Starting out - Need skimmer recommendations

[mrshall1027]

I used to be in the hobby about 3 or 4 years ago and I am glad to be getting back into it. Unfortunately, I have a horrible memory and I'm having to basically relearn everything.

I am hoping to pick up a 75 gallon tank and sump/refugium setup from someone on the classifieds, and the next thing on my list is a skimmer. If I remember correctly, I had an eshopps skimmer for my 55 gallon and it worked pretty well and I was looking into the PSK 100. Any reviews on this model? I don't want to buy a BS unit that I'll have to replace in a few months.

What would you recommend?

After I get the protein skimmer and a return pump, what else do I need to get before I fill it up with rock, sand and water?

ETA: I guess I probably need some lighting too! Any recommendations for that would also be greatly appreciated. I like to cleaner look, so I'd like something like the ones Vu_Deezy had on his tank here: http://www.austinreefclub.com/topic/23572-dsa-pro-65-rimless-rr-with-stand-500/

Edited October 3, 2012 by hall1027

[Timfish]

I would not bother with a skimmer myself. Ken Feldman et al has published some pretty interesting research on advancedaquarist.com over the last several years, here's a link to one of them: http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/1/aafeature2.

I've had tanks running for years and years without them and at best see them as unneccessary. If you are interested Delbeek and Sprung's "Reef Aquarium" Vol III does a very good job of discussing the basic filtering methodologies in a n unbiased manner including Lee Chin Engs and Dr. Jauberts pumpless, sumpless, skimmerless systems.

[Juiceman]

Those are Aqua Illuminations fixtures over that tank. FYI. LED's are the new craze, definitly something to look into.

I personally have only kept ASM skimmers, I've had Euro-Reef and Bak-Pak and found the ASM to be superior to both.

[victoly]

Tim is trying to put the skimmer industry out of business Personally, I find them to be helpful and notice a difference when mine is down for extended periods. In terms of which one is best, it's a lot like cars. Depends on how much you want to spend and the features you wish to include. Personally, I'd watch the classified section and google reviews on whatever pops up for sale.

[wizardx322]

Look at skimz skimmer aquacave.com

[jestep]

I'll join the skimmer debate in a later thread. Depending on your desired setup they may be necessary (Biopellets, ULNS, zeo, etc.).

Eshopps, octopus, tunze, bubble magus are all good brands as well as many others. I would buy 50 - 75% higher rated than your anticipated total volume, but nothing absurdly overboard. Also, there is no difference in efficiency between a conical and tube skimmer so don't waste the extra money on one just for that reason. Also, unless the motor is going out, used skimmers should be just as good or better than a new one. Can definitely save some money on buying a previously used one.

Edited October 3, 2012 by jestep

[Richard L]

You may want to consider that your corals and fish in a 75 gallon tank are likely to add up to some cha-ching. To protect that investment you may want to consider spending the extra money on a new tank instead of gambling on an used tank. Its difficult to tell how old a used tank is, how well it was constructed and how much abuse it has seen. A used tank may never give you problems but piece of mind is worth a few dollars more in my book.

PS - Feel free to ignore everything I just said since I hypocritically purchased a used 100 gallon rimless tank several months ago. It came from a fellow ARC reef enthusiast that I trusted and I ended up selling it before I ever set it up. You should also know that I'm adicted to this hobby and can easily rationalize any impulse I have to purchase things I don't really need.

[subsea]

I agree with Tim about skimmerless operation. With proper biological filtration, in my opinion, skimmers are a detriment, not just in money, but required nutriants for corals and plants. I find it to be a paradox. Take nutriants out of make-up water with RO/DI, add trace elements and minerals with salt water mix, remove nutriants with a protein skimmer, then put nutriants back in with bio-pellets. It must take a lot of money to operate a reef like that.

Patrick

[victoly]

It's about removing variability in the system. There shouldn't be nutrients in tap water (N02, NO3, NH4), and the removal is more for silica and carbonates. Making saltwater with RODI gives you a much steadier baseline condition than mixing saltwater with straight tap water. As far as skimmers and DSBs go, the debate will never end (chevy/ford, apple/pc, republican/democrat).

[Timfish]

Tim is trying to put the skimmer industry out of business . . .

