# What tank size is the best "bang for your buck" ?



## Curious Jay (Feb 17, 2008)

This is entirely an "in your personal opinion" question but I'm curious to hear the spread of answers from such a diverse group of aquarium keepers.

Consider the following factors:

- initial cost and cost in comparison to slightly smaller and larger tanks
- ease of maintenance based on water volume
- cost of properly equipping 
- cost of stocking fish well suited to the size of the space
- expense over lifetime of tank for supplies, routine replacement parts

Obviously bang-for-the-buck is relative and no matter how you cut it fish keeping isn't a particularly cheap hobby [compared to sitting around watching tv all day! :wink: ] but some people might well consider investing in a 300 gallon tank with a custom sump a perfectly acceptable cost when factored over a 20 year period of enjoying a show quality tank in their home.

I'll step back and listen, because for the moment my experience is limited enough with cichlids and larger tanks that I don't have much sage advice to offer :wink:

So what's your take on it? What tank size is the sweet spot for you?


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

the 4ft long 75g tanks are one of the most versatile tanks around. The 4ft 90g are a close second.


----------



## Totalimmortal363 (Jan 10, 2008)

^^I agree. I wish I had gotten a 75g instead of my 55g.


----------



## SLIGHTLY STOOPID (Dec 23, 2004)

The 75 and 90 are good answers. I think the 180 is the way to go. 6 x 2 x 2. Price them out and bang on.


----------



## smellsfishy1 (May 29, 2008)

The 40 long is probably the easiest and most practical tank I have owned. 
You get the 55 footprint but a shorter height which makes things much easier. 
I would definitely consider it a classic in the hobby.

Then I discovered the 33 long which is even better. 
It also has the 55 footprint but is even shorter in height to the 40 long.
I keep mbuna and most could care less about the height anyway.


----------



## Curious Jay (Feb 17, 2008)

smellsfishy1 said:


> The 40 long is probably the easiest and most practical tank I have owned.
> You get the 55 footprint but a shorter height which makes things much easier.
> I would definitely consider it a classic in the hobby.
> 
> ...


Interesting, I didn't know the 40/33 long had the same foot prints as standard 55s. I'll keep that in mind if I ever want a really shallow shell dweller tank!


----------



## kodyboy (Dec 9, 2007)

A nice used set-up off the trading post or craigslist


----------



## Curious Jay (Feb 17, 2008)

kodyboy said:


> A nice used set-up off the trading post or craigslist


My current cichlid tank (a combo of multifaciatus and transcriptus) was a 29g with matching stand, lights and heater that I snagged for $50 off craigslist.

If I had some extra cash, there are some great local deals. I'd love to pick up some of the 180g/stand/hood/filter combos I've seen floating around for <$250.


----------



## non_compliance (Dec 4, 2008)

In my opinion, for the money, a 40 gallon long is a lot of bang for the buck. Cheap tank.. you save on your heater, and filtration becuase of the lower gallons.. you still have a 4 foot long tank... you save on power to run the thing... it's an over-all cheap tank to get into, and cheap tank to run.

SOmeone else said 75 or 90.... but you still only have a 4 foot long tank... you just get higher and wider. I just checked my LFS website, and a 40L is $70 bucks.. whereas a 75 is $175... plus, your heater is going to be about 20 bucks instead of 35-40.... your filter system will be cheaper.. you'll spend less on substrate... you'll use less rock and stuff to decorate.... and you'll spend less to operate the thing.

The 75 or 90 is a great option too, but for a rookie, I think the 40L is the way to get into things. You can always go bigger from there.

Although, I will say, I'm about to buy a 55 with filter, lights, heater, stand, and some fish off CL for 150...


----------



## TNprogrammer (Jul 28, 2008)

With cichlids I always prefer a tank with length over height. I almost never see my cichlids swimming in the top 1/3 of the tank.


----------



## sirdavidofdiscus (Dec 8, 2006)

I'd go with 75 also. Not because of the hieght but because of the width. Though I do like my 40 long. It was about the same price as a 55 when I bought it.


----------



## venustus19 (Aug 30, 2007)

TNprogrammer said:


> With cichlids I always prefer a tank with length over height. I almost never see my cichlids swimming in the top 1/3 of the tank.


it seems like my fish are all over my tank... i think a 75 is a good starter tank...
55's are just soooooo skinny, that is why i do not like them that much...
30B are decent tanks for small fish... 36x18x12 i am setting up a shellie tank in there when i grow my fry out...
if you are really into the hobby, and know you will be for awhile, i think i would invest in a 180 or bigger... granted, if you have the room also...
my next tank will be a 180 or DIY tank in wall...


----------



## Dj823cichild (Mar 30, 2009)

I have a 4ft long 60 gallon for my first tank. I really wanna go with a longer tank when I upgrade one. My cichlids seem to swim rather length wize instead of height. I still live in my apartment but when I buy my house in the near future I will be looking for a longer tank with a good height and width. What would be ideal?


----------



## frank1rizzo (Mar 14, 2005)

I would start scoping CL for used tanks in your area.

You can pick up some pretty sick deals. If a great deal on a 90 comes up... snag that one, its its a 125, even better!

