Skimmer recomendation needed (1 Viewer)

[Jay-Hawks]

I have a 135 gallon reef tank (or at least I want it to be a reef tank) and I believe that I need to upgrade my skimmer before I start adding more things to the tank. Right now I just have a couple clown fish and not much more so I don't have much of a bio load right now. Currently I'm running a an Aqua C EV-180 and it does ok but I know I can do better.

I have an opportunity to purchase a used PM Redline 225 for $175 or I could get the super reef octopus (rated 180gal) for 400 plus shipping. I'm leaning towards getting the PM because I would save $225 and the fact that the PM225 will be plenty big enough for my system.

I would be curious to hear what others think and if $175 for that skimmer is a good price.

 

[RR-MAN]

I would choose the Reef Octopus. Does it come with a Bubble Blaster pump?

Saving couple of hundred is not much in this hobby. If you can afford it and have the room for it, go with a higher capacity skimmer.

 

[DustinB]

You can get the new reef octopus XS200 for around $300 shipped. I have one on my 90 and it is way overkill.

 

[Slayer311]

I would suggest you use the Octopus line of skimmers as they are currently on the cutting edge of skimmer tech and pm has been lacking in advancements the last couple of years in the skimmer department. Don't get me wrong, pm skimmers aren't "bad" but they are definately not keeping up with the current trends in technology. I would suggest using the sro2000int skimmer as it is closest to the pm225 in comparison and more than adequate for your system especially if you decide to keep the bio load light; and it can be had for $350 from multiple differant vendors. Below are the numbers to show the differance in performance of the 2 skimmers:

sro2000int uses the bubble blaster hy2000 skimmer pump. It produces 1200lph of air at a meager 24w of power consumption.

in comparison, the pm225 uses the rl2000 pump whch produces 720lph of air at 65w of power consumption.

So if you went with the rl225 you would be producing about 3/5ths the air at more than double the ammount of power that the sro2000int. That is pretty big differance.

Also the octopus skimmers now come standard with built in bubble plates which reduce the internal turbulance in the skimmer body thus allowing for more bubbles to dwell longer and produce a more stable head of foam and thus more nasty skimmate. The PM Rl225 does not.

You will also see the sro2000int comes standard with a gate valve were as the pm comes with a wedge pipe, night and day differance when it comes to dialing in your skimmers performance.

And lastly, the sro uses a half cone body, which allows for further stability of the water column inside the skimmer body promoting an even stronger head of foam so your skimmer will poduce much more consistant skimmate.

No, i'm not biased at all

 

[RGH69]

Or, you can buy this from me!!!


http://www.marshreef.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=51543



P.S. If you become a member I will deduct the membership fee from the price.

 

[Chewy]

Take a look at Skimz

I have been very happy with my unit and the price is right for all budgets

 

[Moto456r]

I have to reef octopus space saver version on my 100 and love it.

 

[robbyandkristie]

I have had nothing but good results from two different PM skimmers each on separate systems. I am looking at their new ballistic series for my next adventure.

 

[robbyandkristie]

I would suggest you use the Octopus line of skimmers as they are currently on the cutting edge of skimmer tech and pm has been lacking in advancements the last couple of years in the skimmer department. Don't get me wrong, pm skimmers aren't "bad" but they are definately not keeping up with the current trends in technology. I would suggest using the sro2000int skimmer as it is closest to the pm225 in comparison and more than adequate for your system especially if you decide to keep the bio load light; and it can be had for $350 from multiple differant vendors. Below are the numbers to show the differance in performance of the 2 skimmers:

sro2000int uses the bubble blaster hy2000 skimmer pump. It produces 1200lph of air at a meager 24w of power consumption.

in comparison, the pm225 uses the rl2000 pump whch produces 720lph of air at 65w of power consumption.

If you can provide me with your source on this I would appreciate it. I own two PM Red Line skimmers now and am considering purchasing a new Ballistic model.

So if you went with the rl225 you would be producing about 3/5ths the air at more than double the ammount of power that the sro2000int. That is pretty big differance.

Also the octopus skimmers now come standard with built in bubble plates which reduce the internal turbulance in the skimmer body thus allowing for more bubbles to dwell longer and produce a more stable head of foam and thus more nasty skimmate. The PM Rl225 does not.

You will also see the sro2000int comes standard with a gate valve were as the pm comes with a wedge pipe, night and day differance when it comes to dialing in your skimmers performance.

And lastly, the sro uses a half cone body, which allows for further stability of the water column inside the skimmer body promoting an even stronger head of foam so your skimmer will poduce much more consistant skimmate.

No, i'm not biased at all

If you could please provide me with your source of information I would appreciate it. I own two PM Redline skimmers and am seriously considering purchasing one of their new Ballistic Series units.

