Better option: 3 2217s or 2 FX5s

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
thanks for the replies guys - I forgot to add one detail - the tank will be a heavily stocked mbuna tank.

HarleyK- I have seen the 2262 working on a friend's reef tank, man that thing is a beast. Alot of people have recommended it and for a good reason. I am very satisfied with my 2217 so I have no doubt the 2262 will be more reliable then the FX5. But is it really twice as good as the FX5?

I really don't think 3 2217 is a good idea after reading your analysis - basically the same amount of bio media as ONE 2262 + alot more hoses and wattage comsumption, not a good idea.

Its between 2 FX5s against the 2262 i'm basically trading bio media capacity for water flow here. :nilly:

Is substrat and substrat pro really identical besides the shape? If i decide to get the FX5 - I can just get the substrat right? I mean all the gunk will be filtered by the foam before it even hits the 3 baskets. If this is true, you're saving me around $140!!

I plan on buying the FX5s on ebay, but the media that it comes with...is not as good as the Eheim stuff.

Currently reading on mods - I'm not a fan of that though, I don't trust myself when it comes to these things, one of the reason why I am not getting a sump set up.
 
my 240 uses 2 fx5's but i dont like that it doesnt produce the right bio i need i did add ceramics from ehiem to them and bio balls but still i am adding today a 2217 in the center to boost my tanks biological filtration if i were you on a 180 heavy stocked do 1 fx5 and 1 2217 saves you time and $$$ and you are doing just fine with those two running the fx will take care of polishing your water and give it alot of flow and the eheim will make sure you have great water conditions booya its a no brainer
 
Jgray152;2627858; said:
2262 won't put out 900 GPH. Just to let you know. It will probubly put out around 700-800. Still a lot. Eheim only put on one of their universal pumps which is 900 GPH at zero head with zero resistance in flow.
Click to expand...
kevin007;2628406; said:
Its between 2 FX5s against the 2262 i'm basically trading bio media capacity for water flow here. :nilly:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
As far as I know, all manufacturers publish flow rate w/o media and w/o hoses. The rating for FX5 (925 gph, 50 Watt) is practically equivalent to the 2262 (900 gph, 80 Watts). The 2262 has to pull water thru more media, but as you can see, it has a higher power motor. I'd say the output is insignificantly different. It'd be interesting to see someone try it out with buckets :D

kevin007;2628406; said:
I am very satisfied with my 2217 so I have no doubt the 2262 will be more reliable then the FX5. But is it really twice as good as the FX5?
Click to expand...

The 2262 has the same flow (see above) and 3-times the biocapacity. You be the judge if that's twice as good as the FX5.


kevin007;2628406; said:
Is substrat and substrat pro really identical besides the shape? If i decide to get the FX5 - I can just get the substrat right? I mean all the gunk will be filtered by the foam before it even hits the 3 baskets. If this is true, you're saving me around $140!!
Click to expand...

Feel free to search online, if you find indications that they're different other than shape, then please post that here. All my research led me to believe that the material and surface area are the same, just the pro being formed into spheres which don't collect solids and, thus, clog up less. Again, if the biomedia is preceeded bu mech (foam, ceramic tubes, or floss), then the difference should be insignificant.

I'd love to hear more if anyone has more info, we're all here to learn from each other.

HarleyK
 
Just in my own experience, the SubPro is much better as an overall media than the normal Substrat. As Harley noted, it provides all the bio you need without clogging so easily..... Much better for long service intervals.

Also, I'd go with the one 2262 -- no question in my mind. If you haven't seen one in person I can understand your confusion. There's really no need to complicate things with multiple filters, more wattage, etc. when this titan can easily handle the job........ Oh yeah, and no need for a bunch of "modifications" (funny how we all want to mess with things!).
 
I'm leaning towards a 2262 now. This filter, judging from your comment and internet reviews tells me it is simply the best, I have never read ANY negative comments about it. My 2217 is impressing me and I'll give the 2262 the benefit of the doubt. And its only 80W compared to 100 by 2 FX5s, superior bio media capacity and equal water flow. I am really not a fan of modding a filter either. I've also heard that it clogs very easily, which would reduce water flow.

But I have one more concern. Does a single 2260 provide sufficient water circulation on a 180G? Although has the same output as ONE FX5, 2 is clearly superior compared to it. I originally planned to have 2 intakes/outakes in each corner to provide the circulation I wanted (behind each of my 2 rock piles) and to make sure not poop gets trapped behind there (I'll rarely remove rocks).

Is it possible to run just ONE 2262 on a 180G? If i decide to keep my 55G running, I'll keep the 2217 on it, leaving the 2262 to filter the 180 on its own. What do you think?

BTW I really appreciate the input, I don't want to mess up in this project. I've brought some pretty bad filters in the past (primarily Fluval 4+ internal filter) and I've lost faith in Fluval (although the FX5 is in a class of it's own).
 
get a powerhead to circulate water and keep the water moving so nothing settles in dead spots away from the filter. that way you get plenty of filtration and circulation
 
puffcrusader696;2629361; said:
get a powerhead to circulate water and keep the water moving so nothing settles in dead spots away from the filter. that way you get plenty of filtration and circulation
Click to expand...

If i run my 2217 too, I can set up the 2217 input on the left back corner with the spray bar near the surface on the left glass shooting across the 180G, and the 2262 set up exactly on the opposite side, that way I'll have an intake on both of the corners. How does that sound?

Is it possible to set up a power head, lets say Koralia to shoot all the poop into one spot? Or better yet, in the 2262?
 
kevin007;2629390; said:
If i run my 2217 too, I can set up the 2217 input on the left back corner with the spray bar near the surface on the left glass shooting across the 180G, and the 2262 set up exactly on the opposite side, that way I'll have an intake on both of the corners. How does that sound?

Is it possible to set up a power head, lets say Koralia to shoot all the poop into one spot? Or better yet, in the 2262?
Click to expand...

a koralia would be good to shoot the poop into the 2262 but i would get 2 800 gph koralias to make sort of a constant circulation so no poop settles anywhere and still goes in the 2262. i would get 2 of these:

http://www.thatpetplace.com/pet/prod/234404/product.web
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom