Deciding on a tank size

[FlyingDutchman]

Well here's my problem. I currently have a 29 gal and am going to upgrade to either a 60 or 80 gal. They have the same exact footprint the only difference is height. The 60 will run me $120 and the 80 will be $190. There is a bit of a budget issue since I will be needing to get a protein skimmer. The fish I will be keeping are a Huma-huma Trigger and fish that will get along with it. So, my question basically is, is it worth the extra money for the 80, especially since all the extra size is in the height? I just don't think I will be able to keep that many more fish since thay will have to be aggressive and will need "territories" ahich you don't really get with a tank that is only taller. Please help me in my decision!

 

[Atari]

I say get the 60 gal and put the $70 towards buying the fish/skimmer.

 

[MYTY1705]

I agree with atari. The huma will definately need a skimmer. Veeerrrrry messy eaters!!!

 

[24 hours? NE!]

I say, skimp on the fish and get the bigger tank. Just kidding. Save for an extra month or two and get the bigger tank and the skimmer. Look for deals on the skimmer. Spend the extra on the tank and then get the skimmer when you can afford it before you set up the tank.

In summary, if you have the space for the tank, get it- you'll want it later. IMHO anyways. I wish I started with a bigger tank.

 

[austinsdad]

IMO, a bigger tank would make you happier. For a 20 gallon difference, aren't we talking almost 7 inches more of fish(es)? That, based on the 3gal per inch rule.

 

[ddcboys]

I agree with the last posts. I wish that I would have gotten a bigger tank at the get go. I say just save a little longer.......I know that the temptation is getting big but trust me it will be worth it in the long run.

 

[Atari]

A taller tank won't really make that much difference to stocking since most fish don't swim up and down. The reduced surface area per volume of the taller tank will also mean less gas exchange.

If it was going to have a larger footprint then that would be worth considering.

 

[austinsdad]

Thanks Atari for clearing that up for me. I always thought that the gallons per inch thing was about sustainable bio-loads, not swimming room.

 

[indy]

The surface area of the tank is more important than height as atari said. All the bad gasses have to vaporize out and oxygen comes in through the water surface. So a 60 gallon tall will have a lower sustainable bio-load than a 60 shallow with a greater surface area. And some fish do require the greater swimming space to be happy (like tangs).

 

[tmcpeek]

I agree that the extra height on that size tank may not be worth it. I went with the 225 gallon as opposed to a 180 to get the extra viewing area (since it is built into the wall) but I figured with the 6' length of the tank there was plenty of surface area. If I were you I would buy the 60 and buy a good skimmer. This is a very hard hobby to have a budget in. At least one that you can stick to IME

 

[RocketSeason]

The tank will hold an extra 20 gallons though, thus, making it that much more stable.

 

[fishstixs05]

RocketSeason's right, the 80 would be a more stable system, but you need to resist the urge to fill up the empty space in the tank. Like atari and others said the surface area is much more important than inches per gallon. My advice is to get a LR tower in there. Add some gobies or blennies to swim around and through the tower, and you will have a great looking system, along with some fish to swim in the upper area. The problem now is to find a lighting system that will fit in that size hood and properly mantain any corals you plan on owning.

 

[youronlysin]

For the same footprint, Id say save the 70 bucks difference and go with the 60 gal. Then either use the savings for a skimmer or, if you are worried about the extra 20 gal for water stability then spend 50 bucks on a 20 gallon tank for a sump and put the extra twenty towards hooking that up or your skimmer.