 

[Slayer311]

Info

Much of the info has been from countless, and i mean countless!!! hours of research on protein skimmers. Much of the air draw numbers have been released from the manufacturers at some point or time and have been captures for referance here:

http://www.saltycritter.com/protein-skimmers/reef-octopus-pinwheel-nwb-internal-skimmers.htm

The pm redline skimmers rename their pumps the pm rl2000 etc..., in reality they are OTP 1000/2000/3000 pumps slightly modified to fit the pm skimmers. The easiest way to compare is to match up the wattage draw on the pumps, ie pmrl 225 uses the 65w pump ~ to otp3000 pump.

The bubble blaster pumps have been heavily reviewed and drawn similar comparison to the air star aka laguna/red dragon/askoll pumps. They all use extremely similar motor blocks each modified in their own way to suite their own needs, but the bubble blaster is new and unique. Very similar air draw numbers all be it slightly lower but at a MUCH more competitive price point.

The otp pump on the other hand is pretty old technology which draws comparisons to the sicce psk-2500 line of skimmer pumps. They were both good about 5years ago but have since been passed up by newer and better pumps.

Now the ballistic series of skimmers is a totally differant breed of skimmer. You are comparing venturi skimmers (designed for efficiency) to becket injection skimmers(designed for maximum skimming). The becket injection skimmers can produce huge air draw numbers but at a much larger power consumption rating as well. The lowest model of the ballistic series runs at 135w. But when you go to the becket injection type of skimmers you also gain more cleaning requirments as the injectors on the skimmers have to be cleaned periodically to sustain the foam head. If you have never run a becket injection style of skimmer before I would highly suggest you ask opinions from many people whom have and see if they have stuck with them or changed over to venturi skimmers.

The venturi skimmer of the SRO line of skimmers that would most closely fit the same volume of skimming that the low end ballistic series of skimmers is capable of is the SRO 6000s external which runs at 50w on the bubble blaster hy5000 pump. Its air draw is known to be about 90scfh or 2400lph, however I could not tell you what the ballistic becket injection skimmer would run at.

IMHO a good idicator of which technology is the best would be to see what all the manufacturers are racing to build first, and right now that is cone venturi driven skimmers. I could make a list that would fill the page of skimmers that are all vieing for the top position in this market were as I could only count on one hand the number of becket injection skimmers currently being produced, but thats just my honest opnion. Not trying to change your mind, just hoping I can help you make an informed decision.

 

[flipside]

I like the Skimz SM-201 for my next skimmer (this summer)... mainly because the ATI Powercone probably won't be released in the U.S.A. for some time... they are having pump compatibility problems... (Something to do with the 220v vs. 110v standardized electrical outlet systems in Europe vs. the U.S.A., respectively). I'll buy one when it comes out because I want to try out that new grindwheel they developed.

The only thing I don't like about the Bubble Blaster pump is the noise/vibration it puts off. The Laguna/Askoll is pretty silent... I have one, and probably will for a long time since they are tried-n-true pumps. Bubble Blasters are still pretty new in comparison. They've been using Laguna's in ponds for a loooong time.

 

[Slayer311]

Bubble blaster pumps have been up and running for about 2years now and yes they do have a bit more noice issues than the askoll pumps but they are more efficient and half the price. Guess ya gotta give a little to take a little.

 

[RGH69]

The Reef Octopus skimmers are made in China and PM is made in USA. The acrylic body is well made but the chinese pumps are human assembled which is why they have more issues. If you want silence then perhaps you could go with reef octopus and replace the pump.
Also, bubble retention time is just as important (if not more) than amount of air. This is where the beckiett and cone designs excel. All of the skimmers that we are discussing utilize surface tension for protien skimming. The amount of surface tension depends on how long the bubble remains in the water as well as how many bubbles you can place in the water column. The only drawback to a Beckett design is the larger pump that is required. But the benefit is the larger water volumes can be processed faster than other designs except perhaps spray induction.

 

[Llama]

I run a Bubble Magus NAC7 on my 90 currently and really like it. However, I would still be running my PM bullet 1 if it wasn't so loud (tank is right next to my TV in my livingroom) and I didn't have to adjust it every single day.

I must admit though that the bullet out skimmed the NAC7 when it was dialed in.

 

[robbyandkristie]

Thanks for all the good info Slayer 311. I must admit I am sort of old school and a stick to what works type of person. I am not the person who runs out and buys the latest thing just because it is the latest thing. When you talk efficiency at the wattage's we're running the differences aren't that great. "In my opinion".

I like the idea that PM products are American made, and like RGH69 stated if you're moving lots of volume,and have lots of retention time whats a few watts?

I didn't mean to hijack the thread...Sorry

But it seems skimmers are like everything else. Some like chocolate, some like vanilla.

 

[Llama]

chocolate is best though!

 

[lesd]

I switched last year from a PM Bullet-2 to a Super Reef Octopus 5000 skimmer. Have been happy with the switch so far. Lower power, noise and easier adjustment.