skimmer question

[bergamer]

I have a 90 gallon tank
and I am deciding if it would be better to get the 220 gallon version of the super skimmer over the 125

any suggestions, is it wiser to get the larger skimmer?
even though the smaller one is rated for a 125, is it really rated for a 125?
or to be safe is it better to get the 220?


keeping in mind that there is a significant price difference

thanks

 

[Nautilus1]

I think a skimmer rated for a 220 is too large for your tank. If you plan on over feeding and have no other nutrient export perhaps u need such a large skimmer. It is possible to skimm vital minerals from your tank. With A skimmer for a 220 on a 90 gal you should supplemebnt minrals.

 

[lissame]

:lol:

 

[ChrisRD]

I have a 90 gallon tank
and I am deciding if it would be better to get the 220 gallon version of the super skimmer over the 125

I'd get the larger skimmer - typically they are WAY overrated by the manufacturers.

It is possible to skimm vital minerals from your tank. With A skimmer for a 220 on a 90 gal you should supplemebnt minrals.

What minerals? Do you have a link to something that supports that idea?

 

[Nautilus1]

I think we are all aware of the importance of minerals in marine ecosystems .Hydrophobic minerals such as calcium carbonate, zinc oxide or magnesium phosphates can be removed with a skimmer.
Importance of minerals here:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_o ... ca8572f619

 

[ChrisRD]

Sorry, I didn't word that very well. I agree that certain minerals are important to our corals and that skimmers can remove some minerals. I was wondering what information you had showing that minerals are being removed to a detrimental extent by the larger skimmer (and what those minerals are).

Many veteran reefers seem to feel that the presence of excess dissolved organics, phosphates, etc. in an unskimmed or underskimmed tank is far more detrimental to calcifying corals than any potential problems with trace element depletion because of excess skimming.

 

[guara]

When I decided to buy my skimmer I thought to get the larger one,I think is better then small.
Some times you can over feeding and you to avoid getting problems,specially if you prefer to keep only fish.

 

[Nautilus1]

I never said a skimmer would remove minerals to the degree that would be dentrimental. I simply stated that a skimmer can remove minerals. Hydrophobic minerals. I dont have any real data on that man's potential larger skimmer compared to his potential smaller skimmer, nor did I think I had to provide references!

 

[ChrisRD]

I guess I felt that idea was implied in your statement that "with a skimmer for a 220 on a 90 gal you should supplement minerals". IME most skimmer manufacturers far overrate their products (although there are a couple of exceptions) and IMO a good general rule-of-thumb is to cut their claimed ratings in half. I wasn't trying to give you a hard time, just wondering what the basis was for your above recommendation.

 

[guara]

:wink: