PDA

View Full Version : 150 Gal or 180 Gal


fishguy27
10/04/2006, 10:08 PM
I'm in the early protion of my design stage and I am trying to decide between a 150 or 180 gallon GLASS tank. Any input is helpful!!!

Thanx all

dc
10/04/2006, 10:14 PM
[welcome]


Bigger is better? :D

drummereef
10/04/2006, 10:14 PM
180 for sure! Bigger is always better, imo, you lucky dog you. :D I like the proportions of the 180 myself. My next upgrade will a 180 for sure.

jun_celis
10/04/2006, 10:16 PM
I don't have that big of a tank but if I were to start over again, I would go with the biggest I could fit in my house and my budget. 180 it is!!!

mg426
10/04/2006, 11:07 PM
180 gets my vote, that was an easy one LOL

Brewen
10/04/2006, 11:14 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8278921#post8278921 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jun_celis
I don't have that big of a tank but if I were to start over again, I would go with the biggest I could fit in my house and my budget. 180 it is!!!
I second this!

sidd129
10/05/2006, 12:19 AM
I say the biggest tank that you can still reach the bottom in.

theatrus
10/05/2006, 02:08 AM
Whats wrong with a 300g? Its only an extra foot or so longer ;)


180 would be my pick too.

Dave Cox
10/05/2006, 04:14 AM
No brainer. Go big or go home !

atty
10/05/2006, 04:26 AM
i have to question this, the bigger the tank the more expensive the products are to run it. More salt, more expensive protein skimmer, more live rock and the worst of all more power

2farNorth
10/05/2006, 06:00 AM
180 over a 150, I have a 150 (FW) and It is hard to work on being so tall.. (I am assuming your talking 6' tanks here) I have a REALLY hard time reaching bottom... that and the surface area of the 180 is alot easier to aquascape... as for the expense, it is going to be a little more,, but once you get everything.. there isn't much of a difference... just the initial cost... running it should be close to the same (only 30 gallons more)

fufi5
10/05/2006, 09:03 AM
180 for sure

serpentman
10/05/2006, 09:31 AM
Definitely the 180. The difference in cost to run it is negligable. Furthermore, the dimensions are more conducive to a reef (IMO). With that said, I only partially subscribe to the bigger is better theory.

Significant jumps in water volume often mean more $ in Water changes, power consumption aka heating/cooling, and equipment upgrades.

Shagsbeard
10/05/2006, 09:57 AM
The size tank you get really depends on two things:

1) Budget.
2) Space you're putting it in.

Get the largest tank that satisfies the two and you'll be happier in the long run with it.

thor32766
10/05/2006, 11:01 AM
go as big as you can!

besl
10/05/2006, 11:19 AM
I pondered between a 125, 150 and 180 before I made my purchase and I ended up with a 125 which I am very happy with. My rationale was a 125 gallon is roughly : 72 x 18 x 23. A 150 gallon is also 72 x 18 but adds another 5 inches in height - this looked cool, but now I definitely need 250 - 400 w MH whereas on the 125 gal, 150w MH are an option. Of course bigger is better and I did look at the 180 gallon, which is roughly: 72 x 24 x 25. I did like the added 6" depth, however, not only am I back to at least the 250w MH, but also a bigger ($$) skimmer. So, based on my budget I am very pleased with the 125. If your budget allows, definitely go with the 180 over a 150 as it will cost you aroundthe same $ and you will have the added 6" depth which adds alot - IMO.

fishguy27
10/05/2006, 12:07 PM
Thanks very much for all of your info. I will keep all of this in mind as I purchase my tank. My LFS is moving and needing some part time help to do so, so i'm thinking a little trade out sounds good to me, "if you know what i mean".

sidd129
10/05/2006, 01:07 PM
What skimmers are you looking at so far?