# 125 vs. 150 Gallon



## MarkyMark75 (Apr 24, 2012)

Hi All,
I have decided I want a 6' foot long tank and am looking at 2 options for your average African Cichlid Tank:

*A: 125 Gallon: 72"x18"x22"

B: 150 Gallon: 72"x18"x28"*

NOTE: I do not have space for the 6' 180 Gallon, b/c it is too wide (24")

Question: Is the extra 6" in height you get on the 150g a waste?
Should I just stick with the 125g?

Thanks,
Mark.


----------



## DanniGirl (Jan 25, 2007)

MarkyMark75 said:


> Question: Is the extra 6" in height you get on the 150g a waste?


 Depends how the tank is stocked. Sounds you're aiming for African cichlids, and if that's the case, the extra 6" is not really needed. 
Another downside to the 150 gal. is the tank maintenance. For-instance, it's a lot easier vacuuming out a 22" tank than a 28" tank.



MarkyMark75 said:


> Should I just stick with the 125g?


 Yes, good choice.


----------



## BillD (May 17, 2005)

I would agree, unless you have abnormally long arms.


----------



## MarkyMark75 (Apr 24, 2012)

I see your points.
I would have to use a step ladder to clean it, but sounds like more of a pain.
I just find that the 125g is not tall enough....If it were 24"-26" high, it would be perfect for me.

is 22" height really all they need?


----------



## clhinds78 (Jul 27, 2012)

MarkyMark75 said:


> is 22" height really all they need?


Oh ya! Your mbuna won't really take advantage of the extra 6" and tall tanks are a pain to clean as others have already stated. I had a 24" tank and hated cleaning it, my cloths were always soaked after water changes. Since mbuna are more elongated than tall they don't really need the height.


----------



## nodima (Oct 3, 2002)

I had a 150 for ~10 years and replaced it with a 125. Day and night difference with all aspects of the tank. Much easier to clean, re scape or catch fish. However, aesthetically, I much prefer looking at the taller aspect of the 150. As for fish using it, it really depends on the fish - my Trophs liked the top of the tank, but when I had my Fronts in it, the top always looked empty.

You might split the difference and try to find a 135, not sure if any of the major companies still make one, but IIRC, those are 24" tall.


----------



## Cichness (Dec 27, 2006)

I have a 150 and it looks much larger compared to the shorter 125. The extra height does make a slight difference when moving things in the tank but I do that maybe once every 3-6 months if that. My cichlids swim all over the whole tank from top to bottom so they use every inch.


----------



## eutimio (Aug 22, 2012)

Personally i prefer taller tanks.Yes its a pain to clean it but i just love the way it looks.... *** got a 30 inch tall .Anyway youre not sticking your hands every single day in the tank but yea at the end of the day it all comes down to what youre comfortable with and what looks good to your eyeMy cichlids swim all over the place so ya they pretty much use the entire tank.Overstocked, the fish will have no choice but to swim all over the place be it a tall o short tank.And with africans , you pretty much have to overstockgood luck!


----------



## MarkyMark75 (Apr 24, 2012)

Thank you all for your input.


----------



## clhinds78 (Jul 27, 2012)

What'd you decide on?


----------



## MarkyMark75 (Apr 24, 2012)

I am still thinking about it, lol.
I love the way the 150 looks, but still concerned about rocks falling if I build the caves too high,
and how much more of a pain in cleaning it would be.


----------



## clhinds78 (Jul 27, 2012)

What about a 135? It is in between the height of the 125 and 150 at 24". OR you could go for the 8' 200G-which is also 24" tall.


----------



## MarkyMark75 (Apr 24, 2012)

clhinds78 said:


> What about a 135? It is in between the height of the 125 and 150 at 24". OR you could go for the 8' 200G-which is also 24" tall.


A 135 that is 24" tall would be perfect, however, none exist here in Toronto that you can order.
I would have to get it custom made and that is too much $$$.

8'....LOL.....no room.


----------



## clhinds78 (Jul 27, 2012)

MarkyMark75 said:


> clhinds78 said:
> 
> 
> > What about a 135? It is in between the height of the 125 and 150 at 24". OR you could go for the 8' 200G-which is also 24" tall.
> ...


Oh, ok, that stinks. I wasn't aware of what's available there.

So pretty much all you can get for six foot tanks are 125 and 150?


----------



## MarkyMark75 (Apr 24, 2012)

Yes, with a footprint of 72"x18", there are only 22" (125g), and 28" (150g) in height here.
The 180g is 24" high, but also 24" deep which I do not have room for.

We also have a 120 gallon that is 60"x18"x26".
That is another choice, but it seems the 72" is much more favourable if you have the room.


----------



## master chi (Jan 3, 2010)

I have a 6' 75 gallon tank it's 72''x18''x13'' my All male Malawi tank. The Boys seem to really enjoy it over the 55 they used to live in. I love it because if the fact it's only 13'' tall while still keeping a great 6' footprint. PM me if you need info on where I purchased it.


----------



## clhinds78 (Jul 27, 2012)

master chi said:


> I have a 6' 75 gallon tank it's 72''x18''x13'' my All male Malawi tank. The Boys seem to really enjoy it over the 55 they used to live in. I love it because if the fact it's only 13'' tall while still keeping a great 6' footprint. PM me if you need info on where I purchased it.


Do you have any pics of this tank?


