10/06/2015
Super Reef Octopus XP5000EXT vs NYOS QUANTUM 220
Note that the Super Reef Octopus is an older model, so this is not exactly an apples to apples comparison. NYOS is fairly new to the USA, so the test trial duration time is much less compared to the SRO. Please let me know if you have any questions about these skimmers.
SRO Super Reef Octopus XP5000EXT
Price: $949
Rating per manufacture (gal): up to 450gal
Size (footprint): 16" x 19" x 30"
Wattage: Bubble Blaster HY5000 (55 watts) RioHF10 feed pump (25watt) total ~80watts
Trial Duration: 5 years on a 800gal system (dry skimming)
Pros:
1. Was able to handle a low/med bio-load 800gal system with no problem. Rating is very generous by Reef Octopus
2. Flexibility to run external or internal
3. Thick and nasty skimmate
4. Customer Service support 10 of 10
5. Solid built with thick acrylic (makes me feel like I got bang for my buck)
Cons:
1. Large footprint
2. Noise level 6 of 10 (10 being unbearable)
3. Reliability of pump. Bubble Blaster Pump impeller needed to be replace after 3.5 yrs of use (even with regular maintenance every 4-6 months)
4. With 2 pumps to operate, I'm assuming it would add some amount of heat to the system
IMO, this is best fitted for a system in the 600gal range with med bio-load. Due to importance of size, efficiency, noise, my personal overall rating: 7 of 10. Recommended? yes!
NYOS Quantum 220
Price: $799
Rating per manufacture (gal): up to 530gal
Size (footprint): 7.28" x 9.8" x 20.8"
Wattage: 22watts
Trial Duration: 1 month on a 800gal system (dry skimming)
Pros:
1. Efficient pump @ 22watts!!!
2. Small foot print
3. Noise level 2 of 10 (10 being unbearable)
4. Design of water height control is creative and very easy to use
5. Unique design with a cool see-through chamber and clear needle wheel pump cap
6. No “dial-in” time. Skimmer was foaming up the first few minutes after it was plugged in.
7. Produces very fine bubble/foam
8. With only 1 pump to operate, minimal heat added to system
Cons:
1. Collection cup is a twisted on/off, which at times can be a pain when hands are wet
2. Collection cup has a cool curve splash plate, but cleaning the underside is a pain
3. Unable to handle 800gal, which is expected. Thickness of skimmate compared to SRO is much less. The 530gal rating is not as generous as the SRO
4. Quality of built/acrylic. Thickness of acrylic is a bit disappointing compared to the SRO.
IMO, the NYOS Quantum 220 is best fitted for a system in the 400gal range with med bio-load. Due to importance of size, efficiency, noise, my personal overall rating: 9 of 10. Recommended? yes!