New Tank Options

[eraml]

Looking at getting back into the hobby, and debating between a couple tanks.

Looking at the Waterbox Reef 100.3 (or 70.2) Vs the RedSea Reefer 250 or 350.
What would be the advantages / disadvantages of going with the Waterbox vs RedSea?

Additionally, would you recommend having the lights included from these systems, or going out and buying a different lighting system?

 

[Gablami]

I think waterbox and Red Sea Reefer systems are pretty similar. Don’t think there’s a drawback either way. Like buying an accord or a Camry. But do your research on lighting. I wouldn’t go with the included lighting unless that were the light you were going to get anyways. So many options these days. Welcome back to the hobby!

 

[mtraylor]

There was another thread on this with good info. As stated above they are very compatible. I hear there were some issues on a certain type of redsea. May want to bottom that out. Either way you go. I would get the lighting you want on the aquarium

 

[eraml]

Thanks - I will try and find that threat with good into on this.
I'll check the forums for threads on light recommendations, good to know to generally avoid the light add-ons from these systems.

 

[JLandes]

I am in the same about and have been debating the same setups. My first choice right now is the Reefer 350.

 

[vp6799]

I was in the same boat. After some research, I decided to go with the Waterbox 70.2 system. The main reason I decided to go with the Waterbox Reef 70.2 over the RedSea Reefer XL200 was the 70.2 has an extra 16G of total water volume.

 

[fish frinzy]

I have the waterbox 100.3 and love it. Really like the sump setup. had a Red Sea reefer 70 it was nice but the drain valve was a pain to adjust had to put my own gate valve in it . but i'm sure they have upgraded that by now ..

 

[sharpimage]

I've had both. Can't go wrong with either. Red sea had problems on the large tanks. The 750xxl.