More Important? Gallons or Length?

[plasticine]

I am looking to get a larger tank and found an 120 Gallon that is 48x24x24. the question that I have is for fish that require larger tanks, is the length as important as the total volume? would a smaller gallon longer tank be better for keeping a variety of fish, or does it even matter?

 

[dogstar]

Depends on the species, large active fish like tangs need length but also have to be able to turn around easy but large lazy fish need volume.

 

[tizzo]

Volume deturmines your biolad amount (how many fish you can keep) and length deturmines which fish you can keep.

 

[plasticine]

what I would like to have are fish that are reef safe and would probably put in a tang. Would it need a tank longer than 4 feet for active fish like this? the tank I originally posted is a really nice size and gives lots of room for some great landscaping. I would otherwise have to go 150 or 180 gallons.

 

[moneyman]

Given the same volumn, I am a disbeliever to think an extra 2' can make a difference for the fish. Active fish will go 2' with 1/2 a fin tap. So, I say volumn plays a more important role.

 

[my way]

I disagree with you an extra 2' is a big jump from 4'. If you have any kind of teritorial fish it would mean a lot. Also it is much more enjoyable to view fish swimming in that extra 2'. Most fish swim side to side in a tank not top to bottom.

 

[mrdc]

Originally Posted by Plasticine
what I would like to have are fish that are reef safe and would probably put in a tang. Would it need a tank longer than 4 feet for active fish like this? the tank I originally posted is a really nice size and gives lots of room for some great landscaping. I would otherwise have to go 150 or 180 gallons.

A tang will work in a 4'. You just have to search for the right tang because some of them may nip at corals (I think).

 

[ophiura]

All things being equal (such as the fact that yes, it is not the ocean), an extra 2' IMO makes a big difference for a tank. A 125 would be better for tangs than a 120, IMO. Certain tangs, like a Kole, would probably be fine...but a Naso would not at all. And I think it can be argued that yellows, etc would also do best in the longer tanks.

 

[moneyman]

A tang will have to do a 3 point turn just to clear 18" width of the 125g. I'll sacrifice the length for a good lean-in racetrack U-turn. I am not convinced an extra 2' has anything benefit to a 10" long fish. But that's just me

 

[fishfinder]

I also agree that two more feet isn't that big of a deal. That being said I do think that length is more important than total volume when talking about tangs. I think length truely becomes a difference when the length is 7 or 8 feet as compared to 4 (or what have you...). I also believe that the width of the tank plays a large role also. I think most people can draw their own conclusions from their experiences.
With all that said I think the agruements people generate over this topic is a waste of time and overrated. I think we would be better off making sure that our fish are "happy" and healthy by providing the things necessary to do so instead of complaining back and forth about tank size.

 

[pontius]

Originally Posted by MoneyMan
A tang will have to do a 3 point turn just to clear 18" width of the 125g. I'll sacrifice the length for a good lean-in racetrack U-turn. I am not convinced an extra 2' has anything benefit to a 10" long fish. But that's just me

I was going to say this same thing. length is good, but width and height should also be considered. the 48x24x24 is a good size tank. shorter, yes. but wider and taller, that's a plus.

 

[stevenb]

Also remember more water surface transfers gas better.

 

[celacanthr]

Remember that more height also means you will need more lighting...