----------



## master chi (Jan 3, 2010)

clhinds78 said:


> master chi said:
> 
> 
> > I have a 6' 75 gallon tank it's 72''x18''x13'' my All male Malawi tank. The Boys seem to really enjoy it over the 55 they used to live in. I love it because if the fact it's only 13'' tall while still keeping a great 6' footprint. PM me if you need info on where I purchased it.
> ...


 I'm working those. Right now I have been working with different lenses and photo settings to see what I like best. I have lots of close ups of the fellas swimming in there. I haven't yet taken any full tank pics. mainly because a full tank pic does very little for me personally. I will get around to taking a couple,and will share them in this thread when I do.


----------



## cichlid-gal (Apr 27, 2012)

I vote for option "A"... I already have to stand on a small step ladder to reach the back of my 125G tank which has these dimensions. It's a great footprint with plenty of room to spare.


----------



## Cichness (Dec 27, 2006)

Let's face it, only people with smaller tanks are going to tell you get the 125.

The 150 has 20% more water than the 125. That alone would be enough from a water parameter point of view for me.


----------



## Dawg2012 (May 10, 2012)

master chi said:


> I have a 6' 75 gallon tank it's 72''x18''x13'' ...


I'd love a tank this size! I recently got into the 33L footprint which is a similar concept in the 4' variety.


----------



## MarkyMark75 (Apr 24, 2012)

Cichness said:


> Let's face it, only people with smaller tanks are going to tell you get the 125.
> 
> The 150 has 20% more water than the 125. That alone would be enough from a water parameter point of view for me.


What are the dimensions of your 150g?
How do you find cleaning it?
How high do you stack rocks to form caves?

Tks.


----------



## eutimio (Aug 22, 2012)

With african cichlids you really shouldnt stack rocks crazy tall cuz eventually youll have to take them down and rearrange them or clean the debris trapped around them and its a pain. .I would suggest if you go with the taller 150G you get single rocks that are tall like i did .my holey rocks are aprox.15"tall each and with 3 of them i built a wall of rock where the fish love to play around and also leave some space on the top for open water swimmers.They seem to love this setup the most.A nice 3D background always looks good on a tall tank as the wall of rock is taller giving the fish more security to get out and swim freely to the top.Just my opinion here.Good luck with your choice!


----------



## master chi (Jan 3, 2010)

Dawg2012 said:


> master chi said:
> 
> 
> > I have a 6' 75 gallon tank it's 72''x18''x13'' ...
> ...


The same online vendor who sells those 33L tanks is where I got my 75L tank. Same Idea. Better footprint lower height therefore lower weight.

For me it's an aesthetic thing.

The price from a 75L to a 125 is not that bad. I just like the short tanks now.

The 33L is 13'' tall as well isnt it. I think they also sell a 50L which has the same footprint as a standard 75(48''x18'') just 13'' tall.


----------



## MarkyMark75 (Apr 24, 2012)

eutimio said:


> With african cichlids you really shouldnt stack rocks crazy tall cuz eventually youll have to take them down and rearrange them or clean the debris trapped around them and its a pain. .I would suggest if you go with the taller 150G you get single rocks that are tall like i did .my holey rocks are aprox.15"tall each and with 3 of them i built a wall of rock where the fish love to play around and also leave some space on the top for open water swimmers.They seem to love this setup the most.A nice 3D background always looks good on a tall tank as the wall of rock is taller giving the fish more security to get out and swim freely to the top.Just my opinion here.Good luck with your choice!


Good point -- Do you have a pic of your tank?


----------



## eutimio (Aug 22, 2012)

sure here you have it.When the background arrives, its gonna look a lot better(i hope)


----------



## nodima (Oct 3, 2002)

eutimio said:


> sure here you have it.When the background arrives, its gonna look a lot better(i hope)


no offense, but the upper part of that tank still looks "empty" to me.

I don't mind stacking rocks higher, and most of the time, my 150 had rocks up to about 6" below the surface. I do agree that it can be a PITA to remove all those rocks, but I find that this is normally a once a year event.

Especially with all these:


----------



## cichlid-gal (Apr 27, 2012)

My 125G with rocks...the corner rockwork goes a little over half way up the tank, then I added a plant to give it additional height...I think it fills the tank pretty well. So there are options on the rockwork, it just depends on how you want to lay them out.


----------



## eutimio (Aug 22, 2012)

Nodima -none taken like i said thats just how i prefer it for cleaning wise and ease of access .Im sure with a background you wont need that much rockwork otherwise you would be covering it up eliminating the need of one.Cheers


----------



## nodima (Oct 3, 2002)

eutimio said:


> Nodima -none taken like i said thats just how i prefer it for cleaning wise and ease of access .Im sure with a background you wont need that much rockwork otherwise you would be covering it up eliminating the need of one.Cheers


Healthy discussion is always good! :thumb:

I ran with a paper style background for years, then have since determined I like a black BG best. I have no plans to install a 3-D one as the loss of tankspace is a deal breaker for me. I do admit that they can look fantastic, but IMO, I'd not install one on a tank narrower than 24".

As I type this, the irony strikes me that my rocks take up close to the same volume as a 3-D BG would. Perhaps I need to rethink this. Like I need another project to work on, though. :roll:

Lets see. Removal of all rock 1x per year = 2 hours including the water change. Building a BG - prob 8 hours or so. Planning a BG, Days! LOL


----------

