has anyone bought from MARCO ROCKS - Page 3

davidryder · #51 04/13/2007, 12:28 PM

That's insane... rock is WAY denser than water, and rock doesn't retain water. The pores fill with water when submerged but when you take it out the water also comes out.

DarthBaiter · #52 04/13/2007, 12:50 PM

Rock absorbs water. My 25# of Marcos rock comes in a box double the size of any 50# of LR I bought on line. Or from a fellow reefer.
The pores on the rocks take more than a few days to dry out. Also, I doubt any of the LR sellers are draining them for days before shipping them out.

Kinda defeats the purpose of "Live Rock'. Also, I don't think I remember a time when I didn't have a pool of water at the bottom of a Live rock box. And the snapping, pooping nosies at night, with small fish dissapearing on you...

I got 50# of Marcos ready for my 70g. I'll post shots tonight.

davidryder · #53 04/13/2007, 01:01 PM

So your 25# of Marcos was twice the size of the 50# box of LR. Let's see... since the ratio as previously mentioned was 1.8, that means you SHOULD have gotten an equivalent of 45# of live rock. But since it was twice as large as the 50# boxes you have gotten in the past, it means that you received an equivalent of a 90# LR order. Nice score!!

You are still leaving out the fact that rock is WAY denser than water, 4-5x denser. Rock doesn't float, doesn't even come close. So for it to double its weight, or even gain 50% of its weight, it's going to have to become much larger than it already is. This is a silly argument. Do you really think an 8# piece of rock can absorb one gallon of water? Because that's what we are arguing here... one gallon of water weights 7.5#. An 8# piece of rock already isn't that large. Now imagine it absorbing a gallon of water. Even a half gallon of water.

And I don't know where you have gotten your live rock in the past, but it sounds like you got a bad deal if your 25# of dry rock was equivalent to your 50# box of live rock.

The VOLUME ratio of live rock to dry rock might be closer to 1:1.2

I just think that it is quite far fetched to say that dry rock can absorb it's weight in water, or even 50% it's water. MAYBE 20% it's weight... but even that is generous.

nhlives · #54 04/13/2007, 01:10 PM

I have Marco Rocks and I can tell you it feels like it doubled in weight. When you get it, it is feather weighted. Weights a ton now after 12 weeks in the tank.

I should have done a 'fore and after weigh in.

I can't argue with the volume statement though.

davidryder · #55 04/13/2007, 01:21 PM

The rock does retain some water, but you when start considering some simple physics, it's impossible for it to retain THAT much.

DarthBaiter · #56 04/13/2007, 01:46 PM

My bad...ment 25# was half the size of the 25#.

I was thinking 50# cuz I got two 25# boxes at home.
davidryder, I ain't saying it wieghs double or what ever(that be dumb...lol), I'm just saying that Marcos rocks are the most "holy" and porus rocks I've ever gotten or seen. I'll never buy LR again. Just not worth the problems. However, if I was starting a new tank and had no LR I would buy some to seed the Marcorocks.

RichConley · #57 04/13/2007, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by davidryder

You are still leaving out the fact that rock is WAY denser than water, 4-5x denser.

I'd like to know where you got that number? Because I can assure you its completely false.

Water is about 8lbs per gallon.

Sand (and calcium based rock) weights 70lbs/cubic foot. A cubic foot is 7.5 gallons. That means aragonite base rock weighs about 9.3lbs per gallon, meaning that rock is 1.16 times denser than water, not 4 to 5 times.

DiazE · #58 04/13/2007, 02:10 PM

I ordered 25lbs tonga shelf and only used two pieces that nearly fill the bottom of the 65gal. The rocks are nice in shape, porousity and it's light. Will make awesome coralline rock. I got more pounds than expected.

The 12.5 lb rubble is great for sump or refugium.

I hope they don't remove or move this info with pics again for the benefit of others.

Josh125 · #59 04/13/2007, 02:17 PM

Does anyone happen to know if you can request smaller pieces for a small tank out of the 25lb package?

Sparkss · #60 04/13/2007, 02:53 PM

I read the comparison between marcorocks and reeferocks... we have bought from both... HUGE difference.. I would never buy reeferocks again.

We went all base rock because, as others have echoed, we had too many issues with LR hitchikers causing more harm than good. After 2 years with that tank we were still flushing out hitchikers and loosing livestock to the pests. We did not want to go through that again on our new tank.

When we ordered Marc sent pictures of several rocks to choose from.. and we selected the ones that we wanted. None of our rocks were less than 12", most being 14" - 18". (although we did get 50 - 75 lbs of general, smaller, rock, but from our cherry picked rock, none of them were small, by any means.

Here are some picts in our tank build thread from earlier this year :

http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...09#post9023809

A couple of pages back you can see the "selection" picts that Marc sent us and the shippig box that he used, etc.

scubaD · #61 04/13/2007, 05:40 PM

We ordered a 50# and 25# box of their signature rock, couldn't even fit the entire 50# box in the new 70G. It is incredibly porous. We washed it out before putting it in our tank and starting a cycle. Had to help the cycle start, was not enough on the rock to start the cycle.

davidryder · #62 04/13/2007, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RichConley
I'd like to know where you got that number? Because I can assure you its completely false.

