Deleted User 6 Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 I actually went with the SWC 160 Cone. We'll see how it compares. Link to comment
19jeffro83 Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 I don't know the skimmer d but good luck. This is the second I've owned and it does what its suppose to do. It does great actualy! Who makes the skimmer you picked up? I'm not familiar with the abbreviation. Link to comment
Deleted User 6 Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Saltwater Connection, I think is the name. Their cone skimmers are fairly new to the scene. Link to comment
19jeffro83 Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 What are you running it on? I'm assuming it's rate for a 150+ gallon setup? Link to comment
Deleted User 6 Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 About 60g total, will eventually be heavily stocked. Link to comment
19jeffro83 Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Has anyone ever mod'd this skimmers air intake to regulate the bubble size. IMO it could work even better if the bubbles where small but there is no air intake adjustment. Link to comment
ap123 Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Has anyone ever mod'd this skimmers air intake to regulate the bubble size. IMO it could work even better if the bubbles where small but there is no air intake adjustment. Aargh! And here I am trying to figure out where the air intake adjustment is. In my defense, I just got it rolling today. Link to comment
19jeffro83 Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Don't wory it's great even with the large bubbles. You can see what a great job it does unaltered by my pic above. I just want to maximize the efficientcy of the skimmer. Link to comment
ap123 Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Yup, I'm feeling very hopeful. Just got it going late this morning, and I'm already starting to see some yuck mixed in with the foam. Link to comment
Palmer Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 SWC skimmers are basically the same exact design as the octopus skimmers. Most of the models you can match up by the number in the name description. I have an SWC Extreme 200 on my large tank that works great. Link to comment
19jeffro83 Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 D how are you making out? You have this same skimmer? Link to comment
19jeffro83 Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 Here is my mod for the lack of air intake control. My skimmer is no doubt running better and pulling more junk. All I did was. A price of eggcrate over the air intake. Adjusted till my bubbles looked rite for about five mins or so. Then super glued in a couple little spots. Just to hold it together. By the way in the cup is about 24 hours worth of skim. Link to comment
plainrt Posted December 30, 2010 Share Posted December 30, 2010 So what water level running with the current version of the 110 with gate valve? I just picked one up and trying to figure what works best. Link to comment
emmanuel Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 I hate to bring an old thread back to life but is anyone still running the 110 and what are your long term thoughts I need something for my red sea max 34 gal with sump Link to comment
bwoodward0012 Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 +1^ I'm considering this vs. an eshopps psk75 in sump, or either a BM 3+ or 3.5. Any thoughts from 110 owners? I think I'm leaning toward the Reef Octo nwb110, though the small footprint of the BM 3.5 is a very attractive selling point. Link to comment
lil_man72 Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 you can't go wrong with a reef octopus. i've owned several, not the 110, but they all have skimmed great. Link to comment
RayWhisperer Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 I have the 110, though, mine is the recirc model. It's external, unlike the others posted here, so water level is not a concern. Thing skims like a summabich. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.