Best Skimmer under $250 for a medium sized tank?

[gcarroll]

So i put together a quick spreadsheet with the suggestions in this thread and a few others, and got some pretty interesting results (Red highlights are the lower 50% of scores for each column, Greens are the upper 50%, cells left white are basically exactly midway for the group. cells grayed out are where i couldn't find data for that particular skimmer.

It helped me break it into 2 groups; skimmers that will fit in either compartment in my sump, and those that will only fit in the larger compartment.

Starting with the skimmers that i could put in the smaller compartment to free the large compartment up for a refugium, the Simplicity 120 seems to just barely edge out the Bubble Magus NAC5.5 due to the 20% higher max air intake. with the eshoppes Z160 being a wildcard as i was not able to find stats on its flow rate.

what this really did for me was highlight how much better the skimmers that fit in the larger compartment only are, which i think has helped be settle on just abandoning the fuge idea and using the large skimmer compartment for what it was intended for. the Reef Octopus 150 seems to be the clear winner in this category, with the Simplicity 240 and Skimz SN143-QP getting honorable mention. the Exhoppes X-160 is a wild card again, as i cnat find their flow rate published anywhere, but they do look well built. even though MSRP is 300 i included them in part because fosters & smith is shipping a $45 gift card out with them right now, so for all intents and purposes that makes it a $250 skimmer in the long run...


does anyone have any more info on the Eshoppes models or experience with them?

Great job on the comparison chart. I wish more would do something like this. I do find it funny how you left out the @Somatic Aquaristik for being too small, despite the fact that it would have had green for costs, body diameter, air intake, height and fits in 9x30. It's overall size is bigger than every single skimmer you included. This is why I say manufacturers rating means absolutely nothing!

 

[EleMental]

I've been running an in sump Eshoppes for about a year now in my 75 gallon. Skims nice, easy to clean and didn't break the bank. I don't have a lot of room down there so I chose it for the slim design. No complaints...so far lol

 

[siggy]

I have a SKIMZ 123 mini Monster adjustable DC pump about 18" tall 5x7" foot print and pulls right out of the box @159. bargain, been running 6 months no problems

 

[gar732]

I've owned quite a few skimmers throughout the years and even made a few legit cone skimmers. For the budget I'd agree on the somatic skimmer. As was mentioned before it's made by vertex and the build quality will be better than all the others on your chart, not to mention it comes with a reliable sicce pump. Compare the specs to the others you have listed. Manufacturer ratings are usually way off and in most cases over rated. This one happens to be under rated imo. It's what I would go with were I in your situation. Another option is searching for a used skimmer, that will open a lot of doors for you.

 

[Dodgersfan]

Great job on the comparison chart. I wish more would do something like this. I do find it funny how you left out the @Somatic Aquaristik for being too small, despite the fact that it would have had green for costs, body diameter, air intake, height and fits in 9x30. It's overall size is bigger than every single skimmer you included. This is why I say manufacturers rating means absolutely nothing!

I'll look at it again, I discarded it because the manufacturer rated it as 80 gallons light bioload or 50 gallons heavy bioload. I'm going to have heavy bioload. Also I see some places saying it is exactly 9" wide, others say it's 9 and change, I'm going to have to measure my sump again to see exactly how much width I have...

 

[Blue Spot Octopus]

https://aquariumsource.com/products/reef-dynamics-in-sump-protein-skimmers , This skimmer.

 

[joec]

https://aquariumsource.com/products/reef-dynamics-in-sump-protein-skimmers , This skimmer.

I'm considering one of these, the INS 80/135 vs Eshopps S120 or X120 for a 75 gallon. My concern with the INS80/135 is that the Sicce pump and impeller are modified and the replacement pumps cost as much as the skimmer. Also, when Aquariumsource stops supporting these, I'm concerned about not being able to easily interface with the stock Sicce or another replacement pump. The Eshopps both use stock Sicce pumps.

What do you think? Please alleviate my concerns if you can?

 

[roberthu526]

I have the 150 INT and it is very good. For a 90G it is more than enough.

 

[Dodgersfan]

https://aquariumsource.com/products/reef-dynamics-in-sump-protein-skimmers , This skimmer.

It looks good, but it doesn't fit my particular sump.

 

[Dodgersfan]

I have the 150 INT and it is very good. For a 90G it is more than enough.

That is currently the one I'm leaning towards.

 

[skim]

Hard to wrong with a 150 Classic. It has be around for a long time and seems to be almost a staple in the industry. It has only gotten better with the newer pumps, the only down fall, if can call it one is it does not come apart so cleaning is a little limited. I have one on the shelf and most likely will always have it. I am running a Vertex 150 now but has taken a long time to fiddle with and find that magic point where it seems to run at peak. The Classic is a plug in and let it do its thing and after break in it does very well. If you look at BRS again you will find that no other skimmer has as many reviews as the Classic 150 and a rating of 4.9, the negative reviews I found was either addressed with the change to the newer pump or I found questionable. A Classic 150 is like one of those cars you may have or had or have heard of that just does its thing without giving one troubles except for regular maintenance.
If you decide to go with the 150 Classic keep it in the 7-8 inch water level. It seems to be the sweet spot.

