Just seeing how many fish keepers out there love taller tanks. I just recently upgraded my 75 to a 110 tall and even though there the same foot print the extra height is a world a difference in swim space, my fish use every inch of it and there not even top dwellers. I don't think I could ever go back to shorter tank again. I have a 180 and am contemplating upgrading to a 220 for that reason. I Know a lot of fish keepers think height is pretty much irrelevant but after owning taller tanks I strongly disagree. Just wanted here other peoples thoughts on taller tanks.
Who loves tall tanks??
- Thread starter Freshwaterlvr
- Start date
Hate 'em. Most fish will appreciate the length over the height. And the added height makes maintenance a ***** as it's hard to reach.
So you're saying most fish wouldn't appreciate 5 or 6 more inches of vertical space as well on top of length? put a 125 next to 150 and tell me height doesn't matter. 125 looks tiny in comparison and I would never stock them the same for that reason. A lot large centrals like Vieja's can easily reach 8 or 9 inches tall and would look much more comfortable in taller tank.
Any fish that is 8 or 9 inches tall would look better and more comfortable in a bigger tank than a smaller one; but assuming that water volume is the same, then I am certain that they would benefit much more from additional length and greater footprint than from a few extra vertical inches. Any of the formulae that aquarists love to use to calculate stocking levels assign more importance to footprint than to height, and for good reason.
I don't hate tall tanks; I agree they can be very attractive. But if I had to choose between height and footprint...which isn't really a realistic scenario...height would come in a distant second place winner. Once I figure out the absolute maximum footprint I can utilize, only then would I even consider adding height...and considering the extra weight, additional cost of using larger pieces of usually thicker glass, increased awkwardness of cleaning, etc. I'd be hard pressed to justify it.
Last edited:
As in the post above, I think additional height can look nice, but only if it also has sufficient length & width. So length comes first, then IMO width, then height. For height anything taller than 30" is more difficult to clean.
what they said. Do I want a tank that is 16 feet long but only 1 foot tall? Of course not. But absolutely most fish will utilize the length and depth over height, so if I can go longer OR taller, taller will never win. That's why I have a 4ft 40gal instead of a 40 breeder, etc.It depends on the fish you’re keeping, Tall can be good for separation of bottom and top dwellers or for tall bodied fish. My dream tank is a school of look down fish and that would need to be tall for sure
Is that narrow? I don’t have one, but I would actually love to get a cube tank. I like all dimensions lol
I love taller tanks, within reason (pretty much the 30” range). I chose 65B over the standard 40B. I also chose 90 gallon over the standard 75. Same with my living room tank, the taller 300 as opposed to a 240.
Of course this means a longer gravel vac tube and a good step stool as seen in my water change pics
Of course this means a longer gravel vac tube and a good step stool as seen in my water change pics