Why based on the physics of it, do you think Mr. Warner is wrong? You have said he’s biased, but that doesn’t mean what he says is wrong. In fact, they could have released it without VBT if they found it didn’t work better. Also, the fact something is made in China doesn’t mean its not quality. I believe KZ skimmers are made in China…also, I don’t see the logic about getting rid of the gate valve. See it as I’ve overflowed my skimmer a few times using the wedge pipe, I really like the gate valve. I will admit its a function over fashion decision, but in something that I’m filling up with fish poo, I’ll take function

Claiming a Chinese built, Sicce powered, “Interpretation” (good word choice btw) is “better” I think is just ridiculous.

Why not just make this in the USA? It’s already over the $500 mark which puts it in the “High End” skimmer market. This is where people tend to care more about build quality, choice of material, acrylic thickness, customer service, & “Bling” factor so adding a few hundred wouldn’t really matter anyway.

Eric said it best on the SWC “Cone” preview.

“Once you break past the $500 mark it is a completely different customer. However rational or irrational it may be, most of these customers want the best… so what’s another few hundred dollars?”

Indeed, the skimmate production was also greater and of better quality.

Horizontal turbulence with a standard bubble plate is easy to visualize. Water comes straight up out of a bubble plate but must move to the inner wall of the body to drain down to the base. By definition this is a horizontal movement.

A cylindrical skirt and/or conical extension simply changes the location of the point of turbulence. Downward water flow strikes the edge of the “point” with too much velocity causing turbulence. Look at the edge of the cylindrical skirt, you’ll see it.

The problem with a non-VBT plate is twofold.

1) You have too much water velocity near the edge of the plate/extension

2) You have horizontal turbulence dictated by the design of the solid bubble plate.

Both problems are reduced by VBT. Logically, the velocity of water flowing past the plate/extension is reduced and there is less horizontal turbulence created by movement of water “outwards”.

We have single port VBT designs AND multi port VBT designs we’re currently testing for future use.

The best way I can describe a VBT equipped body is to imagine a large airstone skimmer with the water feed turned off.

I bet that center tube ends up being a detritus trap… detritus that could have been trapped in the bubble column and put in the cup if it didnt have that extra escape path.

Dont go thinking that means I dont like it… I merely question the idea that the central ‘drain’ is really of any use, or that it might actually hurt performance more than help it. If you have too much horizontal motion in the cone… methinks you didn’t do something else right to start with. putting a cylinder around the bubble plate is a much more sensible way to prevent horizontal turbulence IMO. The cones also suffer from too much turbulence if you dont have enough air going into them… this causes you to raise the waterline, which means the bubbles and water have more room between the bubble plate and above the waterline to ‘swirl around’. Trust me, my XL cone with 4000lph is actually much less turbulent than with only 2600lph of air because with only 2600lph, my waterline is that much higher.

I mean, hell, what about bubble plates, pond pumps, custom volutes, mesh wheels (yes, he beat ATI to it) and such? Everyone should be lamenting over how the entire skimmer industry is just scavenging off of Klaus’ ideas.

At the end of the day, the real inventor of the cone skimmer may be Chun-Chieh Liu but I don’t see anyone bringing his name up I really don’t feel this is a knock off, but to each their own. Technology and new products are about evolution. ATB evolved their designs with Laguna’s and enlarged volutes, and now WM is evolving their skimmer designs with a cone body…both companies are smart for doing so.