Tank size- large vs. small

[syrinx]

Hey there fans of sport- this is my second discussion type thread. I will preface with the fact that I am all about any size reef, and know there are benifits to all sizes. This is not intended to be a debate of one being the better than the other- rather a discussion of the merits and drawbacks of each- and why you choose to go the direction you have. I will get to the meat of this dicussion tonight, as I have about 440 gallons of sps that I am late getting to now, but I wanted to give the 9 to 5 workers a chance to start thinking.

[panaboy95]

SMALL TANKS = LOTS OF MONEY
BIG TANKS = LOTS MORE MONEY

[Horace]

My humble opinion

Small tanks
----------------

Advantages:
1) Lower cost - less salt, alk/ca additions, less live stock, less/cheaper equipment to maintain, less electricty to operate.

2) Room - most of us have room for a smaller tank in the house. I personally do not have the room for a large tank currently.

3) Movability - a small tank is much easier to move to a new location.

4) Maint Time - It often takes less time to maintain a smaller tank. Of course many of the same types of maint need to be done to a bigger tank so this is not a direct relationship here. There comes a point where the maint of a bigger tank really isnt much more work than a smaller one...this also highly depends on how many automated systems are in place.


Disadvantages:
1) Greater limit of live stock - example is fish. Quite often you cant put a give species of fish in a tank because its too small. Most Tangs prefer a 6ft+ tank. Often fish are also more aggressive when in a small tank. You can often keep speices that dont normally like eachother in a larger tank.

2) Aquascaping - it is much more difficult to get a nice open aquascape with a small area to work with. Often we are forced to pile rocks against the back glass which often causes detritus to build up.

3) Coral Colony Size - we must constantly trim our corals to keep them from growing into the glass. We are also limited in the size of the colony because we often want many species of corals. With a small tank the only way to keep many corals is to keep each colony reasonably small.

4) Stability - It is much harder to keep a small amount of water stable parameter wise than it is a larger body of water.


Im not going to list the advantages/disadvantages of a big tank because ive basically already said most of them above :).

[syrinx]

Good points all H.

[webbstock]

One aspect that I've found about some (not all!!!) large tanks is that they many times seem "underscaped". Basically the tank looks more like a few piles of rock and corals then a seamless reef environment.

That is why I prefer smaller tanks as for less money, a person can fully stock their tank and set up a more complete looking tank. For me aesthetics are more important in a tank than being able to say "I have a 180".

Of course, if someone wants to fund me, I'll be the first to start a 180g setup :)

[Vitaly]

Out of curiousity, what defines a "small" or "big" tank. Not being a smart-a@@ or anything...just wondering whether there is a line in the spectrum ranging from the itty 1 gallon picotanks to the mega 500+ gallon tanks (for the purpose of this discussion)?

I have owned only one tank, a 65 gallon, for 8'ish years...so I have little experience to contribute. However, I am eager to hear thoughts from those of you who have owned tanks of varying sizes. I do hope to one day have a large tank. Of course this would require me to graduate and get a job first.

<B>Webbstock</B>...leave your "tank R01" proposal on my desk.

[syrinx]

I consider small to be under 30 gallons- which was always the minimum recommended size for a reef. Large is more out there- to me a large tank is 150+- but I have been through all the "tank arms race" phases of my life- so I would say for the sake of discussion large would be over 100. That being said it is nothing to disuade the medium size tank owners or the monster tank owners(200+) from voicing their opinions. In fact theirs are among the most important to the discussion because they can tell of plans for and against either.

[syrinx]

My salt water tanks began with a 40 gallon long. A friend had a 135, so of course I had to have one and drove 100 miles to pick it up.(there was no such thing as a 125 commonly then- i think they switched to them because they could use thinner glass at that depth). Then we went together and bought a 200 and a 170. finally I added a 90 so the living room was pretty much walls of glass and a couch and end table. The end table was open space of course, so I set out to make the most expensive 10 gallon I could. Used a clarity plus acrylic 10 and by the time I was done had a 1500$ retail 10 gallon reef- in 1980s dollars. Funny thing was- after the shock and awe of all the salt fish and water was over people would crowd for hours around the small tank. Even after the 90 and 100 went full reef, the ten gallon seemed to be the big draw. My feeling is that the viewer is able to "get inside" the smaller tank- see more of the micro fauna and whatnot. Wheras a big tank is not all viewable in detail at one glance- it makes people tend to look at many things for a shorter amount of time. A small tank allows for one to focus on the entire tank, and then focus down to a section, and down and down. I also like a tank that is "grown together" and a small tank allows that at a level that both patience and pocketbook can compromise.

[tschopp]

Hey Scott,
I have some insight into the good and the bad of a big tank. You were around when I was building my tank so you probably remember some of my thought process. Dana and I had wanted a big tank and we wanted a minimum of a 180 or 240. Since the tank was DIY the size was flexible. The constraints ended up being 8' long (length of plywood), 39" wide (width of closet), 34" high (width of door to get in house). Thats how I ended up with 500 gal.

I think Horace hit the main points, with a few exceptions.

I don't agree that you can keep things that don't get along. 500 gal is certainly not big enough for that.

It is more dificult to see all the micro life. If the coral is 1 foot from the glass it is harder to see the details. Also the glass obscures the view a bit. My glass is 3/4", its not bad, but not the same as looking through a thin sheet of glass or acrylic.

The stability is real good. If a clam spawns or a fish dies while I am on vacation it is no big deal.

Gas exchange can be tough on a big tank. Mostly scrubing the CO2.

The maintanence does not have to be more, but it is different and you have fewer options. If you have some algae, or any other pest, you dont like, you really don't have the option to grab it and physically remove it. You must change the water conditions or get something to eat it.

Physically getting to parts of the tank is tough. To touch the bottom I have to take my shirt off and the tip of my nose goes into the water. Forget about getting to the bottom at the back of the tank.

You can keep things that are not an option in a small tank. David and I both have a gigas clam. I think that would be a bad idea in a 120.

You need a good plan to deal with the heat and humidity. David and I both have the humidity separated from the rest of our house. Evaporating 30 gal / week into the house would be bad.

You need to consider the wieght of a big tank. The floor must be reinforced.

Steve

[syrinx]

Hey Steve- of course I remember the hours of discussion on your tank- I vicariously enjoyed the whole build! There is no question that even at the monster tank size, it is a small ecosystem to fish territory wise. The bigger the volume of water the more stable it is of course- but its also resistant to getting re stabalised if there is a problem- as you address with your Co2 issue. I was lucky weight wise though- when I bought my new house I had a whole pillar and I beam support system put in to handle any weight I put in.( which is good).