Appropriate tank dimensions?

[Buphy]

Obviously this is going to be a hot topic but before anyone starts getting upset, remember this is someone's opinion, not facts!

So for kicks I've been looking into doing smaller custom tanks and it's got me thinking... With custom dimensions, what is an appropriate size for a fish?

Here's my idea, though it seems to break down with smaller fish...
Tank height and depth should be at least x1.5 the max length of the fish, and the length of the tank should be x4 the max length of the fish.
Again it seems to break down with small fish, but I'd like to hear y'all's thoughts.

P.S. I'm talking specifically for SA/CA cichlids.

 

[Stanzzzz7]

I personally would not keep any c/a cichlid in anything under 4 foot.
I like the philosophy of never keeping a fish in a tank that it can not reach full speed in.

 

[vinod_uthaiah]

I am kind of ok with the calculation for length, but for depth(width), I would prefer 2x times the length .
My calculation is based on keeping Dovii in mind with the maximum length it would reach is 24 inches.
My thoughts.

 

[dan518]

As a bare minimum guide it's OK, the trouble is all us fish keepers only look at the length of a fish, I know a 12 inch tiger moto weighs 580 grams a 12 inch trimac weighs 950 grams nearly 40% bigger. Andy Woods jag was 16 inch and weighed 1250 grams when it died which is about the same weight as a 13.5 inch midas. Yet alot of people will say a jag needs a 180 gal and a midas 90 gal even though a 15 inch midas will be bigger then a 17/18 inch jag

 

[vinod_uthaiah]

As a bare minimum guide it's OK, the trouble is all us fish keepers only look at the length of a fish, I know a 12 inch tiger moto weighs 580 grams a 12 inch trimac weighs 950 grams nearly 40% bigger. Andy Woods jag was 16 inch and weighed 1250 grams when it died which is about the same weight as a 13.5 inch midas. Yet alot of people will say a jag needs a 180 gal and a midas 90 gal even though a 15 inch midas will be bigger then a 17/18 inch jag

Just for my understanding and knowledge.... How does weight play a role in tank dimensions... Is it something to do with water displacement... Your post has got my brain all wired up

 

[convict360]

I'd opt for at least 6x the fish body, lengthwise; but 10 is the preferred.

Even then, a lot of it comes down to common sense and fishkeeping intuition. All I have to do is glance at a tank and I can tell in the first few seconds whether there's enough space, whether it be the answer I'm looking for or not.

It's why I've had to face reality and rehome fish like Oscars throughout the years.

 

[rrcoolj]

I agree with 6x the fishes length for the length of the tank and 2x as the width. A 6in fish in a 30 gallon(36in), a 8in in a 55(48in), 12in in a 125/180(96in), etc. I think thats a good minimum. But as people have said there is a lot that goes into this. For example a large open water predator like an umbee might appreciate a little more space. However a cave dwelling species may need less space. For example I have read that the Thorichthys genus holds small territories in the wild naturaly so they probably don't NEED as much space. But I like 6x the total length of the fish and 2x its width as bare minimum.

However... of course... BIGGER IS ALWAYS BETTER.

 

[Stanzzzz7]

I agree with 6x the fishes length for the length of the tank and 2x as the width. A 6in fish in a 30 gallon(36in), a 8in in a 55(48in), 12in in a 125/180(96in), etc. I think thats a good minimum. But as people have said there is a lot that goes into this. For example a large open water predator like an umbee might appreciate a little more space. However a cave dwelling species may need less space. For example I have read that the Thorichthys genus holds small territories in the wild naturaly so they probably don't NEED as much space. But I like 6x the total length of the fish and 2x its width as bare minimum.

However... of course... BIGGER IS ALWAYS BETTER.

+1
Well said.

 

[dan518]

I agree with 6x the fishes length for the length of the tank and 2x as the width. A 6in fish in a 30 gallon(36in), a 8in in a 55(48in), 12in in a 125/180(96in), etc. I think thats a good minimum. But as people have said there is a lot that goes into this. For example a large open water predator like an umbee might appreciate a little more space. However a cave dwelling species may need less space. For example I have read that the Thorichthys genus holds small territories in the wild naturaly so they probably don't NEED as much space. But I like 6x the total length of the fish and 2x its width as bare minimum.

However... of course... BIGGER IS ALWAYS BETTER.

Not disagreeing with you but in your opinion does this mean a jag with a potential to reach 18 inch needs a 9ft by 3ft

 

[rrcoolj]

I've never seen an 18in Jag... But if your Jag did indeed get that big than yes. 16in is about as big as i've seen a Jag and thats exceptional. But IMO most people keep thier Jags in too small of a tank anyway.