Opinions for filling a 110

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
A butti is far too big for both of those tanks.
I wouldn't keep one in my 220 because it's not really big enough.
A butti is far too big for both of those tanks.
I wouldn't keep one in my 220 because it's not really big enough.

Wait, Really? How big do you think a Butti gets? I had one for 8 years in my 125 gallon and peaked at 16 inches? You are aware that a he mentioned his tank is 19 inches wide?
 
No it wouldn't. It may survive and not reach its potential if that's how you define fine.
They are capable of reaching 18 inches in proper conditions, so no I don't think a tank 19 inches wide is anywhere near big enough.
I would consider its existence claustrophobic and restrictive beyond normal acceptance.
You are aware 19 inches is only 3 inches bigger than 16 inches?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vukmir13
No it wouldn't. It may survive and not reach its potential if that's how you define fine.
They are capable of reaching 18 inches in proper conditions, so no I don't think a tank 19 inches wide is anywhere near big enough.
I would consider its existence claustrophobic and restrictive beyond normal acceptance.
You are aware 19 inches is only 3 inches bigger than 16 inches?

Could you show me pics of an 18 inch Butti-cause I have never seen one. My friend who owns a pet store in NE El Paso has one in a 1100 gallon pond for 5 years and is 14 inches?

Second-19 inches>18 inches that is if the Butti even gets that long, like I said never seen one in person or on the web that big. Plus you make it sound like the fish is made of steel or plastic, they are easily capable of turning-esp when the width of a lets say 125 or 110 gallon is 6 feet.

I don't mind your opinion but I would ask have you ever owned a Butti? I speak from personal exp. from the few Butti's I have owned and friends/petstore owners who specialize in larger cichlids.
 
Personally I'd say a 180 would be bare minimum for a buttikoferi. Bigger is always better. For the 110, I'd recommend a fish that doesn't get larger than 12". Plenty of awesome choices around that size.

So you are pretty much saying that he can't have the following fish in a 110:
Oscar, Trimac, Red Devil, Midas, Festae, Black Nasty, Snook, Jaguar, Chocolate Cichlid, Mota, Black Belt or any Vieja Species, certain Pike Cichlids, I could go on.....

While I agree bigger is always better, if we go by Stanzz and your logic why keep fish period? By his/her logic keeping any fish in a "glass" cage is claustrophobic and unhealthy for the fish. I get a bit annoyed when people speak on something without personal exp. or make a comment on something based on what one reads on the internet or forum. I stand by what I say, a Butti is fine in a 110 gallon tank.
 
So you are pretty much saying that he can't have the following fish in a 110:
Oscar, Trimac, Red Devil, Midas, Festae, Black Nasty, Snook, Jaguar, Chocolate Cichlid, Mota, Black Belt or any Vieja Species, certain Pike Cichlids, I could go on.....

While I agree bigger is always better, if we go by Stanzz and your logic why keep fish period? By his/her logic keeping any fish in a "glass" cage is claustrophobic and unhealthy for the fish. I get a bit annoyed when people speak on something without personal exp. or make a comment on something based on what one reads on the internet or forum. I stand by what I say, a Butti is fine in a 110 gallon tank.
I don't think that is what he is saying at all. I agree with him that there are lots of great choices that stay under a foot that would look great in a 19" wide tank that would be more comfortable than a larger fish. A solo wet pet might be able to push this some but as a community tank guy I try to stick with the basic formula of max length being half of tank width.
 
MonsterFishKeepers.com