MR-2 Beckett Skimmer

Greg manton · 01/23/2007, 07:54 AM

how does the MR-2 Beckett Skimmer stack up would this be a good skimmer i know it uses alot of power with a mag 7 but i want to be able to skim wet css220 just doesnt cut it

BrokeColoReefer · 01/23/2007, 08:05 AM

A mag 7 is not the pump you want with the MR-2. You want a blueline 55.
MRC skimmers are awesome, there a no fuss, no tinkering, and look great. If you want wet you will get wet.

jmaneyapanda · 01/23/2007, 09:17 AM

Why do you want wet skimming? very likely, the only difference between the two will be lost saltwater. Not necessarily more waste removed.

BrokeColoReefer · 01/23/2007, 09:35 AM

I like it more on the dry side myself, one nice thing about wet skim though, it that the pesky neck stays alot cleaner, which will pull more gunk then a dirty neck. Im lazy sometimes, and the skimmer stays dirty, if it were skimming wetter, it would still be working.

JC VT · 01/23/2007, 10:05 AM

Randy Holmes-Farley:

"For this reason, the most effective skimming, in terms of total organic removal, comes from removing somewhat wet foam, rather than waiting for this same wet foam to drain prior to removal. The primary difference between wet foam, and drained dry foam, is that additional water and some organics have drained away. "

BrokeColoReefer · 01/23/2007, 10:07 AM

Randy is a expert for sure, but, once again its just a opinion. This is another one of those topics that gets debated to death. Some like it wet, some like it dry. I like it somewhere in the middle.

JC VT · 01/23/2007, 10:11 AM

It's an opinion based on science

I don't see any strong arguments for the other side

BrokeColoReefer · 01/23/2007, 10:18 AM

Did randy do a lab analysis on skimmate? if so i would like to see the thread, or see the data. I dont want to hijack this thread, and i AGREE that modertatly wet to wet skim is best, but, i feel that its best because of the consistancy of the skimmer. dry foam makes a huge gooey mess in my skimmer neck, and if i dont clean it, then the skimmer is not doing what its supposed to do.

JC VT · 01/23/2007, 10:27 AM

AFAIK He has not done any analysis on skimmate. Total organics would be tough to measure anyways since wet skimmate removes more solids while dry removes predominately DOC.

In all honesty, his opinion/theory makes sense and it has not been disproven. There isn't even a decent argument to back dry skimming as more effective for total organic removal.

jmaneyapanda · 01/23/2007, 10:39 AM

drained away? to where? Where can i find this information, i would loove to read it fully.

01/23/2007, 07:54 AM	#1
Greg manton Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: peterborough,ontario Posts: 207	MR-2 Beckett Skimmer how does the MR-2 Beckett Skimmer stack up would this be a good skimmer i know it uses alot of power with a mag 7 but i want to be able to skim wet css220 just doesnt cut it __________________ 90 gal aga megaflow, 2x 250 watt mh 14000k ,euroreef rs 135, three hydor corrilia 3"s, 35 gallon sump 70 pounds figi in display 60 pounds diy liverock in refugium Current Tank Info: 65 gallon started jan 15 2005

01/23/2007, 08:05 AM	#2
BrokeColoReefer Hermit Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Mountains of Boulder County. Posts: 2,289	A mag 7 is not the pump you want with the MR-2. You want a blueline 55. MRC skimmers are awesome, there a no fuss, no tinkering, and look great. If you want wet you will get wet. __________________ Stay fishy my friends. Current Tank Info: 300 gallon built in plumbed to the basement. 30 gallon surge for flow, GEO protein skimmer, litermeter 3's for continuous water change (1 gallon per day), calc reactors, kalk reactors, 600w MHx2, 6" DSB, 1000 lbs of live rock (300 display, 700 sump)

01/23/2007, 09:35 AM	#4
BrokeColoReefer Hermit Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Mountains of Boulder County. Posts: 2,289	I like it more on the dry side myself, one nice thing about wet skim though, it that the pesky neck stays alot cleaner, which will pull more gunk then a dirty neck. Im lazy sometimes, and the skimmer stays dirty, if it were skimming wetter, it would still be working. __________________ Stay fishy my friends. Current Tank Info: 300 gallon built in plumbed to the basement. 30 gallon surge for flow, GEO protein skimmer, litermeter 3's for continuous water change (1 gallon per day), calc reactors, kalk reactors, 600w MHx2, 6" DSB, 1000 lbs of live rock (300 display, 700 sump)

01/23/2007, 10:05 AM	#5
JC VT Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Chicago, Il Posts: 579	Randy Holmes-Farley: "For this reason, the most effective skimming, in terms of total organic removal, comes from removing somewhat wet foam, rather than waiting for this same wet foam to drain prior to removal. The primary difference between wet foam, and drained dry foam, is that additional water and some organics have drained away. " __________________ What ain't no country I ever heard of. They speak English in what?

01/23/2007, 10:07 AM	#6
BrokeColoReefer Hermit Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Mountains of Boulder County. Posts: 2,289	Randy is a expert for sure, but, once again its just a opinion. This is another one of those topics that gets debated to death. Some like it wet, some like it dry. I like it somewhere in the middle. __________________ Stay fishy my friends. Current Tank Info: 300 gallon built in plumbed to the basement. 30 gallon surge for flow, GEO protein skimmer, litermeter 3's for continuous water change (1 gallon per day), calc reactors, kalk reactors, 600w MHx2, 6" DSB, 1000 lbs of live rock (300 display, 700 sump)

01/23/2007, 09:17 AM	#3
jmaneyapanda Commencing hatred Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 3,784	Why do you want wet skimming? very likely, the only difference between the two will be lost saltwater. Not necessarily more waste removed.

01/23/2007, 10:11 AM	#7
JC VT Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Chicago, Il Posts: 579	It's an opinion based on science I don't see any strong arguments for the other side __________________ What ain't no country I ever heard of. They speak English in what?

01/23/2007, 10:18 AM	#8
BrokeColoReefer Hermit Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Mountains of Boulder County. Posts: 2,289	Did randy do a lab analysis on skimmate? if so i would like to see the thread, or see the data. I dont want to hijack this thread, and i AGREE that modertatly wet to wet skim is best, but, i feel that its best because of the consistancy of the skimmer. dry foam makes a huge gooey mess in my skimmer neck, and if i dont clean it, then the skimmer is not doing what its supposed to do. __________________ Stay fishy my friends. Current Tank Info: 300 gallon built in plumbed to the basement. 30 gallon surge for flow, GEO protein skimmer, litermeter 3's for continuous water change (1 gallon per day), calc reactors, kalk reactors, 600w MHx2, 6" DSB, 1000 lbs of live rock (300 display, 700 sump)

01/23/2007, 10:27 AM	#9
JC VT Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Chicago, Il Posts: 579	AFAIK He has not done any analysis on skimmate. Total organics would be tough to measure anyways since wet skimmate removes more solids while dry removes predominately DOC. In all honesty, his opinion/theory makes sense and it has not been disproven. There isn't even a decent argument to back dry skimming as more effective for total organic removal. __________________ What ain't no country I ever heard of. They speak English in what?

01/23/2007, 10:39 AM	#10
jmaneyapanda Commencing hatred Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 3,784	drained away? to where? Where can i find this information, i would loove to read it fully.