a reef tank twice, the first time for about three years and the second time less than a year. Both my attempts at reefing I used an assortment of equipment left over from my freshwater days that were not designed for reef keeping. I gave up and sold EVERYTHING and now I would like to start over designing a user friendly reef set-up.

Okay, letâ€™s start with the tank. I would like a cube-ish, rimless tank. I have decided to let Glasscages built it unless someone knows someone better? Here are a few I am deciding between;

95 -3 Wide (Rimless) 36 x 24 x 24 Tall
90 Square (Rimless) 36 x 36 x 16 tall
100 Square (Rimless) 30 x 30 x 24 Tall

I would like to stay at or around 100 gallons.

What are your thoughts on these tanks, is there a better size I over looked?

I guess my intent with the tank would help you help me!
I am going for a minimal rockwork; with a few chosen SPS and fish. I love the very open look. I made the mistake with my first tanks of just throwing corals in.

For lighting I really have no direction. I am leaning towards either a single 400w metal halide pendant or 2-250w metal halide pendants. I would like a metal halide/T5 set-up but I am afraid the cost will be out of my budget. So, how would you light this tank?

LobsterOfJustice · 08/31/2008, 09:51 AM

My main suggestion is that SPS grow upwards off the rockwork, so one of the taller two options might be better. Really shallow tanks are better for ricordea, zoas, etc because they don't grow upwards.

LUVSPS · 08/31/2008, 10:32 AM

Yeah, ^^thats a good point. I would pick the 100 square with a 400w MH. Sounds like a great idea for the minimal rockwork and SPS. Should look really great!

Mark75 · 08/31/2008, 12:23 PM

Thanks guys for the help. My only concern with the 30x30x24 tank is it will "seem" like a much smaller tank compared with the 36" length tanks,...any truth to this? Also how about swimming room for fish, it would seem more confining to active fish?

About using a single 400w metal halide, is there a good selection of 400w bulbs?

widmer · 08/31/2008, 01:07 PM

The 95 wide gets my vote. Sure 30 inches of front to back width is great to have, but relative dimensions are also a factor for me. So I would think the 95 wide is more visually appealing IMO.

Also, 2 x 250 watts metal halide will give you better coverage, more options for coral placement. Don't feel too bad about not being able to supplement with T5, you're really only missing out on dawn-dusk effect since the T5 would probably be drowned out by the MH anyways once they're up and running.

Mark75 · 08/31/2008, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by widmer

Also, 2 x 250 watts metal halide will give you better coverage, more options for coral placement. Don't feel too bad about not being able to supplement with T5, you're really only missing out on dawn-dusk effect since the T5 would probably be drowned out by the MH anyways once they're up and running.

We are on the same page here! i would love to have 2-250w mh w/2 or 4 T5's but the cost of such a fixture over just the 2-250watters is HUGE!!! I am having a hard time justifying the extra money for a couple of T5's.

seapug · 08/31/2008, 02:09 PM

Corals grow like bushes in a field, not like trophies on a shelf, so I'd say go with the lowest, widest option, like a tidepool. It will give you the most room for aquascaping and allow for better light penetration with lower wattage bulbs. Plus, if you get an acro over 16 inches tall you can always frag it.

crvz · 08/31/2008, 10:13 PM

I like the 90 square rimless, even for SPS. I like the shallow look, and you can stick the corals pretty low in the tank. But the 100 square would be my second option. I really like the depth (front-back) of something more than 24.

Mark426 · 08/31/2008, 11:05 PM

90 square. I like the look and ease of working in a shallow tank.

Playa-1 · 08/31/2008, 11:07 PM

95, Because with the choices that you listed it's a happy medium between length and height.

Jflip2002 · 08/31/2008, 11:14 PM

100g Square... I place a high value on front to back depth, rather than length. I like the dimensions of the 90, but 16" is just too shallow IMO. A 36x36x24 (~135g) would be awesome. My tank is 60x36, youd really love the 36" deep front to back, the aquascaping possibilities are nice. It really makes it look much larger than a lot of other tanks in its same gallon range. The one thing I hate about my tank is its too shallow, and its 20". I think youd end up growing tired of the 16" deep tank.

Mark75 · 09/01/2008, 06:20 AM

I am starting to think the perfect tank size for me lies somewhere between the sizes I have listed,....maybe a 36x30x18????

