# [Wet Thumb Forum]-What is the ideal height of a plant tank?



## imported_ryuken168 (Feb 2, 2003)

Right now I have a 65 gal. 24" high tank even with a 192 watt CF it's not working out.
What will be the ideal height to handle medium to very high light plants?
These are the ones that I'm deciding on since I'm reusing the 192 watt CF light.


----------



## imported_ryuken168 (Feb 2, 2003)

Right now I have a 65 gal. 24" high tank even with a 192 watt CF it's not working out.
What will be the ideal height to handle medium to very high light plants?
These are the ones that I'm deciding on since I'm reusing the 192 watt CF light.


----------



## Rex Grigg (Jan 22, 2004)

Looks like you want to keep the cabinet! Go with the 50 gallon, it's more water, it's much wider which makes it easier to aquascape, and the height is not bad. Less than the normal 55 gallon tank. Or if you want to grow really light demanding plants get the 40. Remember that light going through water follows the inverse square rule.

Moderator



















American by birth, Marine by the grace of God!

This post spell checked with IESpell available at http://www.iespell.com

See my Profile for tank details.


----------



## imported_Fred (Feb 1, 2003)

On a tank that deep would it not be better to run MHs? Or do the PCs put out enough light?

Fred


----------



## qbal18 (Jul 19, 2004)

i have that 50g and i love it, it is a great size, i have 2.5-3wpg on it right now and the plants are doing pretty good if you used your lights that you already have you will be rocking


----------



## ekim (Jan 31, 2004)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Fred:
> On a tank that deep would it not be better to run MHs? Or do the PCs put out enough light?
> ...


18" is not very deep!

NO flouresents will do fine!


----------



## walpurgis999 (Feb 6, 2003)

The reason your having trouble is the tank is too deep. I think PCs and NO FLs only penetrate up to 18 or 20 inches. The halides would do it, but they arnt usually used on planted tanks. I have a 55 that is 18 inches deep and I use 4 T8s on it, everything is growing great.


----------



## JaredW (Feb 2, 2003)

PCs work fine at a depth of 24"

Jared

Plant Resource Page and photos


----------



## imported_Fred (Feb 1, 2003)

Ekim,
My bad I should have mentioned that I was referring to the 24"H 65g not the poll choices.

Fred


----------



## ekim (Jan 31, 2004)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Fred:
> Ekim,
> ...


OOps, I though you were talking about the tanks in the poll!


----------



## Wheeler (Feb 8, 2004)

I can't *believe* that 2x96w PC's aren't working on a 24" tall tank. It should kick a ton of @$$. Do you have good reflectors?

The problem with HID's on a 3' tank is that 2x150w is way too much and 1x175w doesn't give good enough coverage without raising the fixture so high over the tank that PC's would be more intense. Really kick butt light would be 1x150w MH *and* 2x96wPC's.....That's good coverage!.....I'd bet the farm that I could grow *any* plant under 6x30w NO's, and reasonable reflectors, though.

I find it a shame that 70w MH's aren't more popular. The ballast is easy, but the bulbs are hard to find in anything other than 3,000K or 10,000K. I think that 70w MH's would be a great choice for us in alot of situations.....Like over a 20g, or 2x70w over a 3' tank.

I looked at 50g tanks. That's a size that Amano uses commonly. It's a great format for aquascaping. The 65g is a bit tall for me, but is featured in 2 layouts in NAW3. The 40 breeder is also a very nice format. The Oceanic 58g is the best 3' tank out there.

Best wishes,
John Wheeler


----------



## JamesHoftiezer (Feb 2, 2003)

I have 3.3wpg with AHSupply reflectors over a 25" tank. I need a weed wacker to prune the tank.

Before switching the tank, do you think there might be something else limiting growth? Substrate, light color, ferts, water quality all come to mind. 

If you want to switch for other reasons, go with it. If you just want a new set of dimensions, I am a 'bigger is better' kind of person and would suggest the 50.
If there were other options, I would vote for more horizontal depth instead of vertical depth.

James Hoftiezer


----------



## imported_ryuken168 (Feb 2, 2003)

The 65 gal 36"x24"x24" that I have now is not a true plant tank. It is mainly for my Datnioid tiger fish. I'm have a hard time mixing both large fish w/ plants since my Datnioids keep eating the algae crew.
Since they will out grow the tank soon. I will buy a 120 for the fish.
The 65 gal is a bit tall and hard to reach the back without a step ladder. So I'm going to sale the 65 gal w/ my DIY stand and canopy.

So I decide to get a 50 gal. and a maybe a 40 gal on the bottom for my cuttings.

The Collector


----------



## Wheeler (Feb 8, 2004)

You're in NYC, right? What $$ are you asking for the tank and stand?

Best wishes,
John Wheeler


----------



## imported_ryuken168 (Feb 2, 2003)

Hey John, I not sure yet at this time. The price will reflect on the price of a new tank.
The reason I not doing well with plants in that tank is my filter system.
I use a Eheim 2217 attach to a Pro60 Bio-wheel.
w/ no Co2 and basic substrate.

The Collector


----------



## imported_aspen (Feb 20, 2003)

the 65 gal that you now have, is a nominal 90 gal.(36 x 24 x 24 / 231 = 89.7 gal.) maybe it is only 18" deep (67 gal)?

i would look for ways to make this work first. plants will grow in that tank, under that light, imo. get a co2 system, and lose the bio-wheel. (minimum surface agitation.) you will be HAPPY! i would guess the reason this isn't working, is that it is an algified mess if you don't remove it almost daily? that tank sounds like it grows algae really well.

don't think of increasing the light ratios, (like putting that lighting over a smaller tank f/i) until you get co2. it will make things worse.

rick


----------



## imported_ryuken168 (Feb 2, 2003)

Thank for correcting me on the size. I had my mind on a 120 gal. that's where the 24" depth came in. My 65 gal is 18".
The 65 gal. is mainly a fish tank no my plant tank. The reason I got this size tank was for my fish. 
I wouldn't ditch the Bio-wheel since I have $300 worth of Datnioids.
They will be transfer to a 120 gal soon.
The 65 gal will be too tall for my Aquascaping styles, since I don't do Dutch style tanks.
Most of my tanks design are no higher then 16". So a tall tank is useless to me.
My original post is what is a perfect height for all around plant tank, not solving problems w/ my 65 gal.
and no, I don't has a algae problem in my tank.

I've decided to get a 40 gal. tanks.

Aquatic Bliss


----------