Au contrare, actually I strongly suspect in the future research will show certain species will need skimming to be maintained and reproduced. I do think skimming is over hyped and it bothers me when lack of skimming is faulted for algae problems. My introduction to reefs was a series of articles in Tropical Fish Hobbyest in the '85 that had a beautiful reef system using undergravel filters. About the same time I also heard of Lee Chin Eng's filterless and pumpless systems. A couple of years later I read about Dr. Jauberts research in Fresh and Marin Aquarium, Dec. 1990, growing small polyped stony corals with his deep sand beds and did not utilize skimming or pumps. As a consequence a question that has always been at the back of my mind (and soemtimes the focus) "if simple systems using just air bubbles can grow corals what is the advantage of all the fancy equipment and pumps aquarists are being told they need" Starting a maintenance business in 1995 what I saw in systems I was called on to take care of or fix was the key to success was not fancy equipment but attention to selection of appropriate animals and attention to doing the basic maintenance. An article that reinforced this position was an interview of Richard Perrin who's company Tropicorium had started growing corals in the early '90s by Coral magazine in June/July 2005. Mr. Perrin detailed the system his company has been using which was essentially Lee Chin Engs system with the addition of power heads to increase flow for certain corals, primary water flow was done with airlifts. Regarding skimming Mr. Perrin commented they had tried it but decided it was unnecessary. (Also interesting was their use of aragamight as the only supplement.) Most recently Feldmans research showing skimming selectively and dramaticly alters the bacterial populations from what is found on reefs in nature certainly raises questions about it's use, http://www.advanceda...ture Obviously reef systems can be maintained with skimming. And considering the many thousands of species, variants and aquarium adapted variants I do expect when we have a much better understanding of the life cycles of thses animals and what is needed to keep some of them skimming would be called for in some cases. But I also strongly suspect in many cases skimming will actually be a hindrance to long term success. (Considering Dr. Heslinga's comments about plankton and inorganic nitrogen fertilizers for growing Tridacna clams [Next Wave 2011, Dallas TX] and Charles Delbeeks negative comments about low nutrient systems and how "Our crystal clear aquaria do not come close to the nutrient loads that swirl around natural reefs." [Coral, Nov/Dec 2010] I am curious to see how long this fad over Ultra Low Nutrient Systems survives as a viable way to keep corals.)

[subsea]

It's about removing variability in the system. There shouldn't be nutrients in tap water (N02, NO3, NH4), and the removal is more for silica and carbonates. Making saltwater with RODI gives you a much steadier baseline condition than mixing saltwater with straight tap water. As far as skimmers and DSBs go, the debate will never end (chevy/ford, apple/pc, republican/democrat).

Tap water has magnesium and calcium, which is removed by RO/DI. Then salt mix adds calcium and magnesium. Who said there was no variation in the reefs of the world?. There is much nutriant recycling on the reef. Upwellings of nutriant rich water to feed the reef is the normal not the exception.

Patrick

[victoly]

variation is fine in an open system like a real reef, it's not as fine in a small cube of water. sps keepers in particular strive to keep constant conditions that are reproduce-able (via rodi and salt). i guess to that end, it depends on desired livestock as to the methods chosen.

[subsea]

variation is fine in an open system like a real reef, it's not as fine in a small cube of water. sps keepers in particular strive to keep constant conditions that are reproduce-able (via rodi and salt). i guess to that end, it depends on desired livestock as to the methods chosen.

It depends on desired results is exactly the point. I tried to send you a kudo, but couldn't, because I had already used up my alotment for the day.

Patrick

[subsea]

I do not agree that variation is bad in a reef tank. In some of my lagoon biothemes, I do not use reverse photoperiod. With pH fluctuations down to 7.9 I get good trace mineral dosing with both major and minor nutrients from aroggonite sand beds. I have no equipment, controls or monitors to maintain stability. Look ma, no hands. If you think that this does not produce quality results, then come out here and look at the results first hand.

Patrick

[victoly]

I don't know how many ways I can say this, but very few people on ARC are keeping high nutrient lagoon biothemes. A majority of club members are running mixed softy/LPS/SPS reefs that work better low nutrient with steady parameters than the converse (myself included in this category). I'm not saying your methods don't work, and I'm not saying that it's out of line to suggest them. What I do assert is that to steer every new member in the direction of skimmerless DSBs with no automation whatsoever is a path to failure for all but the most experienced hobbyists who are capable of troubleshooting and maintaining a complex biological filtration system. If the end goal is to have low nutrient with even a moderate component of SPS, i feel that a skimmer is the best path to achieve low nutrients and stability. That being said, the OP is asking for skimmer recommendations, not why skimmers suck and DSBs are preferable.

[mFrame]

There are generally some great deals on our classifieds here going into the holidays.

[subsea]

I don't know how many ways I can say this, but very few people on ARC are keeping high nutrient lagoon biothemes. A majority of club members are running mixed softy/LPS/SPS reefs that work better low nutrient with steady parameters than the converse (myself included in this category). I'm not saying your methods don't work, and I'm not saying that it's out of line to suggest them. What I do assert is that to steer every new member in the direction of skimmerless DSBs with no automation whatsoever is a path to failure for all but the most experienced hobbyists who are capable of troubleshooting and maintaining a complex biological filtration system. If the end goal is to have low nutrient with even a moderate component of SPS, i feel that a skimmer is the best path to achieve low nutrients and stability. That being said, the OP is asking for skimmer recommendations, not why skimmers suck and DSBs are preferable.

With respect to steering people down to "it's out of line" to steer people " to high nutriant biothemes" I ask you, why can you justify that your opinion is more justified than my opinion. I hear the hi-tech logic. I also hear your strength in conviction in everybody else is doing it. One does not need to intimately know the names of complex bacteria to use them. Only to provide the conditions that they require to perform, this is not rocket science. As I see it, because you are of superior intellect, you no longer have a need to know something that you did not consider important from your education and experience. The world around you has more truth than your experience and education. I consider that "arrogance of youth".

