Living Room Nano Peninsula

[YHSublime]

10 minutes ago, jhOU said:

nice upgrade, you’re really going to appreciate all that extra space!!!

 

Thanks, I'm already enjoying just imagining! 

[YHSublime]

Please enjoy my vertical video of my reef tour:

 

[Abe]

Love it and congrats on the upgrade too. 

[YHSublime]

25 minutes ago, Abe said:

Love it and congrats on the upgrade too. 

 

Thanks man! 

[menglish]

lovely,

good you got the space pectina all the way in the corner.

I hear they pack quite a sting

[YHSublime]

7 minutes ago, menglish said:

lovely,

good you got the space pectina all the way in the corner.

I hear they pack quite a sting

 

Hey Milton! Thanks for the kind words! I had two colonies, and recently sold the other one. It was keeping the Jedi Mind Trick monti in check that sprouted from a atom sized piece that must have gotten left behind when I thought I completely chipped it away and off many years ago. 

[YHSublime]

Well, I have, as usual, worked myself into quite the conundrum. 

 

Over the weekend I picked up the this nice little tank/stand/sump combo. Some of you might remember I had almost the identical tank setup as a DCA 105 many years ago. Both the Rimless 80 and the SCA 120 have the same footprint. My original intention was to part out the DCA later, and use the stand and sump, but looking at this beauty of a 120, I'm wondering... do I go bigger? 

 

I need to find out if the sides are tempered, but my peninsula plan would exist the same, remove the back overflow, cover the holes in the bottom, turn it sideways and drill the side pane to make it a peninsula. 

 

The only real concern that everybody except for me seems to have, is the weight of the 120. 

 

Here are the differences between both that I'm struggling with:

- Larger tank, means larger selection of fish, easier to manage levels with more water volume, more room for inhabitants. 

- One is rimless, one is eurobraced.

- An internal/external overflow box could tuck right up into the eurobrace, giving me great water height. 

- The 80 is 16" high (shallow) the DCA is 8" higher at 24". The footprint is still the same, 4'x2'.

- The 80 has a big scratch across the longer (current 'front' pane) the 120 is starphire and no scratches. 

- The 80 would be rimless with no lid, there would be a lid on the 120. 

- The 80 would be lighter, the 120 is much heavier. 

 

So what does everybody think. I'm leaning towards the 80. 
 

[Abe]

120 because you’re maximizing the footprint. That being said, I’ll take it from you if you decide to keep the 80

[YHSublime]

4 minutes ago, Abe said:

120 because you’re maximizing the footprint. That being said, I’ll take it from you if you decide to keep the 80

 

Word. I've had this debate for the past week, so finally taking it out to the people! 

 

So you're a form follows function kind of guy, alright! 

[roni]

I vote 120 if your stand supports it. More space to leave empty for swimming if you decide not to utilize plus Starfire and no scratch

[DaJMasta]

I'd lean 120 as well.  Starfire is a big plus and not scratched is one less thing to deal with.  While rimless looks great, I think you'll run into a bit of difficulty scaping for 2 feet of depth with only 16 inches of height unless you keep the tank low and go for a top-down view of everything (and this will mean lower flow up top to keep your view nice), and 24" isn't so deep as to be a big problem to work in either.  I also think the top is a big plus in terms of what you can keep - it seems like so many fish can be jumpers and basically any can do it if they end up with some aggression in the tank, and with mesh tops and spread out lighting, it doesn't have to be hugely visible (though maybe you're talking about a hood, which would be tricky to hide...)  I started mine as rimless with the appeal of the aesthetic in mind, added an inset screen top after a jumper (I know not the option for the 120), but I don't think I'd ever go back to without.  So many more fish I have the option of keeping with it than without.

 

What's the concern with the weight, specifically?  If it's weight of the tank itself, I can't imagine it takes more than one more person to deal with than an 80, but if your talking about weight filled I don't know how much of an issue it will be. Yes, the 120g is roughly 50% heavier, but with a large 4x2 footprint, you're not talking crazy psf numbers in either case.  There's a lot that goes into determining appropriate loading for an area, but either tank is going to want support structure above the minimum for building code, but I don't know if there are many situations that could support the 80 comfortably but not the 120.

