Discussion - Bigger tanks are easier for the beginner, True or False?

[Enigma]

I think nanos are easier, personally. In moving from a 10 gallon display to a 40 gallon display (both of which had the same sump), the time I spend doing maintenance has increased dramatically.

[Aquattro]

Originally Posted by Enigma

I think nanos are easier, personally. In moving from a 10 gallon display to a 40 gallon display (both of which had the same sump), the time I spend doing maintenance has increased dramatically.

Not sure that's a universal though. I spend 5 minutes a day during the week, 20 min on Saturdays and 1 hour twice a month for water changes and misc stuff on a 180. Not what I would consider a lot of maintenance.
I imagine if I had a smaller tank, the time wouldn't reduce a lot. Or maybe it would?

[michika]

Bigger tank = bigger mess.

I think smaller is easier once you've got everything dialed in, but they're tricker, more time consuming, to get to that point.

[Enigma]

Originally Posted by Aquattro

Not sure that's a universal though. I spend 5 minutes a day during the week, 20 min on Saturdays and 1 hour twice a month for water changes and misc stuff on a 180. Not what I would consider a lot of maintenance.
I imagine if I had a smaller tank, the time wouldn't reduce a lot. Or maybe it would?

I've gone from five minutes every day, to five minutes a weekday plus an hour+ on weekends (water change, glass scrapping, powerhead cleaning, etc.). That includes all of the time I spend fussing with my ro/di unit and nsw, too.

The system is now very "gadgeted up," however. I spent five hours last weekend just moving the controller and all of the wires, adding two more powerbars, and reprogramming the outlets. I love my toys way too much.

I don't expect to see a big increase in maintenance time when I upgrade to the 120 in the spring, though. All of the equipment will move to the new display, so the water changes will just be bigger.

[fresh]

In my humble opinion and experience, nanos (10+ gals) are easier to setup, maintain, control, and correct if something goes wrong. They require a lot less time and money to do all the above.

Evaporation (what most people think is one of the biggest culprits in parameter-swings) is really not that bad especially if the setup has a top (a cup every few days).

Additionally, along the lines of Enigma's post above, the more "toys" you add to your setup, the more fidgeting you will have to do regardless of the size of the setup The simpler it is kept, the less things you can play with

I truly think the biggest issue that hurts the new/beginner aquarist is not tank size or equipment, it really is husbandry knowledge (or lack of). Also knowledge of how much your tank size can handle and what it can and cannot do based on the included components.

All that said, nanos are also VERY limited in what you can keep in them. Most beginners are after tangs and angels, and have a stock-list that can only be accommodated in a 200+ gal tank!!!

My 2 cents.

[Psyire]

Big and small are relative. People with 300g+ systems consider 180g tanks to be small. My first fish tank of any kind was a 180g reef tank. I did however do months of reading and research before even buying 1 piece of equipment. That is something most people don't have time for or don't want to do as some people just want a fish tank plain and simple. My 180g is no longer running due to a tank failure but I'm in the process of setting up a new 38g Nuvo and a 208g. I've learnt a lot along the way and I don't really think tank size makes anything easier or harder. The interest and diligence of the hobbyist is what will make things hard or easy. That being said, the bigger the tank the more resources it will consume. (ie. Time & Money) For the 'average' person I would have to say 75g-90g is perfect as it's not crazy expensive and you won't continually hear "your tank is too small for that fish".

[ScubaSteve]

I'm of the opinion that the middle range is best (20-60 gallons). Too small and they become tricky due to evap, fluctuations, etc. Above 60 gallons I think they become too complicated and expensive for most beginners. But then again, any well set up system can be easy to manage.

What I think it comes down to, ultimately, is this: In this hobby you get out what you put in. I would rather see someone with a system that they feel they can manage in terms of effort, money and interest than follow some "rule of thumb". A smaller system is easier financially and a person is more likely/able to spend the money to fix a problem. If all the livestock you are interested in needs a 90 gallon, get the 90 because your interest may soon wane and the tank falls into disrepair. In terms of time, small to mid-sized tanks are best until you learn the tricks of what makes a hands-off system. Some people are quick studies in the hobby and could manage any system in a short time and there are some that just don't quite "get it" despite being in the hobby for years.

I think for every person there is a "right" first tank. I think we should either have a questionnaire or some other way of figuring out what tank that is.

[Proteus]

I wish I would have started with a small tank. Although I loved my 180. It was expensive and required more maintence. With the small cube I have now. Its a breeze. No dosing or reactors. A 5 gallon wc every Friday my cal alk mg are at good levels. I only have 2 fish and 45 pieces of coral. Mostly sps

Now I did find that a crash was easier to achieve in a smaller amount of water volume. But in reality. It was my own fault.

Overall. I think smaller is better for new reefers as cost are down. I'm not even sure I would go back to a big tank

[Parker]

From a time and maintenance point of view my 265 requires a lot less of my time than any of my smaller tanks did, 30/75/90 gallon. That being said it was designed that way. In my opinion, to have a large tank you need either A) A fair amount of free time or B) Money, both would be ideal. Free time to do most of your maintenance and daily chores manually, dosing, water changes, top offs etc or money to automate several systems, controllers, top-offs, dosing pumps, reactors, outsource maintenance all together, blah blah blah. Without automation my tank would be a toy box by now. So a tank large or small can be as easy or as hard as you choose it to be.

[Coralgurl]

I started my 55 reef in March 2011 and the 180 in Feb 2012 so only reefing for a year and a half. No prior knowledge of the hobby and we basically jumped in. I found this forum 6 months after we started and relied on the LFS for advice previoulsy. I am not a research guru and as as newb, honestly didn't even know what to look for or where to start.

I can honestly say the 55 is much easier to maintain. It took 9 months for it to really settle into a nice system and has changed a couple of times since setting it up, but all in all, everything is easier. Water changes, dosing, maintenance, everything. Some things are automated with the 180, but mostly its all manual stuff I look after. Mostly, I find it overwhelming. I've dumped thousands of dollars into it and am still waiting for that "ahhhh moment" that I actually like it. I do have regrets with the 180, to the point that I have thought many times of shutting it down and selling off. Its definitely not from lack of effort and time put into it.

For some of you, this hobby is simple or at least you make it seem that way. I wish my upgrade was to a 90-120 gl. Maybe the upgrade from the 55 was too soon. I would never tell someone to go as big as possible, I would say to start below 100 gls. Would be great to find someone who is willing to mentor you, but chances are, its not going to happen.