Mykel Obvious · 09/01/2008, 07:14 AM

I'd also vote looking at the 135 square... 3'x3'x2'is the best of both worlds IMO

(that's the tank I really want anyway

)

From what I've read on other threads, a single MH pendant covers 30" nicely, if you keep an open area to the sides, you could use one, but I'd vote for a minimum of 2 over a 3'x2' or 3'x3' footprint... you'd really have to ask someone else though, because I'm going to switch from PCs to T5s... I just love the option of switching one or two $25 bulb to get a different look to the tank

On another note, you won't be able to beat the price on a Glass Cages tank, however read everything on RC that you can find about them before you spend any money... people either love them, or have had no end of problems with them, nothing in between... and I've read some horror stories about how they treat customers with problems... just my $0.02

HTH

Mark75 · 09/02/2008, 08:27 AM

I have decided,.....I am going with a 30x30x20 cube and lighting it with a single 400w metal halide. How does this sound?

eskymick · 09/02/2008, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by seapug
Corals grow like bushes in a field, not like trophies on a shelf, so I'd say go with the lowest, widest option, like a tidepool. It will give you the most room for aquascaping and allow for better light penetration with lower wattage bulbs. Plus, if you get an acro over 16 inches tall you can always frag it.

+1

reverendmaynard · 09/02/2008, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark75
I have decided,.....I am going with a 30x30x20 cube and lighting it with a single 400w metal halide. How does this sound?

Sounds like a great size. Will you be using the new lumenbright reflector? Might be able to get away with a 250w.

Mark75 · 09/02/2008, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by reverendmaynard
Sounds like a great size. Will you be using the new lumenbright reflector? Might be able to get away with a 250w.

It is funny that you ask me what reflector I will be using because I just posted a question in the lighting and equipment forum asking help with the reflector/bulb/ballast/SE-DE selection.

I really do not know much about this area, my last tank was T5's.

reverendmaynard · 09/02/2008, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark75
It is funny that you ask me what reflector I will be using because I just posted a question in the lighting and equipment forum asking help with the reflector/bulb/ballast/SE-DE selection.

I really do not know much about this area, my last tank was T5's.

I'm no expert myself, but my understanding is that the lumenbright is the best reflector out there for up to a 3'x3' square.

I'd wait for more responses from the 'experts' before making any purchases though.

Here's the main lumenbright thread if you want to read it. Posting a question to it might attract the right people to answer it.

dcmander · 09/02/2008, 02:47 PM

why not 36x30x24? that would be my ideal dimensions. 112g and i couldn't imagine it being too much more for GC to make

08/31/2008, 09:38 AM	#1
Mark75 Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: East Tenn. Posts: 740	Which of these size tanks do you like best and why? I am preparing my return to reef keeping and would like some help. I have successfully kept a reef tank twice, the first time for about three years and the second time less than a year. Both my attempts at reefing I used an assortment of equipment left over from my freshwater days that were not designed for reef keeping. I gave up and sold EVERYTHING and now I would like to start over designing a user friendly reef set-up. Okay, letâ€™s start with the tank. I would like a cube-ish, rimless tank. I have decided to let Glasscages built it unless someone knows someone better? Here are a few I am deciding between; 95 -3 Wide (Rimless) 36 x 24 x 24 Tall 90 Square (Rimless) 36 x 36 x 16 tall 100 Square (Rimless) 30 x 30 x 24 Tall I would like to stay at or around 100 gallons. What are your thoughts on these tanks, is there a better size I over looked? I guess my intent with the tank would help you help me! I am going for a minimal rockwork; with a few chosen SPS and fish. I love the very open look. I made the mistake with my first tanks of just throwing corals in. For lighting I really have no direction. I am leaning towards either a single 400w metal halide pendant or 2-250w metal halide pendants. I would like a metal halide/T5 set-up but I am afraid the cost will be out of my budget. So, how would you light this tank?

08/31/2008, 09:51 AM	#2
LobsterOfJustice Recovering Detritophobe Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Cary, NC Posts: 7,443	My main suggestion is that SPS grow upwards off the rockwork, so one of the taller two options might be better. Really shallow tanks are better for ricordea, zoas, etc because they don't grow upwards. __________________ If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right. I remember when zoanthids were called things like "green" and "orange" and not "reverse gorilla nipple." Current Tank Info: 180g reef with all the bells and whistles

08/31/2008, 10:32 AM	#3
LUVSPS Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Washington state Posts: 583	Yeah, ^^thats a good point. I would pick the 100 square with a 400w MH. Sounds like a great idea for the minimal rockwork and SPS. Should look really great! __________________ "The statistics on sanity are that one out of every four people is suffering from a mental illness. Look at your 3 best friends. If they're ok, then it's you." — Rita Mae Brown Current Tank Info: 120g SPS reef in the works. 2 400w MH in Lumenarc reflectors. 2 Vortechs. Warner Marine S-200 skimmer. Lifereef sump/refuge. TLF Phosban reactor. 110lbs dried Eco rocks.