[YHSublime]

8 minutes ago, roni said:

I vote 120 if your stand supports it. More space to leave empty for swimming if you decide not to utilize plus Starfire and no scratch

 

This has been the big consensus. There's a big part of me that is excited about maybe considering the plug and play option of setting up the 120 as is without modifying the overflow for turning it peninsula, and keeping the 22 set it beside it. The only issue is the amount of electric that would be running out of that particular portion of the house. I'd probably have to swing something with an electrician. The load that's already in my office is huge, it's a Christmas Miracle everything is still working. That and the weight, I'd probably have to have a structural engineer take a look. 

 

11 minutes ago, DaJMasta said:

I'd lean 120 as well.  Starfire is a big plus and not scratched is one less thing to deal with.  While rimless looks great, I think you'll run into a bit of difficulty scaping for 2 feet of depth with only 16 inches of height unless you keep the tank low and go for a top-down view of everything (and this will mean lower flow up top to keep your view nice), and 24" isn't so deep as to be a big problem to work in either.  I also think the top is a big plus in terms of what you can keep - it seems like so many fish can be jumpers and basically any can do it if they end up with some aggression in the tank, and with mesh tops and spread out lighting, it doesn't have to be hugely visible (though maybe you're talking about a hood, which would be tricky to hide...)  I started mine as rimless with the appeal of the aesthetic in mind, added an inset screen top after a jumper (I know not the option for the 120), but I don't think I'd ever go back to without.  So many more fish I have the option of keeping with it than without.

 

I've already been running 12" of depth for 5 years for scraping, so I've got some great systems in place already! I'm wanting to mimic what I have running now, just with a bigger tank, so for things like the top down view, I have that, and fairly heavy top water skimming and flow. There's something about the clean box with so many views that I think is why I have fallen in love with the small tank. While I'm not much of a fish guy, I guess I can start wrapping my head around adding more fish and being excited about that like I am with coral. 

 

14 minutes ago, DaJMasta said:

What's the concern with the weight, specifically?  If it's weight of the tank itself, I can't imagine it takes more than one more person to deal with than an 80, but if your talking about weight filled I don't know how much of an issue it will be. Yes, the 120g is roughly 50% heavier, but with a large 4x2 footprint, you're not talking crazy psf numbers in either case.  There's a lot that goes into determining appropriate loading for an area, but either tank is going to want support structure above the minimum for building code, but I don't know if there are many situations that could support the 80 comfortably but not the 120.

 

Weight wise a couple of things. It's a little more than 50% heavier, but my SO and I can handle the 80, me and a bud struggled a bit with the 120. Glad to hear about PSF, I'm entertaining the option of keeping the nano setup and running the 120 beside it as is, which is now a whole new scenario. 

[Pedro]

You can do the basement sump!

[YHSublime]

12 minutes ago, Pedro said:

You can do the basement sump!

 

Now there's a thought! Find me a crocodile! 

[Pedro]

1 minute ago, YHSublime said:

 

Now there's a thought! Find me a crocodile! 

Lol. I wasn't going to go there again, but now that you did!

[JJKK]

You got my vote of 120.  But I don't know if you are going to have too different of a fish selection between a 4' 80g vs. 4' 120g.  I think length usually allows you to get to a different category of fish.

 

But you've done wonders with a small tank, just interested to see what you do next with a bigger canvas.

[YHSublime]

18 minutes ago, JJKK said:

You got my vote of 120.  But I don't know if you are going to have too different of a fish selection between a 4' 80g vs. 4' 120g.  I think length usually allows you to get to a different category of fish.

 

But you've done wonders with a small tank, just interested to see what you do next with a bigger canvas.

Yeah, personally I don’t buy into the whole 4’ vs 6’ rule of thumb. That being said, I also don’t believe in overstocking fish. I’m coming around to the idea of the 120 though the more I think on it. 
 

small tanks are easy, you can fill them up quickly!

[AlanM]

I'm a vote that is a bit concerned about the weight, but the concern is not that much different between 80 and 120.  I was concerned at 80 already. 

 

If you are confident that you're close to load bearing members underneath the floor where it will sit it seems like either will probably work out OK in that spot.  

 

So it's just width and depth that are different, both are 4 foot tanks?  In that case if you can spare the extra width in that spot I'd say go bigger.  You'll need the same water making infrastructure to service a 120 that you will an 80.  Whatever skimmer that works on an 80 will work on a 120.  Return pumps will be similar. 

 

You might need more light for the 120.  Maybe that would be the biggest difference in expense?

[roni]

Are you planning on using the 120 as is and putting the nano oriented along the short panel (i.e perpendicular to the 120)?  Or maybe making an L? 