We will agree to disagree.

La bonne temps roulee,

Patrick

[victoly]

I don't know how many ways I can say this, but very few people on ARC are keeping high nutrient lagoon biothemes. A majority of club members are running mixed softy/LPS/SPS reefs that work better low nutrient with steady parameters than the converse (myself included in this category). I'm not saying your methods don't work, and I'm not saying that it's out of line to suggest them. What I do assert is that to steer every new member in the direction of skimmerless DSBs with no automation whatsoever is a path to failure for all but the most experienced hobbyists who are capable of troubleshooting and maintaining a complex biological filtration system. If the end goal is to have low nutrient with even a moderate component of SPS, i feel that a skimmer is the best path to achieve low nutrients and stability. That being said, the OP is asking for skimmer recommendations, not why skimmers suck and DSBs are preferable.

With respect to steering people down to "it's out of line" to steer people " to high nutriant biothemes" I ask you, why can you justify that your opinion is more justified than my opinion. I hear the hi-tech logic. I also hear your strength in conviction in everybody else is doing it. One does not need to intimately know the names of complex bacteria to use them. Only to provide the conditions that they require to perform, this is not rocket science. As I see it, because you are of superior intellect, you no longer have a need to know something that you did not consider important from your education and experience. The world around you has more truth than your experience and education. I consider that "arrogance of youth".

We will agree to disagree.

La bonne temps roulee,

Patrick

Right, so you can ad hominem by calling me arrogant and then take the high road by agreeing to disagree. The reality is that just because I am not old enough to draw social security does not mean that I don't have world experience. You have no idea who I am, where I've been or what I've accomplished.

The title of the thread is "what skimmer should I get", not why should I use a DSB.

[(Bio)³]

Actually title of the thread is "starting out- Need skimmer recommendations." and from the outside view it looks like patrick and tim chose "no skimmer" as their recommendation, and backed it up with available options. You chose "skimmer" and backed it up with what you experience.

/advocate off

[victoly]

no skimmer isn't a type of skimmer just like bald isn't a hair color.

[+Mcjudge]

I have an older euroreef/ (reef dynamics now) skimmer that I have been using for over a year. The guy who runs that shop seems wicked smart and supports his stuff with alot of upgrades and options. I also really like how he rates his skimmers based on what you are planning to have in your tank. If you are interested as well, LA fish guy interviewed him on youtube in like a 4 part series where you can really get to know the intimate details about skimming.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXuEebGU9zA

I have no experience with any other skimmers or not running one but I have good results. It worked for me!

[(Bio)³]

no skimmer isn't a type of skimmer just like bald isn't a hair color.

Your right it is not a type of skimmer, but back to the OP they state "What would you recommend?" And their recommendations are no skimmer.

Not gonna argue hair styles or colors because it doesn't pertain to the topic at hand.

*just being an advocate, I have a skimmer on both systems... one does better than the other. The Tunze being the weaker of the two.*

[victoly]

no skimmer isn't a type of skimmer just like bald isn't a hair color.

Your right it is not a type of skimmer, but back to the OP they state "What would you recommend?" And their recommendations are no skimmer.

Not gonna argue hair styles or colors because it doesn't pertain to the topic at hand.

*just being an advocate, I have a skimmer on both systems... one does better than the other. The Tunze being the weaker of the two.*

patrick seems to be doing just fine advocating for himself. I'm confused as to why he needs help, especially from someone who runs a different type of system than the person he's "advocating" for?

[subsea]

In the spirit of playing nice, Bio3 is my new business partner and sales manager for Combination Live Rock. The reason that I advocate high nutrient systems is because they work and it is what CCR is all about. Of course, I will discuss/argue the merits of high nutrient systems. In the spirit of truth, justice and the American way, I will concede that the use of foam fractionization has less inherent risk then DSB methods.

Patrick

[(Bio)³]

no skimmer isn't a type of skimmer just like bald isn't a hair color.

Your right it is not a type of skimmer, but back to the OP they state "What would you recommend?" And their recommendations are no skimmer.

Not gonna argue hair styles or colors because it doesn't pertain to the topic at hand.

*just being an advocate, I have a skimmer on both systems... one does better than the other. The Tunze being the weaker of the two.*

patrick seems to be doing just fine advocating for himself. I'm confused as to why he needs help, especially from someone who runs a different type of system than the person he's "advocating" for?

I'm pointing out the flawed logic and trying to drag it back to the OP. It asked for recommendations, several people gave them. Some agreed some disagreed. I am in no means advocating for patrick. I agree he can do that on his own.

But when I see someone refrence back to the OP and skew it to it their interpretation I point it out.

And I used to have three tanks running until 3 weeks ago... the one that I collapsed down had no skimmer and was run in high nutrient fashion. Like you said, "what I've accomplished" I've ran the system, and enjoyed it just because I don't have it running now doesn't mean I have to snob it down.

To each their own system and reef. I on the other hand will be shutting down skimmers and activating my Jenkem reactors, go big or go home!