|
02/10/2010, 11:08 AM | #1 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Plantation FL
Posts: 322
|
SWC 160 cone club..
i just pre ordered the SWC 160 cone and i know there are some more guys in also so i made this post to talk about upgrade and setups,feedback..enjoy
|
02/10/2010, 11:10 AM | #2 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Wooster, Ohio
Posts: 1,724
|
i will join the club i pre ordered mine yesterday so we will wait and see how it works. if it does pull 600lph then it should rock.
|
02/10/2010, 11:24 AM | #3 |
Premium Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 525
|
I preordered mine as well. After 10+ years of strictly Euro-reef and ASM, it will be interresting to see the difference in performance.
|
02/10/2010, 11:26 AM | #4 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Plantation FL
Posts: 322
|
|
02/10/2010, 11:28 AM | #5 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Plantation FL
Posts: 322
|
|
02/11/2010, 09:29 PM | #6 |
"feed ur reef...feed it!"
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: in a van...down by the river
Posts: 3,254
|
can I join the club?
got mine in early January and I do likely it very much...
|
02/11/2010, 09:33 PM | #7 |
"feed ur reef...feed it!"
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: in a van...down by the river
Posts: 3,254
|
here's a couple more pix
I am really impressed with the overall build quality... nicely polished and just feels like quality IMO |
02/11/2010, 09:41 PM | #8 |
"feed ur reef...feed it!"
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: in a van...down by the river
Posts: 3,254
|
and here's a quick vid...
|
02/12/2010, 08:45 AM | #9 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Plantation FL
Posts: 322
|
cet thanks for the feed back and the video ..how many inches of water is the skimer in..
|
02/12/2010, 10:22 AM | #10 | |
"feed ur reef...feed it!"
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: in a van...down by the river
Posts: 3,254
|
Quote:
can't wait to hear everyone else's opinions! kinda stinks being one of the very few right now to have one but..... that's gonna change real fast!!! skimmer set up in 7.5" of water... |
|
02/12/2010, 10:26 AM | #11 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 685
|
cet, can you take the bottom apart if you need to clean the pump, or is it sealed in there?
|
02/12/2010, 10:41 AM | #12 | |
"feed ur reef...feed it!"
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: in a van...down by the river
Posts: 3,254
|
Quote:
In my pix above you will notice that the bottom plate is actually TWO plates held together with four screws at each corner. The top plate is attached to the skimmer body The bottom plate is where the pump's mounting plate is attached to, also using four screws and is knotched to allow for the pumps wiring to pass thru...(see close-up pics in post #6 above) The pump slides off the mounting plate and the mounting plate can be removed if desired for a thorough cleaning. FWIW, I had the entire skimmer disassembled in less than 5 minutes...it's just so easy and well thought out IMO. HTH some... C |
|
02/12/2010, 11:07 AM | #13 |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: nyc
Posts: 214
|
i'll be joining this club too
|
02/12/2010, 12:51 PM | #14 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 134
|
does it perform and/or build better than BM NAC7? since they using same pump and hving almost the same footprint! thanks
|
02/12/2010, 01:26 PM | #15 | |
"feed ur reef...feed it!"
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: in a van...down by the river
Posts: 3,254
|
Quote:
from my readings, people seem to be extremely happy with their BMs although I have read about the neck transition on the NAC7 having a "step" in it and is not a smooth transition like on the SWC, but since I don't own the BM, I can't comment on that... Build quality, again since I don't own the BM, I can only attest to the very high quality I have with my SWC. Performance, once again, based on reports from others the NAC7 pulls approx. 18W at 500lph and the SWC pulls 23W at 600lph...likely due to the differences in volute and BP designs In the end, at this price point, I'm not so sure there is a clear cut "winner" between these two skimmers. The truth, IMHO, is that so many people think that numbers mean so much, but if you placed these two skimmers side by side, would you "SEE" the difference in performance?...I really don't know I think it all comes down to preference...and budget On a personal note, I chose (BEFORE knowing anything about the build quality and performance) the SWC for two reasons over the BM: 1- I personally love the "color scheme" of the SWC over the BMs 2- The CS "before" the sale I received (and continue to receive) from the company & gentleman I purchased it from... HTH some C PS, I'd also like to comment on the water level adjustment...I use to own an Octopus INT-PS150 skimmer with a sliding stand pipe and while I never really had a problem with it, I really like the fine tuning ability of the gate valve on the SWC...not really sure how the BM does it, but I just thought I'd mention that ) Last edited by cet98; 02/12/2010 at 01:36 PM. |
|
02/12/2010, 01:26 PM | #16 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 270
|
Quote:
NAC: Not really a cone. Very little taper at all. Skim cup neck just sticks down into the body with no transition lip. Very poor design. Tiny bubble plate, which they now know is too small and are offering replacements, but Im sure you have to pay. Its a no brainer just by comparing the quality of them side by side IMO.
__________________
150 gal. 30 gal sump. 2X400 watt 10k XM's 4X160watt VHO's, SWC 250a skimmer, sps, lps, softies, clams, various fish including a 15 year old maroon clown |
|
02/12/2010, 06:41 PM | #17 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Plantation FL
Posts: 322
|
Quote:
|
|
02/12/2010, 06:43 PM | #18 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Plantation FL
Posts: 322
|
can't wait to get mine.. now i have a coralife super skimer 125g ...so i should be a lots off gunk coming out of my tank..
|
02/12/2010, 08:45 PM | #19 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Reno
Posts: 584
|
Mine is on pre-order
+1 on teh customer service from the other guy you bought from cet. He has been very very helpful and keeps everyone in the loop. That as well as his stamp of approval was the reason I chose the 160 cone. |
02/13/2010, 12:24 AM | #20 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Wooster, Ohio
Posts: 1,724
|
|
02/13/2010, 07:34 AM | #21 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Naples, Florida
Posts: 45
|
Joining the club, ordered mind on Wednesday from Reef Filtration.
|
02/13/2010, 07:44 AM | #22 |
"feed ur reef...feed it!"
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: in a van...down by the river
Posts: 3,254
|
|
02/13/2010, 07:47 AM | #23 |
"feed ur reef...feed it!"
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: in a van...down by the river
Posts: 3,254
|
|
02/13/2010, 07:51 AM | #24 |
T3am Zissou
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Galactic Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 1,123
|
and to think, I was THIS close to importing a pallet of BM nac7's...lol
(add schreeching breaks sound here) you can tell just by looking at the 160 cone how sweet of a skimmer it is... we know the atmann pump performs good(especially considering it's low cost), and when compared to the pumps(resun,otp)that other skimmer companies are using in this price range. it's been used by BM for over 2 years now with little problems, as well as eshopps changing out all their resun pumps for these same atmann pumps because the failure rate is sooo much lower than resun, they have had good success with these for a year now as well. the actual design of the skimmer is heads and tails above the BM nac7, starting with an increased cone shape, increased area in the BP, boared out holes on BP, larger exit plumbing for slower moving water(less possible bubbles in exit), gate valve for fine adjustment, better venturi, better muffler, better build quality... I'm very excited to order mine for the new tank I'm building. that being said, I dont think that the nac7 is a bad skimmer per say, I still think it's pretty damn good, and people are having good results with it which is the important thing. now, if it was just cheaper than the 160 cone, then it would have it's place in the world, but it cant go neck to neck with the 160. Last edited by skimmy; 02/13/2010 at 08:04 AM. |
02/13/2010, 11:12 AM | #25 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Pooler, GA
Posts: 887
|
How would these do with a 90g sps with a heavy bioload?
|
|
|