Skimmer feed question?

[maroun.c]

Adding the SRO XP8000 to my system 400g tank 2x65g frag tanks 27g cube, 165 g sump currently and will be adding couple frag tanks more and a FO tank later on. Skimmer is a 16" body 1200 gph airflow and handle 2-5000 GPH feed and recommendation is 1.5-2 x system volume per hour.
My current volume is around 700 Gallons so do i feed 1400 GPH (2xsystem volum) which is 600 g less than minimum feed rate or do i go with 2000 GPH?
Is it better to run less than the minimum recommended feeding volume or to run more water to match the minimum recommended?
How would performance be affected by running more / less water volume?
Thanks

[viggen]

I was pretty close to getting that skimmer but am 95% sure I am going to get something else, I was also debating on their commercial line. I think the newer ones use a single waterblaster 10,000 vs the older models using two waterblaster 5000's?

Anyways.... Keep us posted on how it works for you!

Going slower flow rate should give you less turbulence inside the body allowing for a more stable head thus a more thorough job of cleaning the water going through it.

Never owned a cone skimmer thus zero experience playing with how they work with different flow rates.

[maroun.c]

Any Specific reason you're getting an other one, If I may ask?
I have considered the commercial line and the distributor here had a 6000 model with 2 BB 5000. yes now they come with a single BB10000 which I believe should be even better.
I was honestly confused with the multiple models they have with a small price and volume rating difference, to make you want to jump to the highest model.
I didn't find any reason to not go for the commercial 8000 (6000 and 7000 being very close in rating and price and rated to just about my water volume) then the 9000 was just over rated for my system and much more expensive.
Comparing the commercial 8000 and the SRO XP 8000 being powered by same pump, close rating with a small plus for the XP although the SRO is 3 inches wider. the real difference was the neck size 6" for the SP and 9 " for the commercial one which I feared would require me to have a much higher load for the skimmer to be able to buildup a steady foam head. Neck size and the much higher feeding rate led me to believe these skimmers are oriented to much heavier load systems and might act different in a medium load system(still I question that a chinese manufacturer would go to this extent research). Add to that some more stability for Full cone skimmers over transition ones which I guess would help if my load isn't enough.
The real deal maker was that the distributor has a SRO XP in stock and I'm getting a good deal on it which means I don't have to ship a commercial one or another model and go through outrageous shipping and customs expenses we have here.