Page 3 of 3

Re: Figure 8 going full SW?

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:44 pm
by Pufferpunk
Exactly--then flush the Oscar because they are mad at it.

Re: Figure 8 going full SW?

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:28 pm
by sevenyearnight
Pufferpunk wrote:Exactly--then flush the Oscar because they are mad at it.
This sounds like guilty admission. :redface:
jk! I know you love the fishes!

Re: Figure 8 going full SW?

Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 10:58 am
by RTR
Or just killing them. It is no wonder why our hobby has so much turnover.

But nobody can deny that baby Oscars are sooo cute! Not may would be sold if the store told prospective buyers that a 50 was the absolute minimum tank size and a 75 better, but a 120 the best.

Re: Figure 8 going full SW?

Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 12:23 pm
by hadla
shoot, i thought a 55 was ok... but for a 120, i guess im going to end up choosing a fugu or porcupine puffer over an oscar lol

Re: Figure 8 going full SW?

Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2011 6:52 am
by RTR
An Oscar as a full adult is much longer than a 55 is front-to-back. A 50 is better , but still not quite enough room for easy turns and not nearly enough water. They really should have more than the 2' front-to-back of a 120. Oscars are big fish, total length can be ~18". Technically that should call for a tank at or over 3' front-to-back and deep, and ~ 9 feet long minimum. I've never seen any so housed though in a private home.

Very few hobbyists properly house their fish, unfortunately.

Re: Figure 8 going full SW?

Posted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 12:01 am
by hadla
well i guess im never getting an oscar then lol unless i can afford to keep it in a converted swimming pool