48 x 25 x 21 or 60 x 25 x 16 for fish

[softiesplease]

48 x 25 x 21 or 60 x 25 x 16

What’s better for more fish options? Clearly shallow is easier to clean, Not worried about any height pro/con on the coral side. I was going to go with the 48 x 25 x 21 but I would consider the longer shallower option if it allows me a significant difference in stocking options.

Specifically between Waterbox Infinia 150.4 Reef and Frag 155.5

 

[i cant think]

48 x 25 x 21 or 60 x 25 x 16

What’s better for more fish options? Clearly shallow is easier to clean, Not worried about any height pro/con on the coral side. I was going to go with the 48 x 25 x 21 but I would consider the longer shallower option if it allows me a significant difference in stocking options.

Specifically between Waterbox Infinia 150.4 Reef and Frag 155.5

They’ll allow for the same number of fish but different species of fish.
One will allow more tang and angel options and the other will allow for butterfly and bannerfish options.

Give us an idea of your potential stock list and then we can give better advice to which tank is more suitable.

 

[Big E]

I don't like either of those dimensions. I would check other companies and go with something like 60x24x24 which is a standard 150. A 60x24x20 would be really nice.

Check out SCA or Planet Aquariums

16" is too low.......you're looking at a water level of about 14"

Depending on the type of fish your putting into it I'd opt for the 48x25x21 if I had to pick one
of your options.

 

[softiesplease]

Well in the 4 foot long tank it was my understanding no tangs long term, no large angels as well. So I was thinking a smaller butterfly and a dwarf angel, fairy, flasher wrasse. Would the 5 foot long option allow any species of tang or large angel at some point at that height? I would think probably not

 

[softiesplease]

SCA seems like good prices, I really don’t want to have to do the plumbing though which is why waterbox (and redsea per my last thread) was appealing. As well as planet but I’d have to get it from WWC in Orlando over an hour away

 

[i cant think]

Well in the 4 foot long tank it was my understanding no tangs long term, no large angels as well. So I was thinking a smaller butterfly and a dwarf angel, fairy, flasher wrasse. Would the 5 foot long option allow any species of tang or large angel at some point at that height? I would think probably not

It possibly could allow for “large” angels.
Both can hold certain species of tang and “large” angel but it depends. I had a Regal Angel and Majestic in my 4’ tank, my 5’ has a Majestic as I decided to allow my male to get paired to a female we have at the LFS.

Fairies and flashers want height so the 4 foot would be ideal for them. The butterflies are what I call “box” fish as they grow the same height as they do length.

Also, the shallow depth is great for growing certain species of coral like SPS, you can get more flow over them IME. I grew SPS incredibly fast in my nano when it was SPS dominant.
Getting the flow over the corals was what I found to be key as at night they would feed really easily.

 

[i cant think]

SCA seems like good prices, I really don’t want to have to do the plumbing though which is why waterbox (and redsea per my last thread) was appealing. As well as planet but I’d have to get it from WWC in Orlando over an hour away

I personally love my Red Sea system.
The overall look of the system is clean. I went with the S-700 G2 as they have bracing basically everywhere except the back at the top of the tank.

 

[softiesplease]

I personally love my Red Sea system.
The overall look of the system is clean. I went with the S-700 G2 as they have bracing basically everywhere except the back at the top of the tank.

The S models are all too big I think for this current tank but its definitely in consideration when I go for a tank even larger than this one

 

[i cant think]

The S models are all too big I think for this current tank but its definitely in consideration when I go for a tank even larger than this one

That one is 60”x27”x26””, it’ll give the height and width.

 

[softiesplease]

It possibly could allow for “large” angels.
Both can hold certain species of tang and “large” angel but it depends. I had a Regal Angel and Majestic in my 4’ tank, my 5’ has a Majestic as I decided to allow my male to get paired to a female we have at the LFS.

Fairies and flashers want height so the 4 foot would be ideal for them. The butterflies are what I call “box” fish as they grow the same height as they do length.

Also, the shallow depth is great for growing certain species of coral like SPS, you can get more flow over them IME. I grew SPS incredibly fast in my nano when it was SPS dominant.
Getting the flow over the corals was what I found to be key as at night they would feed really easily.

Great information about the shallow depth helping SPS growth, for now though this tank definitely will not be growing SPS.

I would absolutely love to keep a regal angelfish, I saw it was borderline in a 4 foot tank helped by its slower growth rate and smaller max size compared to other large angels. I love the majestic as well but the regal is one of my favorite fish out of them all (along with emperor and gold flakes but both seem to need much bigger sizes and I am saving them for a bigger tank down the road). If the 48 x 25 x 21 could house either of these angels I think that would seal the deal for me between these dimensions, may it be for an Infinia 150.4 reef or a planet aquariums 48 x 24 or something else

 

[slingfox]

RedSea 525 G2 is 59"L x 23.6"W x 22"H. 143 gallon total system volume with 112g display and 31g sump. So far it's doing well for me!

