Red Sea Fail, very harsh!! But truthful IMO.

[MnFish1]

The irony of one of the most critical and demanding users on the site, and also prideful scientist, complaining about someone asking him to cite his sources is not lost on me.

I would doubt that unless you have information that I do not - that I am 'one of the most demanding users not the site' - I'm a scientist yes. But we're not talking about a published paper - I have not done a research paper. For all I know - RedSea tanks might be Horrible (I was going to use one of the forbidden masked obscenities). I don't know - but - you have also not answered me - what is your skin in this game - at least I have a 750xxl tank sitting on my wood floors - are you just an argumentative person? Just asking - I'm not sure what you're getting at - I have criticized RedSea - And supported them when I think it's warranted. You - seem to just want to attack me - no matter what I say.

 

[Cell]

you have also not answered me - what is your skin in this game - at least I have a 750xxl tank sitting on my wood floors - are you just an argumentative person? Just asking - I'm not sure what you're getting at - I have criticized RedSea - And supported them when I think it's warranted. You - seem to just want to attack me - no matter what I say.

You asking someone if they are just argumentative is breathtaking irony.

And "skin in this game" is irrelevant, unless you are trying to gatekeep.

Anyone passionate about this hobby should care about this issue. Anyone who frequents this site and takes part in the forums has likely seen multiple RS seam fail threads pop up recently and has the right to be curious, whether or not they currently own, previously owned, or will potentially own in the future, a Red Sea system.

I don't care what side of the argument you reside on. You presented a very specific statistic supposedly shared with you by multiple sources that are also local to me, so I'm simply trying to verify for myself. Not sure how much more clear it can be.

 

[MnFish1]

You asking someone if they are just argumentative is breathtaking irony.

And "skin in this game" is irrelevant, unless you are trying to gatekeep.

Anyone passionate about this hobby should care about this issue. Anyone who frequents this site and takes part in the forums has likely seen multiple RS seam fail threads pop up recently and has the right to be curious, whether or not they currently own, previously owned, or will potentially own in the future, a Red Sea system.

I don't care what side of the argument you reside on. You presented a very specific statistic supposedly shared with you by multiple sources that are also local to me, so I'm simply trying to verify for myself. Not sure how much more clear it can be.

Ignored

 

[Northern Flicker]

At this point the thread is basically:

Some users: “I don’t think I trust the tanks, there are so many leak reports and they are very expensive for what you get.”

RS owners: “How dare you”


You won’t change the mind of someone who has bought in, and you likely won’t change the mind of someone with no attachment to the brand. There’s no real winner, other than a very wealthy company that makes some toys for adults.

 

[MnFish1]

At this point the thread is basically:

Some users: “I don’t think I trust the tanks, there are so many leak reports and they are very expensive for what you get.”

RS owners: “How dare you”


You won’t change the mind of someone who has bought in, and you likely won’t change the mind of someone with no attachment to the brand. There’s no real winner, other than a very wealthy company that makes some toys for adults.

Thanks mommy for interpreting the whole thread. In fact - the thread is IMHO -

1. There might have been a generation of tank that had problems. Many of them may still be out there.
2. Several of the tanks having problems have been bought used (I believe someone said the average ownership of a reef tank is 6 months - in an unrelated thread) - and have had problems
3. In response to the issues - the company has made a number of changes to the stand as well as the tank.

AFAIK - The new generation of the tanks tries to mitigate any problem - Whether they did or not is not my business.

But you must not have been reading well - since I (at least I think I posted) - that PART of my reason to ditch my older RedSea tank was the potential issue with seam leaking.

 

[Northern Flicker]

Thanks mommy

You are welcome, son.

 

[A_Blind_Reefer]

At this point the thread is basically:

Some users: “I don’t think I trust the tanks, there are so many leak reports and they are very expensive for what you get.”

RS owners: “How dare you”


You won’t change the mind of someone who has bought in, and you likely won’t change the mind of someone with no attachment to the brand. There’s no real winner, other than a very wealthy company that makes some toys for adults.

I truly don’t believe it’s that black and white. I for one, have never been in the quote how dare you crowd. I totally feel for anyone who’s had a tank failure. I do own one of the admittedly problem tanks, an early 750, which in no way biases me one way or the other despite what some might think. I do chime in on these threads often. I will question when things are brought up that should be clarified or don’t make sense to me. I have no issue with stating the early stands were junk. I have no experience with the new ones, so I can’t pass judgment on the revisions made. I will probe when comments are made that the stands are made of particle board. Some older ones were, the larger tanks including the acknowledged early 750 and all the newer stands are not. Regardless, stand sucked either way. Comments about glass being too thin. Again, glass thickness across the different brands of similar design are mostly all the same with a couple exceptions. When the front panel overhang is brought up, I’ll question why other manufactures with the same design aren’t having issues as well. When it is said that the silicone is too thin, again other manufactures of similar design are pretty much the same. Power heads are blowing out the front panel…..hmmm again other manufactures aren’t having issues. Glass scrapers….hmmm again other manufactures aren’t having issues, but also if not why the new armored seams? The most common issue I question are the statements about horrible customer service. I’m not a RS fanboy by any means but no manufactures warranty is anything spectacular. They’re typically very detailed about what the coverage is and is not. No one would be happy with just getting a replacement tank after dealing with a failure. That doesn’t equate to horrible customer service. Being denied coverage as the tank no longer complied with the terms of the warranty, too old or used isn’t what I would call horrible customer service. Would I be dissatisfied, you bet. I see these threads as a place where we can talk about issues and offer differing opinions. We can all be wrong about everything and that’s fine.

