V: On the Internet I found out that RTCs get 134 cm at max size and TSNs 104 cm. Is that right if so that's a pretty big difference?
TBTB: Well, for starters, there are 8 TSN species plus some underscribed. We mostly get fasciatum, tigrinum, and reticulatum but it is not impossible to get others sometimes (most babies look about the same). The max sizes vary from 2' to 6'. But generalizing, your info sounds more or less right: 4'+ for an RTC and 3'+ for a TSN. Again, IMO and only IMO, this is utterly immaterial for a planned 4' wide tank. For someone who thinks differently, it may be a big difference. That's called relativity
V: And yes, I plan on growing the Arows up in the same tank from about 6 inches.
TBTB: The Aros have to be grown up together since almost yolk-sack age (~1") in my example. But you can try and see what happens. Things do vary a bit for different keepers. We can only talk about probabilities. All I am saying is that it is highly probable they will fight and the submissive one will suffer if not eventually waste away.
V: And I also was told by people on this site that Florida Gars max out at 24" and I was would be able to keep 3 in my 220 for life.
TBTB: And that's to be expected. It is an integral part of your research to find out who says what and on what grounds and who to trust. Everyone can and does profess out there and it is to be expected that you will get a distribution of answers. You always will... And like all of us, you will most likely learn by far and large the most from your own experience.
It would appear you are a bit dismayed by different aswers you are receiving. Allow me a small diversion, please. In an ideal mathematical treatment of this situation, lots of opinions must be collected and each opinion must be given some weight (a coefficient of trust) before one is able to produce a sense-bearing statistical outcome. In one crude, simplified example, say I have found answers from 10 sources I don't know nothing about, 10 sources who I think are beginners, 10 seasoned sources, and 10 high level sources (sources are not necessarily people but web-sites, books, articles, etc.). It is obvious which sources deserve what trust level.
V: What fish would I be able to keep in the 220" for life?
TBTB: I'd use the rule of thumb I alluded to. But that's me
TBTB: Well, for starters, there are 8 TSN species plus some underscribed. We mostly get fasciatum, tigrinum, and reticulatum but it is not impossible to get others sometimes (most babies look about the same). The max sizes vary from 2' to 6'. But generalizing, your info sounds more or less right: 4'+ for an RTC and 3'+ for a TSN. Again, IMO and only IMO, this is utterly immaterial for a planned 4' wide tank. For someone who thinks differently, it may be a big difference. That's called relativity
V: And yes, I plan on growing the Arows up in the same tank from about 6 inches.
TBTB: The Aros have to be grown up together since almost yolk-sack age (~1") in my example. But you can try and see what happens. Things do vary a bit for different keepers. We can only talk about probabilities. All I am saying is that it is highly probable they will fight and the submissive one will suffer if not eventually waste away.
V: And I also was told by people on this site that Florida Gars max out at 24" and I was would be able to keep 3 in my 220 for life.
TBTB: And that's to be expected. It is an integral part of your research to find out who says what and on what grounds and who to trust. Everyone can and does profess out there and it is to be expected that you will get a distribution of answers. You always will... And like all of us, you will most likely learn by far and large the most from your own experience.
It would appear you are a bit dismayed by different aswers you are receiving. Allow me a small diversion, please. In an ideal mathematical treatment of this situation, lots of opinions must be collected and each opinion must be given some weight (a coefficient of trust) before one is able to produce a sense-bearing statistical outcome. In one crude, simplified example, say I have found answers from 10 sources I don't know nothing about, 10 sources who I think are beginners, 10 seasoned sources, and 10 high level sources (sources are not necessarily people but web-sites, books, articles, etc.). It is obvious which sources deserve what trust level.
V: What fish would I be able to keep in the 220" for life?
TBTB: I'd use the rule of thumb I alluded to. But that's me
but its hard to tell because at LFS's scientific names are rarely used. 
