Hi-tec & Lo-tec Survey

[karlp]

What approach are you using with your planted tank, what kind of results / problems are you having and how much time does it take up ? A photo would be cool too.

It would be really great to get an impression of the pros and cons of different approaches to get a clearer picture of what's out there. Might help me (and others) get my tank running like a well oiled machine instead of a rusted skoda! It would be good to get different views on things like EI vs Natural etc.

Cheers

Karl.

 

[George Farmer]

Nice topic.

I run a high-tech 33G, most of you will have seen it in my journal.

Results are excellent. No problems in a practical sense. No nuisance algae and healthy plant growth. I spend a minute or so every day on ferts, CO2 and fish feeding then an hour or two once a week doing water change etc. Maintenance is relatively low on this for a high-tech due to the absence of stem plants - less pruning and re-planting (except glosso!)

Biggest negative is cost. I've probably spent well over £1000 in the last 3 years on it. However if I knew then what I know now, or had access to all the info on forums like this back then I could have set up an identical looking tank for around £250.

High-tech works for me as I'm not limited by plant choice, only by imagination and wallet!

You can see the full spec in the Member Planted Pic thread - although the pic is old, I must update it.

In its prime - soon to look better though (I hope!)

 

[modernhamlet]

I too have a high tech tank, though not nearly as nice as george's! I spend a minute a day on ferts and feeding, and usually about 2 hours or so every week, sometimes longer and sometimes more often, pruning and replanting. Stem plants are a bit of a pain at 4wpg.

Algae is a constant threat and I still haven't really got it fully under control. If you go away often and can't fertilize daily or every other day, high-tech may not be for you. My tank goes through about 5ppm of nitrate daily. If it gets below 10ppm, BGA is only a day or two away.

CO2 really takes care of itself, so in spite of the cost I'm very glad I took that route over DIY.

Speaking of cost, that's the kicker. High-tech planted tanks can be expensive. I've personally spent about $1700US on setting up my tank in the last 6 months.

I love how my tank looks (though I'm always thinking about how to make it better!) and the fish seem to be very happy as well. If you have the time and money, it's a very rewarding experience.

That said, my first planted tank was super low tech and very minimal maintenance and was very satisfying in it's own right.

Honestly, I think the difference comes down to two factors money and time. If you have the money and like to tinker with your tank, high tech could be for you. There are more plant options and results are generally going to be superior. But you can get a great look with much less work with low tech if you do some up front planning.

 

[karlp]

Bump...

What are other peoples experiences with trying to keep a planted tank be it hi-tech or humble....

 

[zig]

Hi Tech = time consuming and money draining, but worth it nonetheless once you get over the initial steep learning curve.

My tip for Hi Tech would be get pressurised CO2 once you are comfitable in the hobby and plan on staying around a while, also if starting off try and keep your wattage below 3 WPG on standard sized tanks.