Is a Seaclone Skimmer basically Useless??

Reefscape

Reefscape

I shoot people with a Canon
Staff member
Nov 8, 2006
18,481
8
89
Staffordshire, UK
seethroughmylens.co.uk
Real Name
Blinky
Lets see if we can put this one to bed, finally, that either this device is of no good as people state or it does effectivly produce a "required level" of skimate.

Command challenge for people then - Lets see who can produce documented evidence that the level of skimmate that a Seaclone produces from a tank makes this device useless or not an effective device to have..

This evidence shall need to prove that there is a specific ammount, stated, that "must" be removed in the form of skimmate which will make this device ineffective.

I am not posting this thread for me to prove that its good to use, its for people to state "WHY" it is a poor device to use, back that up from actual "personal experience" and not going off what others have said about this device . Lets see what actual evidence we can all produce to try and close this debate off...

Happy debating...

Niko
 
atnixon said:
Lets see if we can put this one to bed, finally, that either this device is of no good as people state or it does effectivly produce a "required level" of skimate.

Command challenge for people then - Lets see who can produce documented evidence that the level of skimmate that a Seaclone produces from a tank makes this device useless or not an effective device to have..

This evidence shall need to prove that there is a specific ammount, stated, that "must" be removed in the form of skimmate which will make this device ineffective.

I am not posting this thread for me to prove that its good to use, its for people to state "WHY" it is a poor device to use, back that up from actual "personal experience" and not going off what others have said about this device . Lets see what actual evidence we can all produce to try and close this debate off...

Happy debating...

Niko
Click to expand...

Yes, The Seaclone Skimmer is basically Useless!! :grinyes:
 
Evidence you say! The last person who I was trying to assist before moving from NY down to NC had a 90 gal tank and he had two seaclones and he at first thought that these skimmers were doing great for him and months before moving away, I told him if he had the money for it to switch to a sump with one good skimmer and I promised him that this will prove far better then those seaclones. Of course mate, your only my word for it, but do take it for what its worth. :)
 
Thanks for the info Buddy, really appeciate the reply....But, this is one of my points here...Where exactly does it state what ammount is an acceptable ammount of skimmate from a tank? or do we all just say..." Well i get more than that...mine is thicker skimmate"....or...." I get twice that ammount of skimmate "..

So, where does it state that twice the ammount of skimmate from another another skimmer, makes the other skimmer better?

Niko
 
Large amounts of micro bubbles returning to the tank, no skimmer box for the pump to sit in that I have seen and that I feel is important for a hangon skimmer, very difficult to get tuned in if at all, poor skimmate production IMO. There are mods that can be done but with very little improvement being seen. I have worked with 3 different ones with no luck in getting them to peform very well. These are just my observations of the sea clone skimmers but I will never recomend one to anybody, Sorry.
 
I have seen these used on different tanks and all of these tanks had very poor coral growth and many of them dieing off, when these people changed to a (IMO) better skimmer there corals colored up very well showed much better growth and much less die off. I was TOLD that they didnt change there husbandry on the tank and only the skimmer was changed and there was marked improvement for the corals.
 
On the above said Archer772...Why dont people have poor coral growth and corals dieing off on tanks that dont have a skimmer on at all?

So, this then raises another question...does the Seaclone actually damage what is in the tank as it appears from the last post?
 
Good Point!! The only thing that I know is that most people that go skimmerless with good luck are those that have very large fuges as in being equal to there display tanks with very large amounts and different types of macro's and they tend to do very frequent and larger WC's as in weekly where most of the people that I know do WC's once every 3-6 weeks. Skimmerless tanks that I have seen tend to run a very light bio load also. This is a good thread and I hope we can get some more people getting involved as I am always open to new ideas and thoughts.
Thanks
Scott



atnixon said:
On the above said Archer772...Why dont people have poor coral growth and corals dieing off on tanks that dont have a skimmer on at all?

So, this then raises another question...does the Seaclone actually damage what is in the tank as it appears from the last post?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom