Sand VS BB

[SINNERMF]

Pros, cons??? Experiences?? Any input will be appreciated.

[miniwhinny]

Had both and for me it's no contest. After going BB it's BB all the way from now on. Here's the test for me...set up a tank with a sand bed. Leave it for one month then remove the rock and stir the sand...GROSS !!!!! Give me a tank where that stuff is removed before it gets into the breakdown cycle. I have a 10 nano with sand and I have to do more work on that one than on my BB 29. PLus you can really up your flow with BB. :)

[Andrew]

This is largely debatable area. I Myself prefer a BB tank as they are a lot easier to clean and you can up your flow a little more which comes in handy when in an SPS tank. If you do have a BB main tank, I would recommend setting up a good sized fuge with a good sized sand bed which will help with filtration and a good place to grow some cheato.

[mg426]

I have re thought to whole issue. I just re set up my system with the LR supported of the bottom of the tank on a PVC Platform. I siphoned all of the sand out of my Display. I now have about 1/4 inch of sand in the display. It aint BB but its as close of a compomise as I could get to. When I moved the LR in my tank to remove the sand it was as described above GROSS.

[cloak]

I had a DSB for almost nine years without any problems. If I didn't have to tear down the tank due to a crack it would still be going strong. This was what the water looked like after removing almost all of the sand. Never had any problems with nitrates and the smell was actually pretty fresh. Kind of amazing really.


http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w16/jAb83_2007/crack.jpg

[crvz]

I've been without a grain of sand for about 2 years now (anywhere in the system), and I much prefer the options it gives you. More flow, easier to see and siphon wastes, less reliance on clean-up critters, less of an O2 draw when power fails, less demand on water parameters. It's worked well for me.

[biecacka]

i use 22 lbs of sand in my 220. mostly for the rockwork to sit in and in case i get and sand burrowing fish. so most of my tank is BB and i love the look

[SINNERMF]

I currently have sand, but I hear a BB is less maintenance and so on. However, there a a few fish that I want to get sometime that need sand. (Jawfish) So I am kind of torn. Also a BB in my opinion just doesn't look as "natural". But then again its a tank so the whole natural thing is out the window.

[miniwhinny]

I don't think the "natural" look argument really matters...you get used to seeing it BB and really ...you don't look at the floor, you look at the corals. And you'll LOVE how clean it all is.

[noboddi]

I have a DSB, and have not had any nitrates in 10 years or so. I also keep jawfish and watchman goby/shrimp pairs.

But you do realize it's not one or the other. A DSB benefits the system, but it doesn't have to be in the tank. I know people who do it in refugiums or even just a bucket, and have a bare bottom tank.

[Ken_wied]

I have sand in my tank. I have perfect water parameters, and a little hair algae problem. I brought in water to the LFS to be tested, and the chemical test revealed pristine conditions. Just to be sure, he re-tested it, and same results. He was puzzled from the algae issue. I have a bullet goby and a pair of maroon clowns that fan sand EVERYWHERE, and the goby lets it fall all over as well. Would this be adding to the hair algae problem??
If so, BB is the way I am going to go.

[SINNERMF]

The hair algae coulb be a lighting or flow issue as well.

[Ken_wied]

I have CP's (2 x 12,000k and 2x true actinic's) each 65w, on a 55gal. Im running a mag 350 for water polishing only, a sump and a korialla 3 ph.

[crvz]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13804897#post13804897 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SINNERMF
The hair algae coulb be a lighting or flow issue as well.

Nope, algae issues are due to nutrients. Flow or lighting won't cause algae.

[dickhordishay]

Well, I'm an amateur, and may change my opinion, but here goes:

The ocean has lots of what??? SAND!
We're trying to recreate the ocean with our tanks.

Also, I like the sand critters. The snails, the crabs, the sand burrowing fish. I think it just looks more natural with sand.

Also, it seems as many people have problems with sand as those who don't.

It's kind of like ro/di water. I keep reading threads over and over with people having problems with their parameters who are dumbfounded because they use ro/ di and don't understand why they're still having problems with algae or whatever.

I'm starting to think it just may be one of those things that everyone goes along with because the minority says it should be so. I've been using well water for a year now with no problems (sorry to get off topic).

[Logzor]

I just started a BB tank and I love it, I can put massive amount of flow and my corals are very happy. I plan on growing zoas and other corals on the starboard. Its very clean and you really focus on the corals rather than noticing that there is no sand.

Pros, more flow and better nutrient export (if you have a good skimmer and lots of flow).

Cons, no sand critters / fish that need sand, the look of sand is missing, some say that sand makes the tank more stable (not enough proof to convince me yet).

I found out that not all parts of the ocean have sand and corals. A local club member goes diving a lot and explained to me why he had nothing but shells as his substrate. He said that in areas that have acroporas there is no sand, its all been blown away.

In my opinion we are not exactly trying to recreate the ocean in our tanks, we can not come close. Its closer to garden than recreating the ocean. I would not go up to someones tank and say "thats not like to ocean" just as I would not go into someones garden and make a similar statement.

[Slakker]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13804687#post13804687 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Ken_wied
I have sand in my tank. I have perfect water parameters, and a little hair algae problem. I brought in water to the LFS to be tested, and the chemical test revealed pristine conditions. Just to be sure, he re-tested it, and same results. He was puzzled from the algae issue. I have a bullet goby and a pair of maroon clowns that fan sand EVERYWHERE, and the goby lets it fall all over as well. Would this be adding to the hair algae problem??
If so, BB is the way I am going to go.

Chemical tests rarely reveal elevated phosphates. You would have to check it with one of the more expensive photometers.

[SeanT]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13803572#post13803572 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Andrew
If you do have a BB main tank, I would recommend setting up a good sized fuge with a good sized sand bed which will help with filtration and a good place to grow some cheato.

Then you don't have a BB tank. ;)

[SeanT]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13804687#post13804687 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Ken_wied
I have sand in my tank. I have perfect water parameters, and a little hair algae problem. I brought in water to the LFS to be tested, and the chemical test revealed pristine conditions. Just to be sure, he re-tested it, and same results. He was puzzled from the algae issue. I have a bullet goby and a pair of maroon clowns that fan sand EVERYWHERE, and the goby lets it fall all over as well. Would this be adding to the hair algae problem??
If so, BB is the way I am going to go.

I would wager you that the HA is being fed from phosphates leeching out of your rocks.

No matter what you do the HA will remain in some form until those nutrients are gone.

That is why I advocate "cooking" rock.
It is so frustrating to have great equioment, great husbandry skills and still have HA.