 

Ultimately I'm sure it'll look great either way.  The ability to see on all sides is definitely a plus and you should do what you think will make you the happiest.  If/when I have the ability, I'll do a larger peninsula tank.  There's something to be said about the 3 sides viewable, though in a bigger tank, it's a lot to keep clean!

[YHSublime]

55 minutes ago, AlanM said:

I'm a vote that is a bit concerned about the weight, but the concern is not that much different between 80 and 120.  I was concerned at 80 already. 

 

If you are confident that you're close to load bearing members underneath the floor where it will sit it seems like either will probably work out OK in that spot.  

 

So it's just width and depth that are different, both are 4 foot tanks?  In that case if you can spare the extra width in that spot I'd say go bigger.  You'll need the same water making infrastructure to service a 120 that you will an 80.  Whatever skimmer that works on an 80 will work on a 120.  Return pumps will be similar. 

 

You might need more light for the 120.  Maybe that would be the biggest difference in expense?

 

I know some very smart people in my life, yourself included, who are worried about the weight. Now I am concerned about weight. 

 

Currently, the joist run horizontal to the nano, and it's spread out over 3, maybe 4 joists. What I am considering is running the 80 or the 120 perpendicular with the (2 most likely) joists underneath it. That's what I was saying I'd entertain upgrading the electrical in the office, as well as have a structural engineer take a look. 

 

It's not even width and depth that are different, they are both 4'x2', the miracles is just 8" higher. I have most of the equipment I need to service either tank (including another light,) as well as keep the nano running, but if I didn't, the light would be fine. 

 

I'm tempted to setup in the basement again, but I know as soon as the tank hits its stride is when we will decide to renovate down there, which is a thing on the list.  

 

5 minutes ago, roni said:

Are you planning on using the 120 as is and putting the nano oriented along the short panel (i.e perpendicular to the 120)?  Or maybe making an L? 

 

Ultimately I'm sure it'll look great either way.  The ability to see on all sides is definitely a plus and you should do what you think will make you the happiest.  If/when I have the ability, I'll do a larger peninsula tank.  There's something to be said about the 3 sides viewable, though in a bigger tank, it's a lot to keep clean!

 

Originally I was planning on using either tank (80 or 120) as a peninsula. However, running them like your question above is something I'm considering now. 

 

It's all work, I love the 3 sides and the challenges that come with aquascaping, considering all angles. 

[howaboutme]

First, let me the rational one.  What's the reason you got rid of your Elos? Make sure that's not the same reason this future tank may be a burden.

 

Second, if your structure if visible, shoot a picture. What you described doesn't make sense. Your nano straddles 3 joist but your new tank will straddle less while being bigger? That confused me. Are you saying your new tank will run parallel to the joists therefore will only straddle 2?

[YHSublime]

There are a couple of ideas floating around. The original plan was to replace the nano with the 80 gallon. The second photo illustrates the way the nano runs in the basement. 

 

The second idea I'm batting around that I like, is setting up the 80, or the 120 regularly, so running the way of the arrows in this first photo, removing the couch. 

 

 

The tank is probably running a little further to the right in this photo (above the pipes) 

 

Based on the first photo, the horizontal lines would be the nano, and the vertical lines would be the 80 or 120. 

[YHSublime]

1 hour ago, howaboutme said:

First, let me the rational one.  What's the reason you got rid of your Elos? Make sure that's not the same reason this future tank may be a burden.

 

Wise beyond your years, Jack. Elos was in the basement, it's not really a space we spend a lot of time in right now. My office is the perfect place for a tank, I'm with it all day, my SO can take it or leave it. She likes to come in and visit and watch, but probably wouldn't notice if it wasn't there for a few days. 

 

2 hours ago, howaboutme said:

Second, if your structure if visible, shoot a picture. What you described doesn't make sense. Your nano straddles 3 joist but your new tank will straddle less while being bigger? That confused me. Are you saying your new tank will run parallel to the joists therefore will only straddle 2?

 

I couldn't quote you above, as I posted pictures from Tapatalk, what a janky app, I'm over it. I'll edit the information above the photos to make more sense. 

[lynn.reef.nerd]

Wait ... running it through the puppy? Seems cruel ... 

[YHSublime]

39 minutes ago, lynn.reef.nerd said:

Wait ... running it through the puppy? Seems cruel ... 

 

He'll get out of the way!