 

[Blue Spot Octopus]

I'm considering one of these, the INS 80/135 vs Eshopps S120 or X120 for a 75 gallon. My concern with the INS80/135 is that the Sicce pump and impeller are modified and the replacement pumps cost as much as the skimmer. Also, when Aquariumsource stops supporting these, I'm concerned about not being able to easily interface with the stock Sicce or another replacement pump. The Eshopps both use stock Sicce pumps.

What do you think? Please alleviate my concerns if you can?

https://www.googleadservices.com/pa...hUKEwig6p_Kxd3WAhUPw2MKHUsgDxwQ9aACCDk&adurl= The pump seems to be a garden variety Sicce pump and you do not have to buy there version, and they are easy to get parts. the newer impellers have a gray magnet, much better than the ones with the plastic covering.

 

[joec]

https://www.googleadservices.com/pa...hUKEwig6p_Kxd3WAhUPw2MKHUsgDxwQ9aACCDk&adurl= The pump seems to be a garden variety Sicce pump and you do not have to buy there version, and they are easy to get parts. the newer impellers have a gray magnet, much better than the ones with the plastic covering.

Would you reccommend INS80 or INS 135 for fish heavy LPS tank, 75 gallon?

 

[Orm Embar]

I'd also vote for the Somatic S60 - I think that it's highly underrated if you go by flow (GPH water flow) and airflow (LPH). It's a pretty big skimmer.

Having said that - per Advanced Aquarist, all skimmers (appropriately sized) remove around 20-30% dissolved organics, with really high end ones maybe hitting 35%. Quality of pump, features, ease of cleaning, etc then become more relevant.

 

[Water Dog]

If you read the BRS reviews of the Somatic S60, everyone agrees that it could easily handle a 100+ gallon tank.

 

[skim]

I'd also vote for the Somatic S60 - I think that it's highly underrated if you go by flow (GPH water flow) and airflow (LPH). It's a pretty big skimmer.

Having said that - per Advanced Aquarist, all skimmers (appropriately sized) remove around 20-30% dissolved organics, with really high end ones maybe hitting 35%. Quality of pump, features, ease of cleaning, etc then become more relevant.

Yup and the one that pulled the most was a PM Air driven Skimmer. Can you imagine no Beckett , no Needle Wheel, no Veturi, and Titanium Screws, just some wooden blocks and air pump and a small pump/power head to feed water to it. That is totally unacceptable in these modern days, how could this be, a skimmer that I believe is not even made anymore.

 

[Blue Spot Octopus]

You are right in the middle of both ratings,75 on the minimum for a INS135 and the max of a INS 80. I used to use a old Euro Reef CS/80 same as the INS80, I used it on a 55 gallon tank and I used to pour chocolate syrup thick skimmate out of my 55 gallon tank. A INS135 is perfect fit for a 90 gallon tank, you do not include your sump volume in your calculations. The INS135 used to cost 500 dollars and used inferior pumps, better pump and at the half the price. You can melt down a INS135 and make two new style skimmers today.

 

[Blue Spot Octopus]

The skimmer that "skim" recommended the Octopus 150o is a real nice skimmer as well highly rated.
Another great choice a Simplicity skimmer I almost bought one Sat for my 120 tank.

 

[Orm Embar]

Yup and the one that pulled the most was a PM Air driven Skimmer. Can you imagine no Beckett , no Needle Wheel, no Veturi, and Titanium Screws, just some wooden blocks and air pump and a small pump/power head to feed water to it. That is totally unacceptable in these modern days, how could this be, a skimmer that I believe is not even made anymore.

I still remember running a 3" HOB Amiracle skimmer on my first 20 gallon reef over 15 years ago (when the Berlin method was the hottest concept out there and my LFS kept telling me that trickle filters with coil denitrators were the way to go), driven by limewood airstones and a Tetra LuftPump. I'd even read of a mod using ceramic airstones (that didn't need replacing) and filling the underwater portion of the chamber with bioballs so rising bubbles would break apart into smaller ones by hitting them on the way to the surface. It produced nasty, organic rich sludge as good as any other skimmer that I've ever used.

I thought the appeal of needlewheel skimmers was that you only needed to power the pump, and those pumps were much smaller in wattage than the large venture pumps they were trying to replace. At the time, I thought that they were simply better skimmers as well, but now with that study I guess that they all work about the same . . .

 

[MasterAlgaeGrower]

I have to agree on the somatic 60s. I have one on my 75 gallon and it does an amazing job. Only complaint I have is it's not dead silent, but the noise isn't terrible. It took about a week to fully break in, and once it's set it doesn't need to be fiddled with.