Skimmer Q&A Thread

[madrussian79]

Aqua C Remora

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? :ooh:

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]

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]

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

 

[vbsaltydog]

Need a quick reply. I have an ATI Bubble Master 160 on my 54g corner bowfront that I have just sold because even though it skims well, the build quality is cheap and I have had nothing but problems with the sicce pump.

Also, I do get skimmate but it is not really from the froth overflowing into the cup but rather from spit collecting on the cup lid and then dripping back down into the cup. After reading this thread I am thinking this is because the skimmer is too efficient for my bioload because it does froth properly for a few hours if it has been off for a few days but then back to spitting at the cup lid.

I am looking at the SWC cone. I just spoke to Luke at Reef Filtration and he said that the 160 cone will be better than the 120 and the 160 has a 3" neck vs. the 4" neck of the ATI.

I have not seen any comparisons of the SWC 160 cone vs. the ATI Bubble Master 160. Did I make a good choice selling the ATI BM 160 and getting the SWC 160 Cone?

Thank you

 

[mojo]

THe 160 i think is a bit on the large side for your 54 gallon. But it will work well. I have the NAC 7 on the 57g and it skims pretty well but I think my tank is on the small side for it. You will be ok. I would of went with the vertex in 100 most likely or the Bubble magus NAC 6. I assume you were looking for something on a budget so those are the two I would of went with first. $199 for the vertex and $150 for the NAC 6. THe skimmer you bought will work fine but I would think it would best from 65 to 100 gallons.

And you know the more I think about it the 160 will probably be fine. As I play with the atman pump more and more. Its not a bad pump for as cheap as it is. But they do not move alot of water. About the same as a sicce as far as water draw maybe a tad less.

The sicce pulls the air of a larger pump you would see on skimmers for larger tanks but I would never run a sicce pump skimmer on a tank larger than a 125.

Most people go by system volume which is good. But what is your load. is your display 125g with a 40 gallon sump
you figure by the time you add the rock and stuff to the tank you are back to 125. your sump is usually only half full too. So just some food for thought.
Sorry for rambling....

Have a great day.
Mojo~

 

[vbsaltydog]

Thanks for the reply. I did not send the payment yet for the SWC 160 Cone so I can still buy whatever. I am trying to stay below $250.00 and get the same performance, or better, of my ATI BM 160 but with better build and no startup issues.

Given the info above and my tank being 54g display, 10g sump, 60lbs LR, a few hundred zoos, and about 50 sps frags, ....

what would you get and why?

It is truly appreciated.

 

[Troylee]

Vertex in100 is a nice skimmer...

 

[mojo]

For a 54g I would probably go vertex in 100, bubble magus NAC6 both under 200.

the SWC 160 will be a nice skimmer as well. Just a few bucks more. I think it will work well But I am not sure how much more you will actually skim for the $$ spent.

 

[vbsaltydog]

I only have a 10g sump due to the stand geometry of the corner bowfront so small footprint is essential I also plan to stock heavier in this tank. For these reasons, I think the vertex is too large of a footprint and the NA6 does not allow for use in a heavier stocked tank or even a larger tank if I decide to go larger so if the performance is about the same on all of them, I will go with the SWC Cone 160.

Small footprint, easy access to cleaning of entire body, easy disassembly, one piece acrylic casting, large enough to support a 120g if I decide to go larger, etc.

Seem like a good way to go given the footprint restrictions and possible tank upsize in the future vs the vertex (size) and NA6 (cant support larger tank) ?

My only concern is... Will the 160 Cone have a small enough neck to create a proper head given my 54g and medium bioload? If not, will heavier stocking of the 54g correct the insufficient dissolved organics?

I apologize for all of the questions but I have had several skimmers, Tunze 9002, ATI BM 160 among others and I want the best possible skimmer for my application at sub $250.00 and the SWC Cone 160 seems to be a good fit for a 54g or (possible 120g), build quality, small footprint, efficiency, no startup issues, quiet operation.

