Discussion - Bigger tanks are easier for the beginner, True or False?

[Taaron]

I would say that larger tanks are easier to learn with. My first saltwater tank was 160 gallons. Several times i was able to save corals or fish in my tank. The parameters stayed very stable. I had no previous experience. I do agree however that the maintenance is much more. Meaning topping up the tank, additives, water changes, and cleaning. I started a great reef tank for about $2000 and we all know that isnt very much when it comes to this hobby.

[reefwars]

its not that bigger is easier ...bigger is more forgiving.for things alot of new reeferes find frustrating.



lets say you get a head of aiptasia on a frag, in a large tank it would take more time to become a problem where it spread over every rock , whats a problem in a large tank is a plague in a nano...... this i know


water issues are going to be roughly the same ,if your cutting cost out of the equation a water change is a water change and media is media, fact is a nano is cheaper to run financially though.


i know in a large tank fish problems are way more forgiving then in nanos, lets face it very few stick to actual "nano fish"


people tend to feed small tanks the same as large tanks which leads to problems and if your like me people fill their tanks with corals as if they are larger tanks.



i think both large tanks and small tanks have problems unique to them so neither is my vote.

[SeaHorse_Fanatic]

Easier? It really depends on the person and what they're trying to do.

What I find is that you spend a lot of money and effort doing the upgrade, which if you can get the small tank the way you like it, almost seems inevitable. Buying everything twice or three times as you upgrade is expensive (I know a lot of reefers who upgraded that many times in the first year or so, including myself).

A nano reef can also be just as expensive if you're going to go the more automated route, such as getting ATO, dosing/calcium reactors/controllers. Personally, if I'm going through that much trouble & expense, I'd rather do it on a bigger tank instead of a small "temporary" one that will get upgraded soon.

It also depends on whether its a fish only or reef. Small tanks have very limited bioload and it is very easy to exceed that carrying capacity and cause yourself headaches.

For a lot of people with limited space, an all-in-one (usually 14g to 34g) is a good solution.

For others who have more room, more $$ and time (and who are likely to get bit by the upgrade bug sooner rather than later), a larger tank is a better starting point. In a 4', my ideal tank has always been the 120g (4' x 2' x 2'). Max volume in min. space without getting your arm pits wet. I have known a few reefers who went the 55-75g to 90g to 120g upgrading route cause they only had 4' floor space available. So for me, if I can have only one tank and its a four-footer, I will go 120g. If its a 3' space, I would go 65g (3' x 18" x 2' tall). If my space is very limited, I'd get an all-in-one or cube.

As with everything else in this addiction, there are no definitive answers. Some people get into sw because they really want to keep tangs or large angels - so for them a 6' tank is needed and anything smaller is too small. I've known people who had terrible results with nanos but when they tried again with a bigger system, they had better luck. I've also known people who did great with a small system but couldn't seem to make the transition to a bigger tank when they upgraded.

The current (and past) nano reef contest is showing how there are many ways to do a nano (some will be KISS and others will be "break the bank" blinged out).

Getting an experienced reefer to mentor and help check out used systems can help get the best bang for the buck. IME, most reefers have a bit of OCD.
I am extremely OCD

This hobby can become extremely expensive very easily, which is why I never recommend people get into it. The first question I ask is "do you like having money in the bank?"

But if they are determined to make the jump into sw, then I am one of the believers in "the solution to pollution is dilution".

I also believe that it is more an art than a science.

[SeaHorse_Fanatic]

Great topic of discussion btw.

The best solution is really to do a lot of research ahead of time to figure out exactly what you want to keep, how much $$, time & space you have available, and go from there. As Psyire stated, "The interest and diligence of the hobbyist is what will make things hard or easy."

[sphelps]

smaller tanks are better for beginners IMO, this hobby is more expensive and more time consuming than most people realize. More often than not when people start with big tanks they end up being overwhelmed because it exceeds their budget or time allowance to do properly. Plus beginners usually go through a few phases of "ugly" all of which become harder to deal with the bigger the tank gets. You don't want too small either but 20 to 40 gallons is good size for people starting out IMO.

[jorjef]

Originally Posted by sphelps

smaller tanks are better for beginners IMO, this hobby is more expensive and more time consuming than most people realize. More often than not when people start with big tanks they end up being overwhelmed because it exceeds their budget or time allowance to do properly. Plus beginners usually go through a few phases of "ugly" all of which become harder to deal with the bigger the tank gets. You don't want too small either but 20 to 40 gallons is good size for people starting out IMO.

This should be gospel that all beginners should heed to. Bigger is not better when starting this hobby unless you have unlimited time, money and patience.