Marco rocks pros and cons ?
- Thread starter Yanir34
- Start date
- Tagged users None
ShakeyGizzard
Southern Dude
your going to get a lot of folks giving positive and negative posts on this. Dry rock has a lot of positive things going on and some negative. You can design and make your aquascape to what ever you desire, and it will be solid and stable (no falling apart) . a con of dry rock is your cycle will be slightly longer, your ugly stage can be more intense. Along with slightly longer time until stable. With that being said, you also have the ability to control unwanted parasites, algae, and other unwanted wildlife. Live rock just has more biome already on the rock, which aids in the tank cycle and speed to maturity. If you are looking for an exact style and shape aquascape, it will be tough to do with live rock. When you add live rock you also add what ever is on the rock, if you see those posts about "what is this" they used live rock. You can add some of the unwanted parasites, crabs, corals, anemones, algae, etc. that came on the live rock.
DmitryB
Well-Known Member
I initially purchased a lot of LifeRock, then saw Marco's in person and I must say it looks much more realistic than LifeRock. I wish I'd gone with Marco's to supplement my fully live rock.
Project1004
Well-Known Member
I’ve used dry Marco rocks very first time I got into saltwater hobby.
Having Marco rocks for close to 10yrs, I didn’t start with Marco rocks this time around.
My personal opinion of Marco rock are:
-it’s ugly and bulky. It’s hard to aquascape with.
But most concerning to me was that it was so porous. So it takes “forever” for it to be filled with whatever is needed to be filled into those holes and gaps. And it’s not always good stuff that gets trapped in there. Guaranty forever detritus..
So it will take long time for it to get to maturity.
That’s my main reason I went with cribsea rocks that are more natural looking and less porous. I think it was much easier to get it to settle.
I only have old photos I took out from the laptop. -.-;
But the rocks were pretty much stack and be done type.
My old 120.
Having Marco rocks for close to 10yrs, I didn’t start with Marco rocks this time around.
My personal opinion of Marco rock are:
-it’s ugly and bulky. It’s hard to aquascape with.
But most concerning to me was that it was so porous. So it takes “forever” for it to be filled with whatever is needed to be filled into those holes and gaps. And it’s not always good stuff that gets trapped in there. Guaranty forever detritus..
So it will take long time for it to get to maturity.
That’s my main reason I went with cribsea rocks that are more natural looking and less porous. I think it was much easier to get it to settle.
I only have old photos I took out from the laptop. -.-;
But the rocks were pretty much stack and be done type.
My old 120.
ShakeyGizzard
Southern Dude
If you are aiming for a more particular shape or style aquascape, you will need to break the larger dry rock up to be able to make your scape the way you want it. there is no limit to the shape, size or design when using dry rock. My first tank used "live" rock from the LFS. yes, it comes with increased biome levels, but every time you add a frag, snail, crab or a fish, you add to your biome.
Waters
"...in perfect isolation, here behind my wall."
Partner Member 2026
Reef Tank 365
Hospitality Award
Midwest Reefer
Ohio Reefer
My Tank Thread
My Aquarium Showcase
I start all my tanks with marco dry rock.....sometimes seeded with one or two pieces of live rock in the sump. I like the ease of aquascaping and building using the light porous rock.....plus I know what is going in the tank....at least in the beginning lol.
Delta_FoxXII
Community Member
Altho Marco is porous. There are some pros to it also, Light weight vs other rocks, easy to connect one piece to another, and with good flow you shouldn't need to worry about detritus. I think it looks great once aqua scaped.
slingfox
2500 Club Member
Marco rock is porous if you compare it to a boulder laying in your back yard but is far less porous and at least double the density of live rock from the reefs in Australia or Indonesia.
The primary advantage of Marco Rock is it is cheap and very easy to aquascape. You can also scape very artistic structures with live rock but it takes much more patience. You can check out My Tank Thread where I have my tank with 100% Marco rock vs 100% Australian ocean live rock + TBS sand.
If you go with Marco rock for the scape I would highly recommend getting at least some TBS live sand (I used a mix of bagged dry sand plus TBS live sand).
The primary advantage of Marco Rock is it is cheap and very easy to aquascape. You can also scape very artistic structures with live rock but it takes much more patience. You can check out My Tank Thread where I have my tank with 100% Marco rock vs 100% Australian ocean live rock + TBS sand.
