Upgrade - Sump vs Sumpless

[claytaylor32]

I am debating on upgrading my 60 gallon sumpless to either a 75 gallon with a sump or a 125 gallon sumpless for about the same money..... which would you do and why? I've seen pros and cons to both.

[nuxx]

Just too many options for equipment would be lost if not using a sump IMO

[richieii]

sump, hides most things, extra water for stability, a nice place to hide unwanted hitchhikers.

[stingeragent]

A lot of this comes down to preference. I know a lot of folks preach about having a sump so you can have a refugium. I think in the size most people do them they are more or less useless (IMHO). I had a 20L sumpless, a 40B with sump, and recently relocated the 40B and made it sumpless. In just my experience alone, sumpless is easier to maintain. True, you do gotta have the heater in the DT and what not but that's up to you. Just if I was in your shoes. You already have a 60. I'd make the jump to the 125, or just stick with what you got. What I realized as I was tearing down my 40 with sump, I still had a crap ton of detritus in both the display and the sump. The way I have it setup for now, is running an oversized canister with UV. I can run filter floss in it, foam, carbon, phosban, whatever. Clean it out once a week and your done. Ultimately though it does come down to you. If you do a google search for sumpless reef tank, you will find hundreds of posts of beautiful large perfectly healthy reef systems. You could do the same and find the same amount for ones run with a sump. It can be done either way.

[claytaylor32]

Thank you stingeragent - I have a HOB filter on the 60 and really don't like it - it stays a mess so I have to clean it a lot and it is a fluval c4 so I am constantly having to change out the carbon bag, the poly foam and the bio screen which can be costly and time consuming. I've thought about (if I do go sumpless) getting a cannister or going with Tunze's internal filter.... I've never used a canister filter but you make it sound pretty easy. On my 60 I've got the HOB and a internal protein skimmer and that is it - water actually stays pretty clear.

[dkeller_nc]

Depends. What do you want to keep? If a full-blown SPS reef tank, the answer is an unequivocal "sump" because of the need for an efficient skimmer, ATO, and reactors.

If it's fish, answer's a bit more nuanced.

[stingeragent]

Good point. Didn't think of it last night. If your going SPS, and your gonna need all the dosing pumps, reactor's, and all of that crazy stuff, you'd be better off with a sump.

[3dees]

I would go with the sump. that being said, my 120 gal. softie/lps reef is sumpless because of severe back issues. I don't dose any thing. HOB skimmer. I top off manually every morning. my heater is hidden behind the rocks and besides the powerheads only the skimmer is visible. many tanks are run sumpless, but yeah, having one is the best option.

[bryanreefer]

I am in the same situation but on a smaller scale. I already have a HOB skimmer, and an AC110 modified for a fuge that I can use for a new 40b but I'm considering running a sump. Cost is a factor for me though.

[Shawn O]

Use the 60 for a sump on the 125?

[serbusfish]

Im running a successful 75 gallon with no sump. Its been set up since March and I have a mix of LPS and SPS, all corals are growing and look very healthy, and I have no nitrates and no phosphates. I have a hang on skimmer and hang on phosphate reactor, I use a buffer in my RO water when needed, and do once a week 15% water changes. That's it really, tank is open top but I only lose around 2 litres a day in evaporation which is really easy to keep on top of.