Edit, I should have also added that I’m pretty sure any RS owner that endured a failure isn't saying how dare you

 

[BeanAnimal]

the weight of the water pushing out the front, side, rear glass panels far far exceed the weight of the overhung glass panel. If the silicon can't handle the weight of the glass, it would never be able to withstand the pressure of the water

That is not how it works, by a long shot.

 

[Sleepingtiger]

That is not how it works, by a long shot.

Sure. I'm not no mechanical engineer.

So you're saying there is more stress on the silicon from gravity pulling down on the glass than the pressure of the water pushing out on the glass? Or am i way simplifying the dynamics of an aquarium?

 

[MnFish1]

That is not how it works, by a long shot.

Numerous aquaria use this design. I'm not sure whether it works the way you say or not - what I will say - is that some RedSea owners have also had a problem with the top seals peeling away. The whole thing is hard to reconcile into one particular cause

 

[CrunchyBananas]

Sure. I'm not no mechanical engineer.

So you're saying there is more stress on the silicon from gravity pulling down on the glass than the pressure of the water pushing out on the glass? Or am i way simplifying the dynamics of an aquarium?

The majority of the tank pressure is pushing down, not out. That’s why (like I stated earlier) tank depth determines glass thickness and integrity, length and width are much less important. Also pointed out, multiples companies use this cantilevered design.

While I may be worrying about nothing, I will never purchase a tank with 1 of 4 major load bearing seams cantilevered over an edge. It’s just not a design I can trust, especially being a professional installer where whole system integrity has my reputation on the line.

 

[Cell]

The majority of the tank pressure is pushing down, not out. That’s why (like I stated earlier) tank depth determines glass thickness and integrity, length and width are much less important. Also pointed out, multiples companies use this cantilevered design.

While I may be worrying about nothing, I will never purchase a tank with 1 of 4 major load bearing seams cantilevered over an edge. It’s just not a design I can trust, especially being a professional installer where whole system integrity has my reputation on the line.

But any downward pressure associated with the side of a tank is simply from the weight of the glass, no?

 

[Sleepingtiger]

The majority of the tank pressure is pushing down, not out. That’s why (like I stated earlier) tank depth determines glass thickness and integrity, length and width are much less important. Also pointed out, multiples companies use this cantilevered design.

While I may be worrying about nothing, I will never purchase a tank with 1 of 4 major load bearing seams cantilevered over an edge. It’s just not a design I can trust, especially being a professional installer where whole system integrity has my reputation on the line.

How is the water applying downward pressure on the front panel?

 

[CrunchyBananas]

But any downward pressure associated with the side of a tank is simply from the weight of the glass, no?

The weight of the glass, the down ward pressure of the water, and potentially, and whatever minuscule flex that overhang allows.

My thought process is, I wouldn’t have a tank hanging 12” over a stand, that’s ridiculous, the glass would flex, water pressure would favor that seam, then the tank would fail. So, we know that an over hang can be catastrophic.

Why would I even try and walk that line to see how much safer a 3/4” over hang is than 2” or 10”? Especially without a frame on the top or bottom, it’s just an unnecessary feature that I can only see as potentially a longevity issue.

Again, apparently it works for a lot of people, but to me it adds extra stress and variables to seams which we are already asking a lot of. In the end, it’s a giant glass box filled with water being pushed around, why limit the structural integrity needlessly?

 

[CrunchyBananas]

How is the water applying downward pressure on the front panel?

On the front seam? Gravity is pulling the panel

 

[Sleepingtiger]

On the front seam? Gravity is pulling the panel

That's what I said. The only downward pressure on the front panel is gravity. The pressure from the water on the front panel is out only, not down. Am I wrong? BeanAnimal thinks so.

 

[CrunchyBananas]

That's what I said. The only downward pressure on the front panel is gravity. The pressure from the water on the front panel is out only, not down. Am I wrong? BeanAnimal thinks so.

I’m struggling to understand what the confusion is? Of course the water isn’t dragging the panel straight down, but that isn’t really the whole concern. It’s the pressure on the seam, potential flex of the bottom panel, and then the weight of the panel all combined. Again, I wouldn’t have a tank 12” cantilevered and I wouldn’t have a tank 3/4” cantilevered.

 

[Sleepingtiger]

I’m struggling to understand what the confusion is? Of course the water isn’t dragging the panel straight down, but that isn’t really the whole concern. It’s the pressure on the seam, potential flex of the bottom panel, and then the weight of the panel all combined. Again, I wouldn’t have a tank 12” cantilevered and I wouldn’t have a tank 3/4” cantilevered.

If you scroll up. BeanAnimal said I was wrong regarding the front panel/face of the tank, I asked why. You responded with “the majority of the tank pressure is pushing down”. So I am trying to next stand why you said the majority of the pressure is pushing down and not out.

 

[CrunchyBananas]

If you scroll up. BeanAnimal said I was wrong regarding the front panel/face of the tank, I asked why. You responded with “the majority of the tank pressure is pushing down”. So I am trying to next stand why you said the majority of the pressure is pushing down and not out.

Yes, down on the bottom panel and 4 seams, not out against the vertical seams and panels, is where the pressure is pushing. Water wants to go straight down with much greater force than it wants to push in a perpendicular direction.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Sure. I'm not no mechanical engineer.

So you're saying there is more stress on the silicon from gravity pulling down on the glass than the pressure of the water pushing out on the glass? Or am i way simplifying the dynamics of an aquarium?

You are greatly simplifying the forces and not considering the differences in sheer, tensile and peeling resistance or how the force is distributed due to the lack of support on the front edge.