Water is about 8lbs per gallon.

Sand (and calcium based rock) weights 70lbs/cubic foot. A cubic foot is 7.5 gallons. That means aragonite base rock weighs about 9.3lbs per gallon, meaning that rock is 1.16 times denser than water, not 4 to 5 times.

What? I made those numbers up... it was a guess. It wasn't that important. The point I was making is that it is physically impossible (for aragonite rock) to gain 1.7-2.0 x its weight just by dipping it in water.

And your conversion went wrong when you compared the density of sand to the density of aragonite rock. No I'm sorry, you compared the weight per volume of sand to aragonite rock.

I didn't anticipate someone reading my post and looking up conversions and dissecting my argument. And even if you were right, my point is still valid. In case you missed it,

So for it to double its weight, or even gain 50% of its weight, it's going to have to become much larger than it already is. -- in the case of your inaccurate measurement, approximately 1.2 times larger (in terms of volume).

The closest material that I can find to compare to aragonite is sandstone which has a density of 2323 kg / cubic meter. The density of sea water is 1023 kg / cubic meter. It looks like my guestimate was off, and your attempted calculation was off... but what's the point?

Anyway, I can see why this rock costs more... it is extremely porous. I would agree that you probably get more rock by the pound - not necessarily by volume, but in terms of actual dimensions of the rock... I could definitely see paying a little extra if I wanted some dry rock.

stevedola · #63 04/13/2007, 09:07 PM

this rock costs more?

i paid 135 shipped for 50lbs. thats less than 3$ per lb-delivered to my door. seems better than 6/lb at the lfs for LR.

davidryder · #64 04/14/2007, 12:44 AM

You can get LR online for $3/lb shipped... and I think you can get dry aragonite rock from my LFS for $2.50/lb. But I think the stuff at Marco looks like some of the best dry rock I've ever seen. Just depends on what you want.

DarthBaiter · #65 04/14/2007, 11:33 AM

My lfs has questionable LR for 8.99lb. Good ones with some colors run 12.99lb to 14.99lb.

and they all have bubble algae on em.

Those are good shots of the rocks DiazE posted, but they were taken with a flash and it really does not do the rocks justice.

Josh125 · #66 04/19/2007, 07:51 PM

Just an update. I placed my order Monday afternoon and guess what....I already have the rock. It showed up this evening, now that is impressive.

The rock itself is even more impressive. Great shapes, light, and extremely porous. I highly recommend this rock, a great value. I'm going to give it a good wash then set it up.

GuOD · #67 04/19/2007, 07:59 PM

I bought my rocks from Marcorocks. They were awesome and tremendous amount for the weight (75#). My friend based his order of Live rock on my base rock #s and he ended up with a fairly empty aquarium

Here's pics of the development:

All the pieces were fairly large and very cool shapes. Note: there are a few pieces of Live rock in there.

davidryder · #68 04/19/2007, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Josh125
Just an update. I placed my order Monday afternoon and guess what....I already have the rock. It showed up this evening, now that is impressive.

The rock itself is even more impressive. Great shapes, light, and extremely porous. I highly recommend this rock, a great value. I'm going to give it a good wash then set it up.

I like your dog...

clekchau · #69 04/19/2007, 09:20 PM

i got alot of marco's rocks because i thought i needed alot but when it came it was dry weight obviously but the rock was light, a huge piece was only 25 lbs or so and i got 250 lbs, i didn't even use it all.

here is a pic

DarthBaiter · #70 04/19/2007, 09:24 PM

Wow...what size tank is that?

Grunt · #71 04/19/2007, 09:26 PM

Nice tang clekchau

Got more pics?
Cheers

clekchau · #72 04/19/2007, 09:36 PM

it's a 600 that is 4 foot wide to put the rock's size in perspective. i got 8 huge pieces and 6 or so medium (if you could call them that) pieces, and like sparkks, he took pictures for me so i could confirm exactly what i wanted. he even included acrylic rods for stacking but they were so big, i didn't need them.

grunt, as a matter of fact

Josh125 · #73 04/20/2007, 11:36 AM

[QUOTE he even included acrylic rods for stacking but they were so big, i didn't need them.[/QUOTE]

I also bought some rods in anticipation that I would need them to stack it. I am not sure if it is by design, by the rocks just fit together like a puzzle, almost as if Marc had tried a stack pattern before sending them. Almost every rock has a semi flat side which makes is very simple to aquascape.

MikeD · #74 04/22/2007, 11:29 AM

Does marcorocks only have figi and shelf? I thought someone said they had marshall island too.

stevedola · #75 04/24/2007, 09:33 PM

heres a few shot I took of the rock and progression of making some rock pillar/structures. The larger flat rock structure will have more rock from the existing tank going on top. This rock was very easy to work with and after we were done were very happy with the results- thanks again marc.