Filtration for one Oscar
- Thread starter Sizzy905
- Start date
Hello; Having run tanks decades ago with bubblers only and with very weak powered filters, by todays standards anyway, I find it interesting that a filter rated for 110 gallons might not be considered enough for 75 gallons. Tanks can and have been run with no filtration at all.
Are power filters today better than what I had long ago? Of course they are. I use them myself. I have not yet found the necessity to go as powerful as is possible. I suppose decades of running tanks with truly underpowered filtration has given me a different perspective. Even when the early power filters began to be available at prices affordable to me, I often ran tanks with filters rated smaller than the tank.
Consider the sponge filter. I have and figure many of have run tanks on a bubble operated sponge filter.
All this said, if a fishkeeper can afford to buy and pay the operating costs of the very powerful filters they will work just fine. I suppose the only limiting factor as far as some fish go would be too much flow to deal with.
Are power filters today better than what I had long ago? Of course they are. I use them myself. I have not yet found the necessity to go as powerful as is possible. I suppose decades of running tanks with truly underpowered filtration has given me a different perspective. Even when the early power filters began to be available at prices affordable to me, I often ran tanks with filters rated smaller than the tank.
Consider the sponge filter. I have and figure many of have run tanks on a bubble operated sponge filter.
All this said, if a fishkeeper can afford to buy and pay the operating costs of the very powerful filters they will work just fine. I suppose the only limiting factor as far as some fish go would be too much flow to deal with.
I too have a few decades of fishkeeping under my belt and I feel that what was once standard and acceptable was actually subpar. Sure, even under poor conditions fish still grew to adulthood, but it does mean the conditions were optimal or that the fish thrived. Human beings are also able to live long lives under slum conditions and poor nutrition, so why not other creatures.
I would never, ever go back to raising fish the way I had in my early years, I believed I've significantly progressed in my understanding of water condition, nutrition, etc. Of course, in another 20yrs, this could all change
I never said that an AC110 isn't enough filtration for a 75, but rather suggests that the filtration could be even better based on the OP's planned stock. Heck, with enough water changes, you actually don't even need any filtration
I guess it depends on how much work you're willing to put in i.e water changes, vaccuum etc.
I think it will be a good idea for me currently to keep a light stock (no oscar no piranha) as im busy with work and college. I am probably gonna go with one green terror or jack dempsey, along with a couple smaller cichlids like green severum
I think it will be a good idea for me currently to keep a light stock (no oscar no piranha) as im busy with work and college. I am probably gonna go with one green terror or jack dempsey, along with a couple smaller cichlids like green severum
I too have a few decades of fishkeeping under my belt and I feel that what was once standard and acceptable was actually subpar. Sure, even under poor conditions fish still grew to adulthood, but it does mean the conditions were optimal or that the fish thrived. Human beings are also able to live long lives under slum conditions and poor nutrition, so why not other creatures.
I would never, ever go back to raising fish the way I had in my early years, I believed I've significantly progressed in my understanding of water condition, nutrition, etc. Of course, in another 20yrs, this could all change
I never said that an AC110 isn't enough filtration for a 75, but rather suggests that the filtration could be even better based on the OP's planned stock. Heck, with enough water changes, you actually don't even need any filtration
Hello; I agree with this assessment. That the filtration available in the 1950', 60's and early 70's were what we had still left plenty of room for improvement. We now have much better power filtration and I use it. While the reliability is, to me, the single biggest improvement, I also do appreciate the increased flow capacity.
I do from time to time run a tank with only a bubbler operated sponge filter. Quarantine tanks, hospital tanks and such. I have also used the sponge filter in breeding setups to avoid losing tiny fry.
I do not plan to go back to the old way of running tanks. I adopted new practices as I became aware of them and the technology. The concept of regular water changes was probably the first significant practice of lasting merit. Even with modern power filters I do not foresee water changes going away.
Agree. There seems to be a misconception in the hobby that more and better filtration units means less water change.
Hello; While the power filters help, they do not eleminate the need for water changes. For one thing as water evaporates from a tank the minerals, salts and other things dissolved remain. If we only top off the water, over time the concentration of those things will increase.
For another, I have yet to have a power filter prevent the buildup of detritus (mulm) in a substrate. I use a gravel vac as part of water changes and always pull some stuff from the gravel, even in fresh setups. Of course I have not yet used an extremely powerful set of filters. Perhaps those who have such tanks running with maximum filtration can report about their experience.
I believe a 75gal is only large enough for 1 adult oscar, no matter what size filtration. To me the determining factor in keeping it healthy, and unstressed, is the amount and frequency of water changes, and filter media cleaning. By the time the oscar is a 15" adult, if it were me, I'd be doing 2 or 3 water changes of 30% or more each, per week, unless your OK with an oscar that is scarred with hole in the head disease.
Most manufacturer recommended filtration ratings, are based on a typical community tank of a school of few neons, a betta and some live bearers. Not on a gluttonous cichlid that normally comes from a tannin infused river, of millions of gallons, and gets a 100% water change every few seconds, and has a nitrate level of <1ppm.
You may think I'm being a little overly dramatic, but that is the reality of a river such as the Amazon and other rivers oscars are endemic. I've seen too many HITH scarred oscars that are kept tanks that amount to no more than a puddle.
Most manufacturer recommended filtration ratings, are based on a typical community tank of a school of few neons, a betta and some live bearers. Not on a gluttonous cichlid that normally comes from a tannin infused river, of millions of gallons, and gets a 100% water change every few seconds, and has a nitrate level of <1ppm.
You may think I'm being a little overly dramatic, but that is the reality of a river such as the Amazon and other rivers oscars are endemic. I've seen too many HITH scarred oscars that are kept tanks that amount to no more than a puddle.
You could easily do a single Green Terror or pair in a 75, I love mine; highly recommend them as they have superb colour, personality on par (or better) than an Oscar imo; and they don't get uncontrollably large. Think along the lines of it being a medium/large cichlid in the majority of cases.
an ac 110 is plenty ,,,, as long as you do plenty of wc's..just monitor conditions with testing..it's either 0 ammonia & nitrites or it isn't...as far as "is a 75 big enough for an oscar "? uh ..it's much better than the 29 (or smaller) tank lots get shoved into & end up dead... is it ideal? ..no.. but how about not ripping guys that want to do a fish in a tank that isn't ideal..I have a blackbelt AND a con in a 75..it's work .. but it WORKS
Last edited:
