Okee Dokee, a 50% reduction for doing nothing sure seems like a win to me. But, you do you boo…
Stacking Media In Sump
- Thread starter HUKIT
- Start date
Any worthy well informed hobbyist will know (or should know) that nitrate removal is just a starter point when it comes to the benefits of water changes.
But I'm afraid in reality that I'm quite wrong on that. Because it will indeed give many many hobbyists the excuse that water changes can be "stretched out", or even stopped altogether!
Complete failure across the board is the only way forward on these nitrate reducing products. Water changes are king, always will be.
900 plastic pot scrubbers temu 118 delivered gotta be worth a shot.Isn't it wonderful? Multiple experienced keepers in disagreement...you're wrong, I'm right, he's out to lunch, she doesn't know what she's talking about. My method works because of this...your idea is obviously wrong because of that. Listen to me, because I'm the smartest guy in the room! I use big words, therefore I must be correct. I read all the promotional literature from all the manufacturers, so I must be right. I spend more on the hobby than you do, so I'm by definition a better fishkeeper than you.
And yet somehow all these folks are keeping fish successfully! How can this be?
Here's a chart comparing the surface area of various biomedia; I've seen similar things in multiple places on the internet, and they may not be identical but the general gist of them is very similar:
View attachment 1568562
If you don't think it's valid...you may very well be correct. So many of these comparisons look so similar that I think that's an argument for generally accepting it. A few outliers show things like ceramic rings and clay balls as having far more surface area, but I think that perhaps those inflated numbers are displaying the area of clean, unused media, straight out of the box with the price tag still attached. In practice...I think...these ultra-fine-pored media will very quickly become clogged with biofilm and microscopic debris, rendering the majority of their surface area useless...IMHO. And look at the numbers for poly floss; they may be correct when you put the stuff in on Monday morning, but by the end of the day, or the middle of the week, that light fluffy cloud of floss has degenerated to a flat black layer of slime, through which very little water actually penetrates, so...?
These charts don't consider other aspects of biomedia, such as cost. Some folks think that spending more on media guarantees better performance; I sometimes think that they should try a biomedia chamber filled with folding money just to see what happens. It'll work...I mean, anything will work, since the basic function of biomedia is just to sit there and be covered with bacteria...but then we'll probably get into a debate over the relative efficiency of $50 bills as opposed to $20's or $10's.
A biggie for me is weight, which ties in with ease of cleaning. No matter how carefully and thoroughly we mechanically filter our water before sending it into the biomedia, the media will eventually benefit from an occasional cleaning to remove excess biofilm, debris, sludge, etc. Ceramics weigh a ton and are a PITA to remove for cleaning. Sponges, for which I have almost unbridled admiration as a filter media, are also a messy PITA to clean, although this is not a frequent requirement...thank goodness.
I'm not sure about the obsession with ultimate efficiency. Stacked vs random; static vs fluid; blah, blah, blah. If Media A works "better" than Media B...if such can even be detected and agreed upon...then logic would dictate that you use only Media A. And yet we see all manner of sumps with countless chambers and partitions, each section filled with a different boutique medium. Why? If one is better than the other, why devote any space to the other?
We can't all be right, we can't all be wrong. But...if a keeper's chosen method works for him and his tank is healthy and his fish are thriving...why should he care what others think or say? And conversely, if he is constantly dealing with mysterious diseases and health problems and cloudy water and worrisome test numbers...then why would anyone care what he thinks or says?
Fire calcined clay has been shown to have similar affects on nitrates. With regards to testing, it’s being done weekly on a Lamotte spin touch not an API test or a strip.
The media is $17.99 per 250g and the catalyst is $6.99 which lasts which lasts for a year.
To be perfectly honest I don’t care what other people do or don’t. The people who frequent aquarium forums represents less than 1% of the total fish keepers in the world. I never said this the best way nor the only way. I simply shared my personal experience for those interested. It’s no different than people using pothos or FCC mentioned above to achieve the same end result, it’s just an alternative way to solve a problem. I don’t understand some of the responses to people just sharing their experiences, which is essentially the point of a public forum.
No one has said anything regarding eliminating water changes or a reduced frequency of them. I don’t know why you keep regurgitating that in every post.
Will absolutely work, but...since you mentioned shot...one bag of 12-gauge budget plastic shotshell wads, $18.50 Canadian...that's about $13 US, for almost a cubic foot of media. They weigh nothing, last forever, easily rinsed if needed. They aren't cool....but if you're using potscrubbers, that ship has already sailed for you...900 plastic pot scrubbers temu 118 delivered gotta be worth a shot.
Not trying to be negative, just discussing the idea. Serious hobbyists will utilize this tech and understand what it can...and cannot...do for them. But as you say, the vast majority of hobbyists are far from serious and just buy whatever the LFS tries to sell them.
For me it'll remain a theoretical discussion, but certainly an interesting one. I hope you'll keep us posted on progress.
Ive ordered them I've been picking my brains for days about it....Will absolutely work, but...since you mentioned shot...one bag of 12-gauge budget plastic shotshell wads, $18.50 Canadian...that's about $13 US, for almost a cubic foot of media. They weigh nothing, last forever, easily rinsed if needed. They aren't cool....but if you're using potscrubbers, that ship has already sailed for you...
Thinking this post was made for me
Loving the idea of the scrubbers I have a back wash that will be rigged up when I've made the filter so hoping at the most ill have to put my hand in squashing it down a few times and keep back washing cleaning should be made easy.
Probably could get empty shot gun shells for free know loads of lads that shoot around here Devon UK
P.s thanks for saving my brain
Easy pod with a 250micron mesh insert insert washed off morning and night dailyNot trying to be negative, just discussing the idea. Serious hobbyists will utilize this tech and understand what it can...and cannot...do for them. But as you say, the vast majority of hobbyists are far from serious and just buy whatever the LFS tries to sell them.
For me it'll remain a theoretical discussion, but certainly an interesting one. I hope you'll keep us posted on progress.
Easy pod backwashed as off needed remove **** from settlement chamber
140ltr water tank filled with pot scrubbers back washed cleaned as of needed
Constant drip from hma filter 70% tank volume weekly to get a 50% water change.
Think I worked out filters changed every 4 weeks
System is gravity fed returned with a 5000ltrph pump
Tank volume 2750ltrs
Easy pod 80ltrs
140ltrs water tank
Total tank volume 2970 LTRs
Plan on adding a couple of big pins air pads to get some more water movement going and get some oxygen in there
Last edited:
I’ll do my best but since I’m not a “well informed” hobbyist no guarantees.Not trying to be negative, just discussing the idea. Serious hobbyists will utilize this tech and understand what it can...and cannot...do for them. But as you say, the vast majority of hobbyists are far from serious and just buy whatever the LFS tries to sell them.
For me it'll remain a theoretical discussion, but certainly an interesting one. I hope you'll keep us posted on progress.
