300dd or 265?

[axs377]

After tax returns I'm planning on adding another aquarium. I'm debating on the two because they essentially cost the same at the LFS. The tank will be housing frontosa, likely 12-15 of them. Which do you think would be better suited to a colony? Dimensions I believe are 72" x 36" x 27" on the 300 vs 84" x 24" x 30" on the 265. I very much doubt that I'll be adding anything aside from the fronts. Thanks for any thoughts.

 

[Oxymus]

The wider surface is better for gas exchange and circulation so 72x36x27 way better than the 84 long one IMO.

 

[Fat Homer]

the extra 14" will make a big difference if you want to keep some of the larger fish such as rays and stuff... so i'll say the 72" x 36" x 27" maybe a better choice...

 

[mudbuttjones]

Deep dimension tanks are the bomb. In my travels ill take a 40 breeder over a 55g any day. Depth makes or breaks a tank. Its the difference between living in a room and living In a hallway.

I'd go 300dd any day of the week. Deep tanks are what it's all about.

Sent from my SCH-R950 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App

 

[Nigelk8485]

300


Sent from my iPad using MonsterAquariaNetwork app

 

[Fish on Fire]

300, the footprint is much better and will allow for a nicer scape.

 

[Pharaoh]

If you can fit it in the door, 300DD is the way to go. Loved my 265, but would have preferred the DD.

 

[axs377]

Well thanks for the opinions, I think I'll be going with the 300.

 

[shookONES]

Since frontosas are the focus, I'd go with the longer tank for the sake of territory, but that's just me.

 

[DIDYSIS]

300DD, overall a larger foot print meaning more space for the fish more opportunities. Was just at my local mini pet store and they had one there it looked great.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App