Skimmer Q&A Thread

mojo · 02-07-2010, 12:52 AM

I think you should go remeasure the neck size on your NAC 7. I didnt think it was 4 inches so I grabbed my calipers and double checked the ID of the neck. IT actually measures 3.1855" Not 4 inches. THis does match up with the 580 to 600 lph of air that it is pulling.
The ATB 840 has approx a 3.5 inch neck and pulls around 700 lph with the small wheel and 850 to 900 lph with the large. I run the small wheel on it and it is probably one of the best balanced skimmers on the market.

Not trying to rain on the SWC 160 you sell. I think it will be a great skimmer. Just trying to make sure I give the best un biased opinion I can give. Give actual measurements and make my recommendations accordingly. The NAC7 is not the best built skimmer. But at the price point it does skim well and I have no issues. The hybrid pinwheel meshwheel produces a nice small bubble in the reaction area. I actually got a second pinwheel with mine as a spare.

The Swc 120 I bought from you works well and if the 160 is built the same I am sure it will be a bit nicer build than that of the NAC 7. But using the same pump with similar performance I am not sure how much more skimmate it will actually produce than the NAC 7. The nicer build will be nice and the added air draw is nice. But if the wattage is higher chances are you are pulling in a little more water as well. which in my eyes means 2 things. It will handle a slightly larger tank of the NAC 7. but will also have the same air to water ratio as the nac 7.

Just my two cents. But you might want to re measure your NAC 7. either that or ours have different size necks and collection cups.

mojo · 02-07-2010, 12:56 AM

I had to pull my meter and measuring tools at 1 in the morning. Your making my hair turn grey here luke. I need my beauty sleep. lol

Hammmerhead · 02-07-2010, 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mojo

Well the 160 isnt here yet mainly . It actually pulls the same air as the NAC7 . Same pump. They are both cheaper China skimmers but they both work well. I do like the design of the 160 a little better and should be out soon. I was giving them a buy now option the NAC 6 is actually a pretty good $150 option. I also had the vertex as a option. The NAC 7 was only one option of the ones given.
I actually own a SWC 120 and it has a slight step in the neck. Bigger than the NAC 7.But the 160 shouldnt have one on the production models. The 120 should be reduced as well.

My bad. I didnt pick up on you saying the NAC 7 was the best option for him available right now. I assumed you were actually picking the NAC 7 over the SWC cone. I was trying to realize advantages you were seeing that the NAC possibly had over the new SWC...which really had me reaching for conclusions......

mojo · 02-07-2010, 10:46 AM

No problem. ITs hard to take the context of how things are meant online. I am pretty un biased and try to make sure I take everything into account before giving my opinion ect.

As far as a bigger bubble plate making a difference and thinking it reduces turbulence. I tried the CS 200 and it has had the biggest bubble plate of any skimmer I have used and it was more turbulent than my cone skimmer I buit with a 4 in bubble plate. Its not just in diameter. It has mor to do with the diesign as well. If the plate is too big the water velocity that has to go past the plate is increased and you have to be careful that you dont get micro bubbles from it. I have no doubt the 160 is fine. I have talked to luke about it actually, and have respect for his opinion. I have no doubt it will be a nice budget skimmer. The 120 will be nice as there really isnt a smaller skimmer with its foot print that will work well for its range of tanks.

luke33 · 02-07-2010, 01:06 PM

Maybe we have different generations man. The one i had was 4" right above the red neck taper. It was bought off fish street in person over in china though, so who knows : ) There was just a large difference between the nac7 and 160 cone when i ran them both. The smaller neck made the foam collect better and push over the neck better. The nac7 reminded me of a bk mini gen 1 as a oversized neck and not enough air. But both would skim.

luke33 · 02-07-2010, 01:12 PM

Here check this out Jesse. You can see the diff in neck diameter between the 160 and nac7. Maybe you have a different version. The transition on the nac7 went from 6" to 4" so it was very little of a cone.

mojo · 02-07-2010, 05:23 PM

I got the one that is being sold here in the US. The inside is just over 3" and I ll have to double check the od. Mine seems to be working really well . I ll take a picture of mine with the calipers here later on tonight.
Sorry super bowl goodies cooking now.

luke33 · 02-07-2010, 10:44 PM

Darn colts! Oh well. I guess NO was a good opponent. And Brees seems to be a good guy. Well deserving.

Look forward to that pic, i'm curious if yours is going to look similar. All of the nac7's i've seen look more like a cylinder all the way up, not so much a cone.

Dr.Olmuls · 02-09-2010, 01:52 AM

Mojo, I have read this thread and I am confused. I have a 90 gallon tank with a decent load and i want a new skimmer I am running an ASM G3 skimmer. I am looking at the Bm just because of funds. What do hyou recommend? Thinking that you can give me a good opinon due to your vast skimmer experience. What do you think for me in that price range?

mojo · 02-09-2010, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr.Olmuls

Mojo, I have read this thread and I am confused. I have a 90 gallon tank with a decent load and i want a new skimmer I am running an ASM G3 skimmer. I am looking at the Bm just because of funds. What do hyou recommend? Thinking that you can give me a good opinon due to your vast skimmer experience. What do you think for me in that price range?

The BM is good choice. Runs well and is a budget skimmer. For a 90g I really like the vertex in 180. TH water and air daw work well for a 90g tank.

The BM NAC 7 and the swc 160 are both good choices as well. They have a smaller footprint than the vertex in 180. But that would probably still be me top choice for the 90 on a budget. If you end up with some extra cash the ATB 840 is a nice choice as well.

jimzin15754 · 02-11-2010, 10:29 PM

I am brand new to this forum. But do you think the swc extreme 160 w/sicce is a good choice or wait till the 160 cone is available? sicce is a better pump right? For 15 bucks the price is irrelavent. I dont have room for the IN180. Definately trying to stay under the 300 mark.

mojo · 02-12-2010, 12:02 AM

The sicce has its own issues. I would get the swc 160 cone over the msx 160.

madrussian79 · 02-14-2010, 02:41 PM

Hey Mojo -

I just got an Aqua C Remora (hang on w/maxi jet 1200) about 4 days ago. The guide it came with is pretty vague....so let me ask you since this is my first skimmer - how often should I run it?

Right now, I leave it on nonstop, and while I do get some gunk, the collection cup is mainly filling up with pretty clear water. Then foam is escaping thru the small vent hole on top of it, which is splashing all over my wall and my lights. I know that can't be normal....is any of this because it is in what the guide mentions is a "break in period"??

Any help would be appreciated - thanks!

troylee · 02-14-2010, 03:28 PM

It does need to break in for like a week and get a slime coat inside the walls of the skimmer body... As for time running it should run 24/7 there is no reason to turn it off...
And if your getting clear skimate you need to lower the water level which is gonna be real finiky during the break in but after a few days it should be alot easier to dial in...

mojo · 02-14-2010, 05:03 PM

yea just lower the water level in the skimmer and let it run like that for a t least a couple days with your aquaC. Then slowly start raising it up