Author Topic: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695  (Read 1959 times)

Offline ⚡⚡DrachenDame⚡⚡

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1409
  • Fur, and Scales, and Scorpion Tails.
CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« on: January 05, 2009, 09:43:48 PM »
So, I was pretty set on the CN single level, and then I stumbled upon a Martin's thread. I have 4 girls and I was wondering which cage was better?
Some people think the best way to protect animal life is to make scientists fear for theirs. Support the Foundation for Biomedical Research.

Offline Emymoo

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2497
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2009, 09:47:36 PM »
What about little Lucien? :(

Most people think the CN is overall a better cage, but I really like the look of the R-695's. It would just come down to how much you'd want to spend.
The dogs: Sara and Lola. The kitties: Emy and Molly
Rest in peace my sweeties
 Bella, Riley, Fuzz, Juno and Frederick <3

Offline ⚡⚡DrachenDame⚡⚡

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1409
  • Fur, and Scales, and Scorpion Tails.
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #2 on: January 05, 2009, 09:53:17 PM »
Lucien lives at my boyfriend's house in a 40 gallon tank with other boys. I don't know exactly how old he is, but he's a little under a year. My boyfriend bought the 2 other males and one female (Who died) from that litter, so he lives with those two boys, and two of his nephews. I felt bad about him being alone all the time, and I needed to use his cage as the QT cage for my new babies. It costs a ridiculous amount to get him neutered here (NY) and I really want to consolidate to one cage, which is what brought me to this decision. I'd like to spend as little as possible, but I also want the better cage. Something that's easier to clean.
Some people think the best way to protect animal life is to make scientists fear for theirs. Support the Foundation for Biomedical Research.

Offline JuliesZoo74

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2710
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #3 on: January 05, 2009, 10:08:45 PM »
I have both cages.  I actually have the 695 sitting on top of the 161 cage.  I like them both.  I like the doors on the CN and think it is easier to clean.  The 695 cage is great looking and fits in the tub to fully clean but is a little awkward to carry to the tub.  I don't think I prefer one over the other. 

I'm using them both LOL!  Right now they are in the CN cage.  Cleaning day, they will go into the 695 and I'll clean the CN.  I'm switching back and forth.  I don't have anywhere to store the 695 right now so I might as well use it :P

Offline ⚡⚡DrachenDame⚡⚡

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1409
  • Fur, and Scales, and Scorpion Tails.
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #4 on: January 05, 2009, 10:11:55 PM »
Hmmm... Indecision 2009. I don't know which to get. I'm leaning towards the CN because of those big doors and ease of cleaning, but I'm leaning towards the Martin's because of cost. I appreciate everyone's input, but it's such a hard decision. If you HAD to give up one of the cages and keep the other, which would you keep?
Some people think the best way to protect animal life is to make scientists fear for theirs. Support the Foundation for Biomedical Research.

Offline JuliesZoo74

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2710
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #5 on: January 05, 2009, 10:29:05 PM »
They cost me the same.  My Martin's including shipping cost $136 and the CN including shipping was $139.99.  So cost isn't an issue for me.  I think if I had to chose,  I would go with the CN.  I like how easy it is to clean.

Offline ⚡⚡DrachenDame⚡⚡

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1409
  • Fur, and Scales, and Scorpion Tails.
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #6 on: January 05, 2009, 11:32:52 PM »
Where did you get your CN from that it was only 139.99 with shipping?
Some people think the best way to protect animal life is to make scientists fear for theirs. Support the Foundation for Biomedical Research.

Offline Emymoo

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2497
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #7 on: January 06, 2009, 12:31:28 AM »
allpetfurniture.com has the single story for that price. Rats really shoudn't be kept in tanks though  :(
The dogs: Sara and Lola. The kitties: Emy and Molly
Rest in peace my sweeties
 Bella, Riley, Fuzz, Juno and Frederick <3

Offline evilhobbitgirl

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
  • ratless
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #8 on: January 06, 2009, 12:43:52 AM »
I would go for the 695, I was tempted by the CN at one point buttttttt I changed my mind.

Offline ⚡⚡DrachenDame⚡⚡

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1409
  • Fur, and Scales, and Scorpion Tails.
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #9 on: January 06, 2009, 01:24:04 AM »
Why would you choose the 695 over the CN?
Some people think the best way to protect animal life is to make scientists fear for theirs. Support the Foundation for Biomedical Research.

Offline ShigsnPits

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #10 on: January 06, 2009, 07:06:39 AM »
I debated this exact issue prior to Thanksgiving.  I looked at the FN's in the stores, and then contemplated what I knew about the CN from the forum.  By looking at the FN, I was able to tell what the CN would be like, on a smaller scale. 

I am now the proud owner of a Martin's 695.  Sure, the CN may look nicer, but I like the versatility of the 695 in that you can hang stuff everywhere and anywhere in the cage.  Sure, you can do that with the CN, but from what it looks like, the hammocks would slide on the bars, as they openings are not as small as the 695.  Does that make sense?  Hammocks and stuff will stay in place.