08/31/2008, 02:09 PM	#7
seapug Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: 4980 ft. Posts: 7,954 Blog Entries: 1	Corals grow like bushes in a field, not like trophies on a shelf, so I'd say go with the lowest, widest option, like a tidepool. It will give you the most room for aquascaping and allow for better light penetration with lower wattage bulbs. Plus, if you get an acro over 16 inches tall you can always frag it. __________________ insert clever saying here. Current Tank Info: 200 gallon custom Marineland DD peninsular tank. LPS dominated mixed reef. Previous 90 gallon mixed reef TOTM April 2009.

08/31/2008, 10:13 PM	#8
crvz Team RC Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: houstonia Posts: 7,989	I like the 90 square rimless, even for SPS. I like the shallow look, and you can stick the corals pretty low in the tank. But the 100 square would be my second option. I really like the depth (front-back) of something more than 24. __________________ -Chris- You don't win friends with salad. "Look! They're trying to learn for free!" ... "Use your phony guns as clubs!" Current Tank Info: rectangluar? wet?

08/31/2008, 12:23 PM	#4
Mark75 Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: East Tenn. Posts: 740	Thanks guys for the help. My only concern with the 30x30x24 tank is it will "seem" like a much smaller tank compared with the 36" length tanks,...any truth to this? Also how about swimming room for fish, it would seem more confining to active fish? About using a single 400w metal halide, is there a good selection of 400w bulbs?

08/31/2008, 01:07 PM	#5
widmer Drug Enthusiast Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Rochester, MN Posts: 2,958	The 95 wide gets my vote. Sure 30 inches of front to back width is great to have, but relative dimensions are also a factor for me. So I would think the 95 wide is more visually appealing IMO. Also, 2 x 250 watts metal halide will give you better coverage, more options for coral placement. Don't feel too bad about not being able to supplement with T5, you're really only missing out on dawn-dusk effect since the T5 would probably be drowned out by the MH anyways once they're up and running.

08/31/2008, 11:05 PM	#9
Mark426 Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: South Carolina Posts: 2,479	90 square. I like the look and ease of working in a shallow tank.

08/31/2008, 11:07 PM	#10
Playa-1 Moved On Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Laguna Niguel, CA Posts: 7,497	95, Because with the choices that you listed it's a happy medium between length and height.

08/31/2008, 11:14 PM	#11
Jflip2002 Eagles & Tigers Fan Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 3,543	100g Square... I place a high value on front to back depth, rather than length. I like the dimensions of the 90, but 16" is just too shallow IMO. A 36x36x24 (~135g) would be awesome. My tank is 60x36, youd really love the 36" deep front to back, the aquascaping possibilities are nice. It really makes it look much larger than a lot of other tanks in its same gallon range. The one thing I hate about my tank is its too shallow, and its 20". I think youd end up growing tired of the 16" deep tank. __________________ I hate cheap powerheads. Current Tank Info: 40g Breeder

09/01/2008, 06:20 AM	#12
Mark75 Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: East Tenn. Posts: 740	I am starting to think the perfect tank size for me lies somewhere between the sizes I have listed,....maybe a 36x30x18????

09/01/2008, 07:14 AM	#13
Mykel Obvious Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Huntsvegas, Alabama Posts: 907	I'd also vote looking at the 135 square... 3'x3'x2'is the best of both worlds IMO (that's the tank I really want anyway ) From what I've read on other threads, a single MH pendant covers 30" nicely, if you keep an open area to the sides, you could use one, but I'd vote for a minimum of 2 over a 3'x2' or 3'x3' footprint... you'd really have to ask someone else though, because I'm going to switch from PCs to T5s... I just love the option of switching one or two $25 bulb to get a different look to the tank On another note, you won't be able to beat the price on a Glass Cages tank, however read everything on RC that you can find about them before you spend any money... people either love them, or have had no end of problems with them, nothing in between... and I've read some horror stories about how they treat customers with problems... just my $0.02 HTH __________________ Mykel Obvious - "I have a total irreverence for anything connected with society except that which makes the roads safer, the beer stronger, the food cheaper and the old men and old women warmer in the winter and happier in the summer." Brendan Behan Current Tank Info: 65 gallon mixed reef

09/02/2008, 08:27 AM	#14
Mark75 Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: East Tenn. Posts: 740	I have decided,.....I am going with a 30x30x20 cube and lighting it with a single 400w metal halide. How does this sound?

09/02/2008, 02:47 PM	#19
dcmander Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 140	why not 36x30x24? that would be my ideal dimensions. 112g and i couldn't imagine it being too much more for GC to make __________________ 55g - 150lbs Fiji Live Rock, 90lbs Live Sand 1 Purple Tang 1 Yellow Coris Wrasse 2 Percula Clows 1 Tiger Pistol Shrimp 1 Coral Banded Shrimp 1 Purple Urchin WTB: Rimless Tank setup