Thanks again as this is an important decision.

 

[mojo]

I only have a 10g sump due to the stand geometry of the corner bowfront so small footprint is essential I also plan to stock heavier in this tank. For these reasons, I think the vertex is too large of a footprint and the NA6 does not allow for use in a heavier stocked tank or even a larger tank if I decide to go larger so if the performance is about the same on all of them, I will go with the SWC Cone 160.

Small footprint, easy access to cleaning of entire body, easy disassembly, one piece acrylic casting, large enough to support a 120g if I decide to go larger, etc.

Seem like a good way to go given the footprint restrictions and possible tank upsize in the future vs the vertex (size) and NA6 (cant support larger tank) ?

My only concern is... Will the 160 Cone have a small enough neck to create a proper head given my 54g and medium bioload? If not, will heavier stocking of the 54g correct the insufficient dissolved organics?

I apologize for all of the questions but I have had several skimmers, Tunze 9002, ATI BM 160 among others and I want the best possible skimmer for my application at sub $250.00 and the SWC Cone 160 seems to be a good fit for a 54g or (possible 120g), build quality, small footprint, efficiency, no startup issues, quiet operation.

Thanks again as this is an important decision.

The NAC6 and the swc 160 use the same exact pump. The SWC is not going to process anymore water than the NAC 6 really. But it is a good skimmer never less. I just want you to know what you are buying. The SWC isnt going to allow you to go up on tank anymore than the NAC6.

They both use the ATMAN 2500 pump. Yes the venturi and inletris a little different but not enough to allow you to run it on per say a tank with 50 to 100 gallons of more system volume.

Good luck to you with your purchase. Just remember I do not sell skimmers and make nothing off my advice. Just trying to give you all the information I can to make a educated choice.

Mojo~

 

[vbsaltydog]

Given that I am down to 2 skimmers and they are both affordable to me, can you detail any reasons why YOU would get one over the other? Other than the price difference.

I would rather pay a little more if one is built a little better or is a little lower on energy bills, or skims a little dryer without building up in the reaction chamber.

Your unbiased opinion is valued.

 

[luke33]

The NAC6 and the swc 160 use the same exact pump. The SWC is not going to process anymore water than the NAC 6 really. But it is a good skimmer never less. I just want you to know what you are buying. The SWC isnt going to allow you to go up on tank anymore than the NAC6.

They both use the ATMAN 2500 pump. Yes the venturi and inletris a little different but not enough to allow you to run it on per say a tank with 50 to 100 gallons of more system volume.

Good luck to you with your purchase. Just remember I do not sell skimmers and make nothing off my advice. Just trying to give you all the information I can to make a educated choice.

Mojo~

They use the same pump yes but the swc pulls 100lph more air than the nac6 and is a much better transition being a cone. They are not going to be rated the same due to these two factors. Not trying to argue but this is a fact.

 

[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?

Do you have a suggestion? really looking forward to your responce. Want to order one right away.

 

[Troylee]

The only real advantage I see in swc is less head pressure which in terms is more efficant those tubes skimmers can work just as well as a cone if the pump is well matched... It's all about balance....

 

[Dr.Olmuls]

Mojo can you tell me the about the build quality difference between the SWC and the BM. the SWC is getting really good reviews but has only been around for a short time. I am also curious about the neck size on the BM nac 7. looking forward to hearing from you

 

[Dr.Olmuls]

The only real advantage I see in swc is less head pressure which in terms is more efficant those tubes skimmers can work just as well as a cone if the pump is well matched... It's all about balance....

so are you saying that the SWC will have an advantage over a BM? Due to the cone shape? is the cone shape of the SWC better than the BM? Thank you in advance

 

[luke33]