 

[slingfox]

Great information about the shallow depth helping SPS growth, for now though this tank definitely will not be growing SPS.

I would absolutely love to keep a regal angelfish, I saw it was borderline in a 4 foot tank helped by its slower growth rate and smaller max size compared to other large angels. I love the majestic as well but the regal is one of my favorite fish out of them all (along with emperor and gold flakes but both seem to need much bigger sizes and I am saving them for a bigger tank down the road). If the 48 x 25 x 21 could house either of these angels I think that would seal the deal for me between these dimensions, may it be for an Infinia 150.4 reef or a planet aquariums 48 x 24 or something else

Primary reason I would go with a low height tank is to grow SPS. If focusing on fish and less light and flow intensive coral then a standard height tank may be better.

 

[softiesplease]

RedSea 525 G2 is 59"L x 23.6"W x 22"H. 143 gallon total system volume with 112g display and 31g sump. So far it's doing well for me!

Definitely an ideal footprint if I can squeeze a full height 5 ft, it does feel like 4 ft is the ideal limit for this particular room though

 

[softiesplease]

It possibly could allow for “large” angels.
Both can hold certain species of tang and “large” angel but it depends. I had a Regal Angel and Majestic in my 4’ tank, my 5’ has a Majestic as I decided to allow my male to get paired to a female we have at the LFS.

Would you still do a butterfly and a dwarf angel in a 48x25x21 if I wanted to add a regal when the tank is mature enough for it?

 

[softiesplease]

It possibly could allow for “large” angels.
Both can hold certain species of tang and “large” angel but it depends. I had a Regal Angel and Majestic in my 4’ tank, my 5’ has a Majestic as I decided to allow my male to get paired to a female we have at the LFS.

Would the shallower 5 ft be better than the taller 4 ft for a regal angel? And not many other options besides a majestic, a goldflake would get too big for either right?

 

[littlefoxx]

Well in the 4 foot long tank it was my understanding no tangs long term, no large angels as well. So I was thinking a smaller butterfly and a dwarf angel, fairy, flasher wrasse. Would the 5 foot long option allow any species of tang or large angel at some point at that height? I would think probably not

Large like emperor, queen, french ect angels no. But tangels like the girdled and regal yeah! And a smaller tang (tomini) might be okay, depends on how much room for them to swim in the open water column and through structures

 

[softiesplease]

Large like emperor, queen, french ect angels no. But tangels like the girdled and regal yeah! And a smaller tang (tomini) might be okay, depends on how much room for them to swim in the open water column and through structures

I’m ok waiting on any tang for a bigger tank. The only two species I’d be dying to have are yellow and hippo, which won’t fit here at all. But I’d love to grow out a girdled or regal angel even if I have to upgrade or rehome it. I think I’m going to make a new thread for stocking that 4 ft dimension and see if I like the options or if I want to go for a longer tank

 

[KrisReef]

I’m ok waiting on any tang for a bigger tank. The only two species I’d be dying to have are yellow and hippo, which won’t fit here at all. But I’d love to grow out a girdled or regal angel even if I have to upgrade or rehome it. I think I’m going to make a new thread for stocking that 4 ft dimension and see if I like the options or if I want to go for a longer tank

I have been working on this general idea for a while and I think it’s probably helpful for tank commanders to consider what conditions they might prefer if they were a fish going into a tiny tank.

Four or Five are both very tiny compared to an average oceanic settlement spot for marine fishes.

Going into a fish tank is like going on a bus, train, or sporting event with seats where you have to sit with many other passengers some who don’t regularly bathe or use paper to wipe as a customary action.

If we put our minds towards our fish habitat with these kinds of practical considerations we may not crowd out the space like we do with our common “I want to have/love/observe this fish” approach.

Not putting this out for just the OP’s sake as it applies to me first and then the rest of us, as a concept to inspect our animal confinement.

Chinchilla habitat, with running room but no running water.

 

[softiesplease]

I have been working on this general idea for a while and I think it’s probably helpful for tank commanders to consider what conditions they might prefer if they were a fish going into a tiny tank.

Four or Five are both very tiny compared to an average oceanic settlement spot for marine fishes.

Going into a fish tank is like going on a bus, train, or sporting event with seats where you have to sit with many other passengers some who don’t regularly bathe or use paper to wipe as a customary action.

If we put our minds towards our fish habitat with these kinds of practical considerations we may not crowd out the space like we do with our common “I want to have/love/observe this fish” approach.

Not putting this out for just the OP’s sake as it applies to me first and then the rest of us, as a concept to inspect our animal confinement.

Chinchilla habitat, with running room but no running water.

You’re right, that’s why I’d like to get an idea on the fish before I decide on the tank, so I can either get a tank ok for them or wait for the next bigger tank down the road.

 

[KrisReef]

You’re right, that’s why I’d like to get an idea on the fish before I decide on the tank, so I can either get a tank ok for them or wait for the next bigger tank down the road.

That is an easier thing to answer, get the bigger one, only do it now!