Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board  

Go Back   Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board > General > Product Review and Equipment Forum > Filtration and Skimmer Specific

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-09-2011, 08:31 AM
RuGlu6 RuGlu6 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vancouver PoMo
Posts: 829
RuGlu6 is on a distinguished road
Default What would you get? Skimz SM 121, SWC160, Nac6A, Nac7 or NAC9?

If you had a 66 gal tank (SPS dominated with three mid size (3") fish) what would you get, if you had to choose between these skimmers and why? Also i am trying to find out the size of the neck of the cone Nac7 skimmer, does anyone know ?

It is stated that Nac7 Cone skimmer is 9" at the bottom but what are they at the neck in inches? Almost looks like the chamber of the Nac7 is similar diameter at the top as Nac 6A and if so the these two should have very similar performance in terms of contact time and air to water mix ratio especially due to the fact that these two have the same water pump atman ph2500.

And yet Nac7 is rated for more gallons.

I'd like to overskim so this is decided, but still wonder what others think.
thank you.

Nac6A
.
NAC7
.
SWC160

Or
SKIMZ SM 121

Last edited by RuGlu6; 04-23-2011 at 08:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-09-2011, 04:01 PM
ALang ALang is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta
Posts: 614
ALang is on a distinguished road
Default

I checked mine: 4" across the neck. (NAC 7).
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-09-2011, 06:47 PM
viperfish's Avatar
viperfish viperfish is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Dawson Creek
Posts: 684
viperfish is on a distinguished road
Default

Any reason why you're decision is limited to Bubble Magus?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-11-2011, 06:31 AM
RuGlu6 RuGlu6 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vancouver PoMo
Posts: 829
RuGlu6 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by medhatreefguy View Post
Any reason why you're decision is limited to Bubble Magus?
500 l/h air intake, small footprint, price, easy to clean, silent pump
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-11-2011, 10:02 AM
BlueWorldAquatic's Avatar
BlueWorldAquatic BlueWorldAquatic is offline
Vendor
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,160
BlueWorldAquatic is on a distinguished road
Default

If money is an issue, get A nac6. For the $50 more I would get a nac7, cone skimmers are much more efficient.

If footprint is important, the nac6 will fit in more places than the nac7
__________________

Store Location


Twitter


Facebook
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-11-2011, 04:28 PM
ALang ALang is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta
Posts: 614
ALang is on a distinguished road
Default

I love my NAC7 from BWA.
Pulled out sooo much stuff that it astonishes me every couple of days!
Another plus: it is heck of a lot more easy on the wallet than most full-sized skimmer.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-12-2011, 06:35 AM
RuGlu6 RuGlu6 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vancouver PoMo
Posts: 829
RuGlu6 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueWorldAquatic View Post
If money is an issue, get A nac6. For the $50 more I would get a nac7, cone skimmers are much more efficient.

If footprint is important, the nac6 will fit in more places than the nac7
how much are these two (NAC7 & NAC 6A) at your store?
What would a shipping to Vancouver cost?
do they come with pin wheel or mesh impeller ?
what is the neck diameter of the NAC6?
220volts or 110V?
thx.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-22-2011, 01:49 PM
nlreefguy nlreefguy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 295
nlreefguy is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueWorldAquatic View Post
If money is an issue, get A nac6. For the $50 more I would get a nac7, cone skimmers are much more efficient.

If footprint is important, the nac6 will fit in more places than the nac7
I wasn't aware that this had been proven so definitively re: cone skimmers. My impression was that recent research is showing no significant difference between cone and cylindircal skimmers.

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/1/aafeature
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-02-2011, 03:47 AM
RuGlu6 RuGlu6 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vancouver PoMo
Posts: 829
RuGlu6 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALang View Post
I checked mine: 4" across the neck. (NAC 7).
Can you please check what is the height of the rising tube from bubble diffuser plate to the bottom of the collection cup neck?
I am considering this skimmer and would like to know what is the size of the mixing chamber.
Also what is the diameter just above bubble diffuser?

There is a new skimmer on the block 2011 Marine color CPS-150 that is very similar to NAC7 but they changed a water effluent tube, made it few inches higher which will make it more consistent in regards to a water level and more stable. looks very similar to a HERO line skimmers.

Thank you so much.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-02-2011, 04:44 AM
Myka's Avatar
Myka Myka is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Saskatoon, SK.
Posts: 11,268
Myka will become famous soon enough
Default

I recently got a SWC 120 Cone for my nano because of the impressively tiny footprint, and I'm quite impressed with it. I pulled my EuroReef RS-180 off my 90 reef (w about 15 in the sump), and put the SWC in there just to check it out. The SWC pulls about 2/3 the skimmate (at similar coloration) that the RS-180 pulls, and the SWC is deadly silent. Believe it or not I can hear the Tunze 6055 in my tank switching from high flow to low flow over everything else in the tank now, and i'm sure you guys know how quiet that is.

SWC rates this 120 Cone for 90 gallons at a light bioload, 70 for medium, and 55 for heavy. I would say that isn't too bad for manufacturer recommendations. My tank is medium-light and the skimmer isn't quite enough to keep up, although I'm rather picky.

I was wanting to replace my EuroReef with a Bubble King, but now I think I'm going to use a SWC 160 or 180 Cone instead because of performance and silence. Unless of course I find a screaming deal on a Bubble King that I just can't pass up.
__________________
~ Mindy

SPS fanatic.


Last edited by Myka; 05-02-2011 at 04:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.