Bubble Magus Vs. SWC...

[ryangrieder]

whats the difference between the Bubble Magus Nac7 and the SWC Xtreme 120? just the brand and color? anyone have personal experiance with the SWC skimmers? i know alot about bubble magus but cant find alot of information or reviews on the xtreme 120. wanted to hear your take on both... all i see is the nicer gate valve on the SWC and the NAC7 has a drainer on the collection cup....thats just about it?

-----------Vs.-----------

 

[noodleman]

the swc120 runs a smaller pump than the nac7. the nac7 is more comparable to the swc160

 

[Baja170]

The SWC does have a drain on the collection cup, at least the 160 does although it is straight not an elbow like the BM. You can see the drain in my photo below on the left side of the photo bottom of cup. I think I can see in the photo you attached where the drain is in the back of the skimmer you can see it through the tube below the cup. I have attached a photo to illustrate. Also, it is not really a gate valve, it is a knob that turns a piece of pipe inside of the outer pipe that controls the water flow rate. The inner pipe has roughly a V at the bottom to go from almost total blockoff of water flow to wide open with no restriction. Seems to work very well.

I have 2 of the SWC 160's in my 125 and 150 sumps. My sumps are 40B tanks with 1/4" thick glass bubble traps I have glued in with the skimmer sitting in 9.5" of constant level water.

The 160 calls to be run "best" in 7 to 10 inch deep water and I have found by experience that they produce best (Photos below) in deeper water. The problem is that on a power failure they will not restart when you run then even 9.5 deep which I did at first.(at least neither of mine will) Now I have them sitting on 4" high risers to where they are basically in about 6" of water and I am finding them a lot more tricky to fine tune but with effort, I am getting there again AND they restart no problem every time. I say all of this to explain that depending on your sump depth you may need to put the SWC on a stand in your sump. I understand from talking to others with the 120 they wish they had gotten the 160 and that the 120 operates very similar and water depth is also a factor with them restarting in deep water and that the 160 produces dark dry skimmate more rapidly.

Here is a photo of the first one I got when I was still running it in a ALS 1500 Wet Dry which is also now for sale. Notice the DARK and DRY Skimmate. These 160's produce some KILLER AWEFUL smelling skimmate but like any skimmer I have ever had, you have to learn them. I plan to most likely buy another one for my 93G Cube with custom 26x18x16 Sump I am building.

SWC Pros:
Very good production of DARK and THICK skimmate.
Easy to clean.
Fairly easy to adjust.
Affordable.
Good customer service from where I got mine, reef filtration, I had a leak in my collection cup and it was immediately replaced no questions asked. (I hope I can say this, if not I will remove the vendor name)
Pretty high quality construction and easy to take apart to clean/maintain even for a computer geek like me. Good fit and finish of all parts and easy reassembly after cleaning.
Low about 20" tall profile to fit under minimal clearance stands, like my 125 stand.

Cons:
Tricky to get to restart in deeper than about 7 or 8 inches of water after a power cut.
They need a 90 fitting coming out of the collection cup like the BM instead of one that comes out straight down.
Cord could be about a foot or so longer would be nice.

Overall, I am happy with the performance to price ratio.

 

[aznt1217]

The SWC 120 Skimmer is fairly new. It's basically the Reef Octopus line. I absolutely love these skimmers. I have heard good things about Bubble Magus but I would go with the 120 because it's a true cone skimmer versus the BM's semi conical shape.

To the reply above...holy crap that's a lot of skimmate. I might drop the money on this skimmer even though I have 3 just laying around. =X

 

[Baja170]

I can get that much skimmate every two days. I would fo with the 160 over the 120 though.

Overall I am happy with the SWC skimmers I have bought. I also had the Xtreme HOT but sold it. It did skim well though.

 

[kaOzGrUnT]

I bought the SWC 160, my tank is not even running yet, but I already did the break in and when I plugged it on saturday it was a solid column of air bubbles. the SWC def worth it.
pm me to let you know where to get it for lower price than the guys in Canada.

 

[zook]

I would definitely get the 160 over the 120, but if you have sump space less than 6", the 160 is not an option. Like others have said, it produces great skimmate that really smell awful and that's saying something as I used to 'like' the smell of the skimmate from my old Tunze.

 

[Baja170]

The closest way to describe the skimmate I am getting is it smelled like when I had to have my septic tank pumped out after 15 years of living here. It is really really nasty. After I clean the collection cup my wife says she can smell it in the house for hours.

Like I said, no lie, that is 2 days of skimming. But, I have also had the first 160 for about 3 or 4 months and I have learned how to fine tune it. I prefer the air on minimum and the flow rate on about 3/4 and it seems to produce the best at the level I am running them in the sumps now. If you change the water level they are in, you will need to fine tune them again. I definitely recommend running them in a sump you can keep a constant level in. In my wet dry where that photo was taken, I had to top off daily to keep the water level regulated and the skimmer producing consistently like it is in the photo. Varying water level will cause you to have to chase your settings and can get you really frustrated, constant level is very much closer to set it and forget it, besides emptying it of course.

Also one more thing about the 160 I like is, when I empty, I leave the skimmer running and overflowing, I run my finger around the inside of the cone to get the skimmate off. I then clean the cup. Takes about 5 minutes and very easy to do. 2 days later, I have a cup full of the crap again. I need to go to a larger skimmate reservoir.

 

[ryangrieder]

wow thanks alot guys for all the amazing info! only thing is that everything you guys mentioned was the same reviews people said for the nac7...except the water hight issue. i really like both. only thing is that this skimmer is going on a smaller tank. its a 46 bow with 30g sump so only around 75g oh water total. i dony know if that would be over kill with the 160. this is a hard decision....

 

[batt600]

There both rated almost for the same gallons the nac7 is for 180g and the swc 160 is rated at 150G . Overkill in this game is good.

 

[Baja170]

I figured someone with a SWC160 would post BUT.....

OK I gave bad information!!

When your 160 is new you will probably break it in best and get skimmate with doing the opposite of the directions. Start with the air on the minimum and the flow almost maximum.

Once it breaks in and from my experience:
Run your air wide open on + and limit your flow. The SWC 160 is a lot less finicky setup like this and it also produces very well setup with full open air and less flow. It is a lot easier NOT to overflow the cup with these settings.

Sorry for the bad info but once I got under the tanks for maintenance today, I realized my mind is not like an elephant.

 

[ryangrieder]

haha cool thanks alot man but i actually ended up today ordering the nac 7. the tank is only going to be a 46g with 25g sump so im sure ill love the nac. thats alot though everyone for all the great info!

 

[ryangrieder]

also, my buddy did just buy the 160 today for his 90g. so when we both get ours were going to have a mini shoot out between them lol