is b.b. a passing fad ? a.k.a. the things you wanted to know ,but were afraid to ask

[SPC]

Originally Posted by Flatlander

I,m running a couple of 500gph power filters, Tunze 6080 stream @ 2200gph & an internal 750gph pump. Very turbulent. I would say its at the limit for soft corals and that still cant keep the crap from the rubble.

Hi Doug, I hear ya, I've been working on this for a couple of weeks now (probably have removed a good 40% of the L/R). It was so much easier in the old days with the "natural" method .
Steve

[Flatlander]

Hi Steve.

I went in up to my armpits yesterday and removed most of the rubble. Bottom is much cleaner already. I did place the rock, so that the current could keep it fairly clean.

I did leave lots of old snail shells there for future crab homes. I was interested in seeing you still keep blue legs in another post, as I planned on adding a bunch of them and some scarlets.

Just seems like a better crew for a bare, higher current system? I no longer have any faith in snails for cleaning much of anything.

[gwaco]

doug actually the opposite is what i have found . the snails do a much better job of algae control . much safer than hermits . remember the idea is to get as much detritus out , so there really isn't any need for hermits .

[SPC]

[quote=Flatlander;953870]I was interested in seeing you still keep blue legs in another post, as I planned on adding a bunch of them and some scarlets.

I only keep the mini blue legs that I get from Keys Critters, these guy's only get about 1/2" long and will clean a rock of with algae in short order. They seem to me to be more herbivore than the larger blue legs.

Just seems like a better crew for a bare, higher current system? I no longer have any faith in snails for cleaning much of anything.

IME the only snail that I have seen make a real difference is the Mexican Turbos. They are long lived and their size seems to help with removing larger vegetation from rocks. I also keep Astreas (don't do a whole lot IME) and Ceriths (help to break down detritus a bit but the ones I catch around here lay alot of eggs. They are also a pain in the ... when siphoning the tank because I like to use a smaller hose and a 5 gallon bucket every 4 or 5 days).
Steve

[crvz]

Spanky, et al...

I don't want to ask for a magic formula, but I was reading through this thread and was curious on what, in your experiences, is a good ratio for tank water turnover in a sump as well as water turnover in a skimmer?

I ask this as I'm planning an upgrade, and on my 150 gallon tank I expect to have about 1000 gph turnover through the 2 overflows. With that, I intend to run a needlewheel designed skimmer (which I already own) which should process around the same volume of water. Am I headed in the wrong direction, or should this be enough to support a barebottom tank?

[Flatlander]

Originally Posted by gwaco

doug actually the opposite is what i have found . the snails do a much better job of algae control . much safer than hermits . remember the idea is to get as much detritus out , so there really isn't any need for hermits .

In 16 yrs. of keeping reef aquariums, I myself have yet to see any snails worth their cost for algae cleaning purpose. All thats ever helped me, besides some of the crabs, has been a foxface & some of the urchins.

I wish snails would do what they are purchased for. I will check out the Mexican turbo,s. I also find the astrea pretty much useless and most of the standard turbo,s we get here.

[REEF-DADDY]

Originally Posted by crvz

Spanky, et al...

I don't want to ask for a magic formula, but I was reading through this thread and was curious on what, in your experiences, is a good ratio for tank water turnover in a sump as well as water turnover in a skimmer?

I ask this as I'm planning an upgrade, and on my 150 gallon tank I expect to have about 1000 gph turnover through the 2 overflows. With that, I intend to run a needlewheel designed skimmer (which I already own) which should process around the same volume of water. Am I headed in the wrong direction, or should this be enough to support a barebottom tank?

You've got plenty of sump turnover. Now can you get the paticles to the overflow?

[crvz]

Originally Posted by REEF-DADDY

You've got plenty of sump turnover. Now can you get the paticles to the overflow?

Uhh, we'll have to figure that out together. My intent is to have the two returns pointed toward the bottom back corners of the tank and then have the 2 tunze 6100's positioned in the back middle of the sides, angled slightly up and to the front. My hope is that most particulate will be directed towards the overflows, and then anything up front will be siphoned during weekly water changes (assuming there are some collection points). Rock will be minimal to aid in the flow patterns.

With closed loop out of the question, are there other options to consider? Does anyone have success or opinions with this minimalist approach?

[REEF-DADDY]

I think your close. The 2 6100's should be plenty and should sweep up most of the particulate, and pile up the rest. You'll find yourself tweaking it for a few months and the tank producing less and less particulate as it matures.

[Esper]

Originally Posted by Flatlander

In 16 yrs. of keeping reef aquariums, I myself have yet to see any snails worth their cost for algae cleaning purpose. All thats ever helped me, besides some of the crabs, has been a foxface & some of the urchins.

I wish snails would do what they are purchased for. I will check out the Mexican turbo,s. I also find the astrea pretty much useless and most of the standard turbo,s we get here.

I mostly agree with you! The exceptions have been some cerith snails that cleaned the diatoms off my starboard and a conch/slug thing that my gf picked up from the beach. it's about 3 inches long and completely wiped out the nice lawn of hair algae in my 40g in about 2 days.