I would start looking and keep your options open. Anything between 55 and a 180, you'll be happy with. And no matter what size you get, in a year or so, you'll wish it was bigger.


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

Breeder tanks always rock. They are wider and shorter than tanks of the same size. 40 and 50 gallon breeders are 36"x18" ... rather have them than a standard 55 gallon.

60 gallon breeders are awesome but hard to find, they are 48"x18" same as a 75 gallon or 90 gallon, just shorter.

75 gallons are nice too.

Those 4'x2' 120 gallons are awesome as well.


----------



## locomotive282 (Jun 2, 2009)

90 Gallon Hands Down. Some like to say that its too deep and that a lot of fish are bottom dwellers but fish really don't care about what people say on forums and enjoy swimming all over.


----------



## PromptCritical (Feb 19, 2009)

> fish really don't care about what people say on forums


True dat!


----------



## Morcs (Jun 1, 2009)

I love my 4x1.5x1.5' 65g. Its proportionately perfect. Doesnt look too narrow or too short or too deep.


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

While nothing beats a good deal on used tanks/stands in good condition...

When looking at brand new prices... and taking into accound everything requested in the original post...

I woul dhave to say a 125 gal...

The initial investment is low (on a dollar per gallon ratio)..
The options/diversity for stocking are high...
Filtration can be started simple (read as inexpensive) then elaborated on as desired...

I'm not going to say it's "the best" tank out there... but very well may be "the best bang for your buck"...


----------



## theBIGone2087 (Jan 26, 2009)

the 75 and 90s are the best. I got the 75 instead of the 55 because of the value. There are times I wish I got the 90, but a 75 long is really an awesome value compared to say a 55.


----------



## planenut007 (Mar 21, 2009)

I just picked up a 100 long I guess you would say 72 x 18 foot print 12 high, looks like it has potential and will be a breeze to clean.


----------



## eddy (Jan 16, 2009)

I think as far as bang for buck.......far and away 55 gallon.

You can pick those up used with lights,stand,and filtration for around 100$ all day long.

of coarse I have never bought a new tank in my life and never will as long as people keep diving into the hobby without researching.....there is a huge abundance of used aquariums I'm not sure why anyone buys new ones.


----------



## nick a (Apr 9, 2004)

Considering the fish types most of us are usually keeping, I'd have to say:
For smaller size....40BRs
For medium......75s
For larger......125s

I also love the 40/30 Longs but they're surprisingly rare on the 'used' market down here. 55s are probably the most common & can usually be had for little $--I've just grown to not really like their geometry. The additional dinero for a 75 buys a LOT of options on varieties of potential fish--that's good *Bang* for my bucks :lol:


----------



## RyanR (Apr 29, 2008)

There's a big jump in price between a 75g and 125g..... but not much between a 55g and 75g. So the 75g seems to be worth it.

As for the long term, if the hobby sucks you in like it did to me, going big from the get go is cheaper than slowly upgrading over time.

-Ryan


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

Take the price of the tank w/ stand new... divide it by the gallons... multiply that number by how much you will enjoy the set up...

Use that value to compare what tank is the best bang for _YOUR_ buck...


----------



## BillD (May 17, 2005)

Around here, during boxing week, 75s are $100.00 which makes them easily the best bang for the buck.They went up to $100.00 last year becaue our dollar dropped. They were $90 the 2 previous years. The 48" 65 is also a nice tank, although not usually available at the price of the 75. Any 48" tank is a better buy because of the inexpensive lighting options.


----------



## Rick_Lindsey (Aug 26, 2002)

For many people the 55g is a "sweet spot"... so many are made that it's hard to beat the buck-per-gallon if you're buying a new tank. Personally though the 55gallon tank just doesn't do it for me, but that may be because the fish I tend to prefer are more interested in floorspace than water column depth. I like 75's, and 40-breeders, and that's where my money would go but it may not be the best "bang" for everyone.

If you're interested in shell-dwellers then it's hard to be at $10 for a 10-gallon tank, but by the time you add everything else you need (lights, filtration, heating, fish) it's alot more than $10 .

As someone else already pointed out though, generally the best bang for your buck is someone else's used tank that they don't want to move, or got tired of maintaining!

-Rick


----------



## star rider (Mar 20, 2006)

I would say..the best bang for the buck depends on what fish you plan to keep.

but i always try go for 'bigger is better' .

:wink:


----------



## brycerb (Dec 23, 2007)

180 gallon. I thought my 125 was awesome till I got my 180. The extra room is really nice. My 225 is a little big and makes aquascaping real hard due to the height(still wouldn't trade it for anything)  (maybe something bigger) :wink: (definatly, if I could get something bigger) :thumb:


----------



## BRANT13 (Feb 18, 2009)

Toby_H said:


> Take the price of the tank w/ stand new... divide it by the gallons... multiply that number by how much you will enjoy the set up...
> 
> Use that value to compare what tank is the best bang for _YOUR_ buck...


 =D> :thumb:


----------



## tankhead (Aug 8, 2008)

>200g is the way to go. I have a 125g that is 6ft long and was quickly filled. I am now looking to go >200g. I will not be able to fill it up right away, but that is part of a slow grow-in process. For me, this seems better than to have all of these smaller tanks around that I have out-grown.


----------