I'm all for different opinions but here's my thoughts on what i've read in the last few posts. What i've read is a cone skimmer vs a cylinder skimmer there is no advantage. So all the new cone skimmers coming out and out are all just a trend. For example since the sicce skimmer is so popular lets compare. So a cylinder skimmer using a sicce pump pulling 900lph that is designed well is going to handle the same size of tank as a similar cone like the new version 1.5 atb with the sicce pump, or H2 by WM or swc 180 cone? So the cylinder askoll skimmer pulling 70scfh are going to perform the same as a 70scfh cone like the atb you are running? I guess i just don't agree that a cone is going to perform the same as a cylinder. Yes there is less head pressure which allows more air to be injected but there is so much more going on there. If this were true all the manufacturer's are doing it wrong.

 

[Dr.Olmuls]

Luke, you seem to know what you are talking about when it comes to skimmers. I have seen your posts in this thread. I also see the pictures you posted with the BM and SWC skimmers. looking at the pictures you posted it sure looks like the neck on the BM is larger than the SWC. Are you sure the measurement is correct on the SWC skimmer? If it is them then Bm neck looks to big. Mojo says the neck is 3 inches. I am curious to know which one of you knows how to use a tape measure?. this SWC skimmer is starting to get some great reviews but i am concerend as Mojo keeps recommending the BM. he says that he does not sell skimmers and you sell them. Can you give me an unbiased opinion as to what will be better? thank you for your time.

 

[luke33]

I'm unbiased as i can be but everyone that sells a brand is going to prefer it. But honestly there is no comparison between the two. I don't have the nac7 anymore so i can't measure the neck. I can say the 160 is 3" and you can see the difference in the pics. Its bigger, how much i can tell you for sure. Thats really all i want to comment about that.

I just don't get all the cone vs cylinder talk i've read here recently.

 

[mojo]

I'm all for different opinions but here's my thoughts on what i've read in the last few posts. What i've read is a cone skimmer vs a cylinder skimmer there is no advantage. So all the new cone skimmers coming out and out are all just a trend. For example since the sicce skimmer is so popular lets compare. So a cylinder skimmer using a sicce pump pulling 900lph that is designed well is going to handle the same size of tank as a similar cone like the new version 1.5 atb with the sicce pump, or H2 by WM or swc 180 cone? So the cylinder askoll skimmer pulling 70scfh are going to perform the same as a 70scfh cone like the atb you are running? I guess i just don't agree that a cone is going to perform the same as a cylinder. Yes there is less head pressure which allows more air to be injected but there is so much more going on there. If this were true all the manufacturer's are doing it wrong.

Luke I dont think that is what I said at all. Please re read the post. I said that the NAC 6 and the swc 160 were using the same pump. I said the swc would not be able to handle 50 to 100 gallons more than the NAC 6 just because of design. When a cone body is designed well it does make a small improvement. But one might argue taht the longer reaction time in the cylinder doesnt matter. How about all those euro reefs that are round and no bubble plate. They skim really well.

There is more to the make up of a skimmer than just a cone body. The SWC 120 and 160 are nice little skimmers and are built pretty well for the money. I have told you the same over the phone when we have talked. My other point is that you are selling the SWC 160 and 120 and may be a little bais as well. MAybe not. As I have always had respect for your opinion. But you cant say the same pump pulling the similar #'s is going to work for larger tanks of that big of a difference. Simply not true. That pump is a cheap pump that works well. No issues. But it simply doesnt have a good water turnover rate for tanks upwards of 150g +

Look at Deltec. They came out with there new line..... No Cones ...

Bubble king No cones
The alpha's are a proline product made by royal exclusive.

So just because its a cone doesnt mean it skims better. The ATB is a well balanced skimmer. The WM k2 has some of the best bubble rise of any skimmer I have seen. Second to mine of course....lol. But Again it has to be balanced and the added cost is hard to say if its worth it on all skimmers.

I have owned pushing 40 different skimmers now. I am not just talking theory. I have ran them all. All different makes and models.

Thanks Much, I will not comment further on this one topic. Moving on.

Mojo~