Jordangil Posted December 8, 2012 Posted December 8, 2012 It says online that the biocube 29 is 22-3/8"L x 24-3/8"W x 20-5/8"H and a solana 34 is 20x20x20 ..... That makes no sense to me whatsoever . I have seen a solana in person and it was pretty small I see alot of people that have 29 g biocubes online and they look alot bigger . What tank has more overall floorspace ? The solana just seems mad tall as well . I want the biggest all in one I can get and I am thinking either the biocube 29 or the 28g nano cube because of the pure depth of it its like 20x20 of actual tank space .
Reeftech Posted December 8, 2012 Posted December 8, 2012 The biocube 29 has a slightly bigger footprint. have you considered the reed sea max series or the ecosystems mini 28p
Jordangil Posted December 8, 2012 Author Posted December 8, 2012 The biocube 29 has a slightly bigger footprint. have you considered the reed sea max series or the ecosystems mini 28p They are to narrow ... I like wide tanks . I am between setting up a 93g cube or nano ... Just not sure if I want to spend the extra on the rock and lighting . Other wise the price is about the same , theres about a 1000 difference though because of the extra 500 in rock and 500 in lighting . Not sure yet though .
Reeftech Posted December 8, 2012 Posted December 8, 2012 Then the bc29 seems like a good candidate for you. .I would check clist to find some deals.
kveekx Posted December 8, 2012 Posted December 8, 2012 Im upgradeing my BC29 to a Solana 34. The Solana looks clean and way cooler IMO.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.