You can easily disassemble it and fold it up the 695 if you don't need it (especially if you assemble with zip ties) and slide it under the bed or put it anywhere.  The bottom of the cage pan is smooth enough that it is easy to move over carpet.  It is relatively easy to clean also.  So far, this is my favorite cage I have ever had between rats and ferrets.

I have just read so many positive things about Martin's cages, that I had to give it a shot.  Having rescued ferrets for the past 7 years, I have been through SO many cages, custom made AND pet store cages, and thus far, I am in love with the 695.  I recently had some rather large ferret cages (6 ft tall, 4.5 ft wide), and the CN seems more bulky and will take up more space, and I am tired of large cages taking up all the extra wall space that I have!

Those are just my personal feelings.  You need to decide what is best for all involved.   


Wild animals never kill for sport. Man is the only one to whom the torture and death of his fellow creatures is amusing in itself -Froude

Offline ⚡⚡DrachenDame⚡⚡

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1409
  • Fur, and Scales, and Scorpion Tails.
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #11 on: January 06, 2009, 11:53:03 AM »
Hm...that does give me something to think about. The one thing I really love about the CN is the huge doors. The 695 would pretty much fit into the space where I have my cage now, but I really like the look of the CN. It would also probably be about the same price because a store near me can order it, so I wouldn't have to pay for shipping. What makes the 695 so easy to clean? That's definitely one thing that will cinch it. Since I have all bamboo wood floors, I can't really drag anything across them. From what I've read about the CN, you just need to wipe it out and change the bedding. How do you clean the 695?
Some people think the best way to protect animal life is to make scientists fear for theirs. Support the Foundation for Biomedical Research.

Offline libertatis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 401
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #12 on: January 06, 2009, 08:21:32 PM »
I have the 695, and I really love it. I've never had a FN or CN, so I can't directly compare, but I can tell you that Martin's makes a good product.

the CN wasn't out when I got my 695, so part of why I got it was because of the bar spacing (I refuse to pay close to $200 for a cage that I have to spend a bunch of time and money modifying), but also because it had a pan that could hold beeding (my boys aren't litter trained), it could sit on a table, and it had vertical and horizontal bars, which can accomodate climbing and easy decorating.

Really, it's just a matter of personal preference. If I decide to get more rats and keep two cages, I'll probably get a CN as my next cage, just because it looks like it's just as good as the Martin's cages, but just different, and I'd like to try it out...don't have the space, money, or time to keep two cages full of rats right now, though.

I know people who love both, and I know people who swear by one and not the other. But they're both very good cages, and odds are you'll be happy with either one.
Owned by Houdini, Patroclus, Fritz, and Dorian.

RIP: Maxine, Sweetstick, Basil, Olivia, Stormy, and Lightning

Offline ShigsnPits

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #13 on: January 06, 2009, 09:27:33 PM »
In regards to cleaning, the fact that I am used to cages like the 695, I guess that is an "art" that I have formed. Ha ha!  I am VERY anal about how clean my rat cages are, so they do not get much of a chance to get dirty. I can see how the CN would be easier to wipe down, but I think that it is quite a bit heavier then the 695.  The 695 fits right in my tub when I need to hose it down.  It comes right off the base, and the base is a nice plastic that won't break like I have read the CNs do.   

Again, it is all a personal preference.  The CN is very nice looking, but it is wider than I prefer.  I like wide AND tall cages.  Gives the rats more climbing space, in my opinion.  The CN is more like a piece of furniture with the way that it looks, but I am still hooked on the "old fashioned" cages like the Martin's.  Maybe if I ever have the chance of seeing a CN in person, I may change my mind.  In the meantime, it is a 695 for me!

Wild animals never kill for sport. Man is the only one to whom the torture and death of his fellow creatures is amusing in itself -Froude

Offline synelovator

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 733
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #14 on: January 06, 2009, 09:49:11 PM »
is the CN really two whole feet deep?!  it doesn't look that wide in the pictures, but those can be deceiving.

Offline JuliesZoo74

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2710
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #15 on: January 06, 2009, 09:52:48 PM »
Yes, it is 36 long and 24 wide.

Offline evilhobbitgirl

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
  • ratless
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #16 on: January 18, 2009, 01:33:16 PM »
What about the height of the single level not including the shelf space under? I've been more and more tempted by the CN now after seeing everyone's pictures!! The most appealing thing to me are the doors, for ease of cleaning. The 695 also looks harder to attach fleece to the shelves.. Right now my cage has the same dimensions of the 695 but the doors are smaller and it's already a bit of a pain to clean and decorate with those doors...

Offline ⚡⚡DrachenDame⚡⚡

  • Posts Too Much!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1409
  • Fur, and Scales, and Scorpion Tails.
Re: CN 161 Vs. Martin's 695
« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2009, 11:06:59 PM »
The cage without the stand is 36LX24HX24W. With the stand the height is 39".
Some people think the best way to protect animal life is to make scientists fear for theirs. Support the Foundation for Biomedical Research.