Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board  

Go Back   Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board > General > Nano Tank Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-28-2009, 12:58 PM
Snaz's Avatar
Snaz Snaz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Surrey, BC
Posts: 1,034
Snaz is on a distinguished road
Default

I have 1 - 1.5 inches of sand in my AP12 and I don't have any algae on the surface. I'm not sure which critters are keeping it clean but I suspect the 12 small hermits are shifting it enough. The only algae the tank has ever had is the 2 day old brown haze on the glass which the magfloat cleans in a jiffy. Oh and LOTS of coraline!

I slope my sand high in the back, shallow to front so the sand at the front is level with the black trim.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-28-2009, 02:58 PM
mike31154's Avatar
mike31154 mike31154 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vernon
Posts: 2,073
mike31154 will become famous soon enough
Default

No comment on the BB, but you mention a difference in watts per gallon that you are basing your purchase decision on. What type of lighting are we talking about here for either the aquapod or biocube? If you're going to keep corals you may be well advised to concentrate more on the type of light output rather than watts per gallon. The difference in light output for given watt of the different options (MH, T5HO, PC) is substantial. Watts per gallon alone is no longer a good indicator of what's best for your livestock.
__________________
Mike
77g sumpless SW
DIY 10 watt multi-chip LED build http://www.canreef.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=82206
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-28-2009, 07:53 PM
Whatigot Whatigot is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Coquitlam, B.C.
Posts: 680
Whatigot is on a distinguished road
Default

IMO, the only thing bare bottoms are good for is spanking

I ran a heavily stocked aquapod with no skim for a year and I contribute my success to the 5' of crushed coral I had on the bottom.
Pod city and excellent bio filtration...
In a larger tank, I don't think it makes as big of a difference, but in a smaller one, makes a big dif.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-28-2009, 09:31 PM
t_hac's Avatar
t_hac t_hac is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: White rock, BC
Posts: 9
t_hac is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whatigot View Post
IMO, the only thing bare bottoms are good for is spanking

I ran a heavily stocked aquapod with no skim for a year and I contribute my success to the 5' of crushed coral I had on the bottom.
Pod city and excellent bio filtration...
In a larger tank, I don't think it makes as big of a difference, but in a smaller one, makes a big dif.
yea i am now leaning to having a small amount of substrate to keep the pods happy and i forgot about the bio filtration, since i have no skimmer this will be a +
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-28-2009, 09:44 PM
gbeef's Avatar
gbeef gbeef is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Calgary
Posts: 133
gbeef is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to gbeef
Default

I'm running bare bottom in a 14Gal biocube my setup has been up for 4 months. BB for me is easy to clean thats why i do it. People dont notice its bareness factor. I also had a 7gal a couple years back. same thing loved how easy it was to clean.

Do you like the look of Cyano?
This is the main reason why i have barebottom ive had bad cyano outbreak in the past with my 55Gal. It seem to be caused by the sand bed absoring photospate and too much debres.

I know people have had different opinons also on sand. I love the look but i cant stand the maintance. Thats the trade off. Also its easier to add sand later then remove. If your on the fence you can always go BB now if you hate it add sand.

Last edited by gbeef; 01-29-2009 at 05:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-28-2009, 10:08 PM
Whatigot Whatigot is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Coquitlam, B.C.
Posts: 680
Whatigot is on a distinguished road
Default

may be the case at first, but once established, which can take some time, there is no better, simpler tool in a smaller systems filtration.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-21-2009, 06:21 PM
MCC's Avatar
MCC MCC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 69
MCC is on a distinguished road
Default

Watts per gallon means nothing... all three choices of your tank is power compact...IMO the same "power" and usage... PC lights just aren't good either way... either way with any of the mention tank you are going with the same corals... you won't be keeping any SPS..and the LPS will be placed higher in the tank... as for Calms..good luck...

So I would get the biggest tank you can afford... if you are new to saltwater...the bigger the tank the easier for you to maintain...you will just hit a road block with a 8 gallon...

As for sand.. i didn't read the other posts...but sand is added biological filtration just like liverocks... so without sand you will be losing some filtrating power... IMO
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-22-2009, 11:22 PM
Boomboy's Avatar
Boomboy Boomboy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: edmonton
Posts: 442
Boomboy is on a distinguished road
Default

i personally like the look of the sand, i wouldnt go deeper than 1" though, no reason in nanos, you just do water changes. its alot easier to do water changes on a nano then it is on a larger tank, where 10% is 1 gallon instead of 10, also if you have a larger tank, you make more water than needed and use the rest for the nano.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-28-2009, 09:30 PM
t_hac's Avatar
t_hac t_hac is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: White rock, BC
Posts: 9
t_hac is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike31154 View Post
No comment on the BB, but you mention a difference in watts per gallon that you are basing your purchase decision on. What type of lighting are we talking about here for either the aquapod or biocube? If you're going to keep corals you may be well advised to concentrate more on the type of light output rather than watts per gallon. The difference in light output for given watt of the different options (MH, T5HO, PC) is substantial. Watts per gallon alone is no longer a good indicator of what's best for your livestock.
yea i know, for now all i can afford is the stock lighting so i am looking at the most wattage i can get... and if the bulbs arent cutting it ill replace them.

the aquapod has the sunpaq pcs which apparently produce %50 more lumen output than comparable bulbs...

so thats what im leaning for.. the most power for stock lights, i know t5/mh is better i had a t5 fixture on my 55 and saw the difference from my pc light on the type and output that they give off...
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 02:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.