# Need help deciding



## dcristalli90 (Mar 7, 2006)

Well i just bought a 30 inch pc strip with a 65 watt bulb, a couple bags of eco complete, a piece of driftwood, etc, and now all i need is the tank and plants obviously. I was thinking of either the 20 gallon long (30x12x12) or the 29 gallon (30x12x17) i don't think i want the 37 because it is way to tall. so which should i get the 20 gallon long which is what i'm kind of leaning towards or the 29 gallon? I will have plenty of light if i get the 20 g and only a moderate amount of light if i get the 29, so that's another reason i'm leaning towards the 20.


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2007)

With the 20g, you'll be on the border of needing CO2, while with the 29g, you shouldn't with that light. I'd probably go with the 20 long though, personally.  You'll have alot of plant choices with the 20g long.


----------



## dcristalli90 (Mar 7, 2006)

yeah that's what i was thinking, and my friend will sell me his old pressurized unit, so if i need it i will buy it. can you think of any good aquascape plant suggestions? i was thinking glossostigma for the foreground, then i have a piece of bogwood with a bunch of java fern attached to it (should i place that in the middle?), where else should i put plants, name suggestions?


----------



## Damon (Jan 18, 2005)

Go with the 29 gallon. Still plenty of light and more room for fish and plants.


----------



## BV77 (Jan 22, 2005)

I'd go with the 29 myself, as a 20 long doesn't have much height for a nice plant display, IMO


----------



## TigerBarb12 (Jan 7, 2007)

id go with the 20 long, i think it would look nice


----------



## girth vader (Apr 24, 2006)

29g for sure. It's the same footprint as the 20 but you're getting more height for growth as Damon said. The wpg is a bit more complicated then just calculating total watts and gallons however it's a pretty good rule of thumb. It has a lot to do with surface area as well, so your WPG will not change in the 29g as much as you think. at only 17" the light will reach the bottom without any trouble. The bulb selection will be your biggest choice. I have used Coralife 6700k, all glass 8000k, GE 9325k, and coralife 10k and I like the 6700k hands down, although a lot of ppl like the GE and swear by it. Talk to some plant heads on a few sites and choose the bulb that will best suit the plants you want. I would also consider a carbon source either hi/low tech or excel. but don't think that your light source will not be as adequate for the 29 as opposed to the 20, it will be the same for all intensive purposes. Have fun planning your scape, thats half the fun! 

cheers.

Zig.

a good read if you want help understanding minimum light requirements & wpg 

http://rexgrigg.com/./mlt.htm


----------



## MyraVan (Jan 19, 2005)

Here's another vote for the 29. That amount of light will allow you to grow plenty of things. Sure you won't be able to grow the most demanding of plants, but with careful choice of plants you will be able to include a few pink or red ones (I've got pinkish hygro and a red Nymphea stellata growing in a 20g with 30W of lighting, so you should have no probs with them in yours!)

I also agree that the extra height will be great for allowing nice tall plants for your background, and of course the extra gallons will allow you to stock more fish.

An all around win for the 29g, I think.

As for bulbs, I like daylight bulbs myself, and I think a daylight bulb is about 6500k, so the Coralife 6700k sounds good to me too.


----------



## Damon (Jan 18, 2005)

Remember bigger is better. Your fish and plants will tank you for it.


----------



## Daniel1 (Aug 30, 2006)

definately get the 29 gals tank..your set up will look nicer..and you will have more choices.
i have a 29 gals tank..which is medium light...on which i have 8 black neon tetras, a pair of appistograma borelli, 3 ottos , 3 cories and more than 15 shrimp...


----------



## mayastarocker (Dec 29, 2006)

I agree with a 29 gal. It might be a bit more pricy if you buy one new but it will be better in the long run.


----------

