Closed loop or Wavemaker?

[cmack]

I am re-doing my 180Gal ACRYLIC tank, but before i start it, I am considering drilling the back to add a closed loop system. This obviously means i need to invest in bulkheads, tubing and an external pump (i am looking at a Turbo-Sea 1090 External Pump, 80 Watts power) as well as drill the tank myself and risk damaging it. my other option is to invest in a wavemaker system and have Powerheads visible in the display tank (something i was trying to avoid).
1 benefit to the closed loop is that i can plumb in a chiller to the same lines...
So in your oppinions, what option is better, as well as cost effective (purchase prices and Power consumption).
Thanks

 

[scsinet]

The closed loop is a better investment. A good external pump (Sequence, Iwaki, etc) will last much longer than powerheads, especially since wavemakers are very hard on powerheads.
You'll also get more flow, and less submersed equipment means less risk of electrical leakage into the water. Finally, you get less heat in the water by using an external pump.
With an acrylic tank, it's very difficult to damage by drilling it, unless you somehow put the holes in the wrong place.

 

[blue44magnum]

i think that closed lood is better because your not putting so much heat into the water by using powerheads . the closed loop sys. that im building will be like having 6 pwr. heads .no powerheads stuck to the side of the tanks means it wont be covered in coraline algae.so no extra eyesores.
just my 2 cents. check out the reeflo pumps by sequence. im using the reeflo dart.

 

[indyws6]

Greetings

I'm working through the same question as I look to replace my standard 90G RR tank with a new one made from Starphire panels. I will have the opportunity to have the tank drilled for a closed-loop system for almost no cost since it is a "custom" order from Oceanic, but should I?
I currently have a controller and in-tank powerheads that perform the wavemaker function quite well. The tank seems to like it, it is easy to setup and adjust and I already have the equipment needed to replicate the system in the new tank. The obious downside is the look of the powerheads in the tank - they're bulky and I dislike the power cords hanging, even though they are neatly attached.
If I use a closed-loop, to replicate the wavemaker function will require an additional investment in an OM-type device. The plumbing, although not a problem for me to design/build, will also be somewhat complex and with all of the valves, unions and bulkheads, will not be cheap. There will also be bulkheads, intake strainers and Loc-Line (or something similar) in the tank for the feed and return sides of the closed-loop. These will be a little smaller than powerheads and, possibly, easier to hide, but likely still visible.
So the question is whether or not trading the powerheads for a somewhat less visible installation - but adding significant cost and plumbing complexity to do so - is worth the effort. I intend to use a Reeflo Snapper, which would significantly increase my water turnover and that's definitely a good thing, but I'm on the fence. Leaning towards the closed-loop, but still on the fence.
Sorry for the long-winded hi-jack

I started a very similar thread a couple of weeks ago, but got little response when asking for suggestions on the best placement locations for the intakes and returns. Maybe bumping this one back to the top with a response will get more input. My new tank will be a little pricey and I don't want to just drill holes at random.
Take Care

 

[scsinet]

Someone looking at a new tank can look at the powerhead-vs-closed loop question differently than someone who already has an investment in one or the other.
For you, you need to throw out what you've already spent money on to get a closed loop. That is a different story, IMO. You can go either way, but since you're already invested in a powerhead system, it may make sense to keep what you have.
You an also have your tank drilled and simply plug the holes unitl the day you are ready to install a closed loop.