treesprite November 27, 2008 Share November 27, 2008 Honestly, are you really jasking the thread question for a sense of security, or to really try to convert people to go skimmerless, or reacting to someone commenting on it somewhere else, or what exactly is teh goal? I'm just thinking if we know the motivation without just assuming it, perhaps the thread could go straight to a final thought on which to end.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dzekunoi November 27, 2008 Share November 27, 2008 Let's say the best is to have both, I have both and things go well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zygote2k November 28, 2008 Author Share November 28, 2008 Honestly, are you really jasking the thread question for a sense of security, or to really try to convert people to go skimmerless, or reacting to someone commenting on it somewhere else, or what exactly is teh goal? I'm just thinking if we know the motivation without just assuming it, perhaps the thread could go straight to a final thought on which to end.? Yes- you've busted me. There really is a hidden agenda and conspiracy behind these posts. Those voices you hear aren't really speaking to you. Always nice to hear others' opinions and facts about this wonderful hobby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lhcorals November 28, 2008 Share November 28, 2008 Let's say the best is to have both, I have both and things go well. I second that. I have both and they each do a seperate job together to help my tank to be as healthy as possible. I have found that in this hobby you can ask a question to ten different people and get ten different responces. The best way to look at it is if it is working for you that is great but dont try to tell someone else they are wrong if having a skimmer is working for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davelin315 November 28, 2008 Share November 28, 2008 Honestly, are you really jasking the thread question for a sense of security, or to really try to convert people to go skimmerless, or reacting to someone commenting on it somewhere else, or what exactly is teh goal? I'm just thinking if we know the motivation without just assuming it, perhaps the thread could go straight to a final thought on which to end.? I don't see the purpose in this post. This is a constructive thread with many different opinions on what works, what doesn't, and the success people have had. It's a good debate and is being enjoyed by the people doing it. If the system works for him and others, fantastic, if it doesn't, fantastic. We're about education here and this thread is bringing out the debate. My own opinion may fall on one side, but that doesn't mean I am not curious as to the results and how they will be long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rascal November 29, 2008 Share November 29, 2008 When I first started I had a fairly decent skimmer and no fuge. Then I added a small Fuge w/ DSB (2/3 of a 10G tank) and things got better. Then I increased my system volume and saw more improvement (dilution of pollution). Then I increased the size of my fuge w/ DSB (3/4 of a 55G tank) and things got better again. Then I got a much better skimmer and saw more improvement. Then I modded the skimmer a few times to make it even better and saw still more improvement. Just lately I increased the size of my fuge w/ DSB to a full 55G tub and modded my skimmer even more. IMO both are essential components to my system and I do not believe I would be able to stock my tank the way I want (and therefore feed it the way I need to) without either one. If I had a much bigger and better skimmer I could probably get by without the fuge (although I wouldn't really want to -- the little critters make my happy), but I do think the fuge exports nutrients - both macro harvesting and because of the 8-10" DSB I get nitrates turned into nitrogen gas bubbles and released to the air. I also think it recycles some nutrients - in food production for the main tank. Other nutrients get metabolized by the critters. Most successful skimmerless tanks I have seen have a relatively low bioload, esp when it comes to fish, and are mostly softie and some LPS. They can be beautiful tanks. There is one in Paletta's book "Ultimate Reef Aquariums", the one in the Marine Scene, and Zygote's tank, for a few examples. However, I have yet to see a fuge-only tank look like Copps' TOTM tank and that is the look I aspire to -- heavily stocked with lots of beautiful fish and chocked full of colorful SPS. I am not saying this is impossible to achieve with a fuge-only system, only that I haven't seen one yet. Theoretically I believe it is possible, but the fuge would have to be absolutely huge relative to the display. How big? Maybe 5-10 X to start, I would guess --- probably more. FWIW, I don't think the low nutrient conditions on coral reefs in the ocean is due to natural skimming. For sure there may be some of this due to the waves, but we've all been to ocean enough to know that the picture above is not representative of a normal day at the beach. Most of us probably send the entire volume of our systems through a chamber densely filled with microbubbles about 10X per hour, give or take. The percentage of the ocean's water that gets foamed during the crashing of a wave seems like it would be really, really small. When non-reefing people gape at all the stuff I've got plumbed together to support my tank, I point out that real 5'x2'x2' sections of coral reefs get a 100% water change every couple of seconds, along with a new dose of fresh food. The essential challenge of the this hobby is that we are trying to replicate something which can't possibly be replicated. Where does all the poop and dead stuff go in the ocean? Well, the ocean has kelp forests and grass flats and mangrove swamps and marshes and lots of other stuff including . . . just consider the size, depth and surface area of that DSB!!. A whale could die just offshore and the water quality on the reef would be unaffected. An 8" fish dies in our tank and we hasten to get it out as quickly as possible lest we suffer a nutrient spike. We are chasing the impossible, so to speak. That's part of what makes it so rewarding when we succeed, at least for me. Lastly, all other things aside, my system has looked best during those periods of time when I've been able to consistently do 10% water changes 2x week. No attempt to compare reefing methods should fail to consider this most important variable, IMO. to all and happy reefing. I'm off to pop downstairs and empty my skimmer cup and check out the critters in my fuge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanman November 29, 2008 Share November 29, 2008 Lastly, all other things aside, my system has looked best during those periods of time when I've been able to consistently do 10% water changes 2x week. No attempt to compare reefing methods should fail to consider this most important variable, IMO. to all and happy reefing. I'm off to pop downstairs and empty my skimmer cup and check out the critters in my fuge. Interesting... I am doing my 2xweekly 10% changes because of my nitrate problem - but everything is doing much better, and everything looks brighter since I started doing them. In fact - while I'm at it, I do about 10% in each of the other tanks - and they are all looking better. Coincidence? I think NOT! bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zygote2k November 29, 2008 Author Share November 29, 2008 Does anyone have a raceway filtration system built? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treesprite November 29, 2008 Share November 29, 2008 (edited) I don't see the purpose in this post. This is a constructive thread with many different opinions on what works, what doesn't, and the success people have had. It's a good debate and is being enjoyed by the people doing it. If the system works for him and others, fantastic, if it doesn't, fantastic. We're about education here and this thread is bringing out the debate. My own opinion may fall on one side, but that doesn't mean I am not curious as to the results and how they will be long term. A couple things here. One is that there is a bit of underlying joking (look at his response) on various threads, also I was following up what someone else raised, and also I'm waiting for someone to say something that for me would bring the debate to a close as I wait to see something I have never seen before. Edited November 29, 2008 by treesprite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treesprite November 30, 2008 Share November 30, 2008 Does anyone have a raceway filtration system built? what is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanman November 30, 2008 Share November 30, 2008 Does anyone have a raceway filtration system built? I've actually considered trying one - full of aiptasia. I'll bet a 20-foot run of aiptasia would make for some crystal clear water coming out the other end! Sticky little buggers would grab everything. Should be almost like a carbon filter. bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zygote2k November 30, 2008 Author Share November 30, 2008 I'm going to build a raceway system to grow Dragons' Breath algae. I've already figured out its' lighting, nutrient, and waterflow requirements, so all I need to do is to design a raceway that fits over the top of a 20L tank. I have a 250w 6500k fixture to put on the top of the unit. I've found that there is a high demand for this type of algae-so why not grow it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now