If you go with Marco rock for the scape I would highly recommend getting at least some TBS live sand (I used a mix of bagged dry sand plus TBS live sand).
Mid_Reefkeeper
Community Member
Used it for my reef. It’s porous, varied shapes, and easy to work with. I built 2 decently large structures and two small islands with a lot of caves, swim thrus, and negative space over a few weeks.
The benefits are it’s cheap (both by the pound price and because you’re not paying for water weight), has good porosity, easy to aquascape with dry rock, and has no pests.
Cona are it takes a while to color up, limits biodiversity, and will cycle longer and probably with more ugly pests (although I’ve not had anything yet after 8 weeks or so).
I’d recommend either putting in a live rock with it from the LFS and/or using a live sand like oceans direct with it to boost the biodiversity.
The benefits are it’s cheap (both by the pound price and because you’re not paying for water weight), has good porosity, easy to aquascape with dry rock, and has no pests.
Cona are it takes a while to color up, limits biodiversity, and will cycle longer and probably with more ugly pests (although I’ve not had anything yet after 8 weeks or so).
I’d recommend either putting in a live rock with it from the LFS and/or using a live sand like oceans direct with it to boost the biodiversity.
landlubber
Valuable Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2017
- Messages
- 1,800
- Reaction score
- 1,633
When I first got my tank together it was started with Pukani but the struggle was real and I added a bit of rock from an established tank and it happened to be Marco.
I can't really tell them apart so many years later but if you ever have to cut a coral free or even just reduce the size of a rock the difference becomes very evident.... Marco is concrete and is a major pain to cut apart.
At the end of the day both do the job.
I can't really tell them apart so many years later but if you ever have to cut a coral free or even just reduce the size of a rock the difference becomes very evident.... Marco is concrete and is a major pain to cut apart.
At the end of the day both do the job.
RoanokeReef
Valuable Member
Marco is limestone
landlubber
Valuable Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2017
- Messages
- 1,800
- Reaction score
- 1,633
I checked into it an likely got a couple of pieces of aragocrete along with Marco. My mistake
my tank currently has a combination of marco, liferock, TBS live rock, and a few individual pieces of dry rock from nearby LFSes that I'm not sure who made them. the marco rock I have in there comes from a mix of a box of "reef saver" and a box of "the perfect mix" and the liferock was whatever they had at a local petsmart. previous tank was 100% marco rock (all marco reef saver; some of that rock went into the current tank and is still covered in some kind of aggressive algae that I'm still trying to find the right solution for lol)
pros of marco rock:
- inexpensive
- relatively easy to find and buy locally without shipping (though perhaps not quite as conveniently as liferock)
- relatively easy to scape with if you get enough different kinds of pieces
- the holes are great for harboring copepods, amphipods, micro brittle star, etc
- no chance of destructive hitchhikers
cons:
- readily hosts algae that your herbivores won't want to eat, which can easily contribute to dealing with an extended ugly phase
- after 1.5 years I still have seen no signs of coralline* on any of the older marco rock I have
- the holes are also great for harboring aiptasia
- no chance of useful or otherwise interesting hitchhikers
etc:
- I've never personally tried to cut it so have no comments on that. hammer (to break apart) and wet drill with a masonry bit (to add/enlarge holes) both worked fine for me
notes:
* this may not be considered a con by everyone and also could be due to inexperienced me not being able to defeat the other algae covering it so far lol
pros of marco rock:
- inexpensive
- relatively easy to find and buy locally without shipping (though perhaps not quite as conveniently as liferock)
- relatively easy to scape with if you get enough different kinds of pieces
- the holes are great for harboring copepods, amphipods, micro brittle star, etc
- no chance of destructive hitchhikers
cons:
- readily hosts algae that your herbivores won't want to eat, which can easily contribute to dealing with an extended ugly phase
- after 1.5 years I still have seen no signs of coralline* on any of the older marco rock I have
- the holes are also great for harboring aiptasia
- no chance of useful or otherwise interesting hitchhikers
etc:
- I've never personally tried to cut it so have no comments on that. hammer (to break apart) and wet drill with a masonry bit (to add/enlarge holes) both worked fine for me
notes:
* this may not be considered a con by everyone and also could be due to inexperienced me not being able to defeat the other algae covering it so far lol
Similar threads
