does anyone have a Pro 3/2260 and an FX5?
- Thread starter rumblesushi
- Start date
I will soon, i have the FX5 now and will be getting the new EH as well, i will do a thred once i get both running, but my FX5 has been running for a week now.
Joe
Joe
You're getting the Pro 3 Joefish?
I was wondering if you could do a test. Attach both outputs to an identical bucket, turn them on at the same time and see which filter has the better flow. Full of media too.
I was wondering if you could do a test. Attach both outputs to an identical bucket, turn them on at the same time and see which filter has the better flow. Full of media too.
Thats easy and i wont need them to do that, there GPH is a huge difference so the FX5 will win that toss off. even both packed with bio media. my FX5 is packed now and still has a huge flow rate. but when i do get the new EH i will for sure test it out!
Im to the point and past all the comments on which one is better, so screw it im getting both, that way i wont miss anything lol
Joe
Im to the point and past all the comments on which one is better, so screw it im getting both, that way i wont miss anything lol
Joe
The eheims have a slower flow rate because that company believes in longer contact time for the water and bio-media!! Personally I like the higher flow rate of the FX5!! I thinks eheims are overated.
Joe, the reason I am asking is because I'm not convinced about the flow rates.
I had a fluval 404, and a few eheim canisters.
The eheim classic 2215 has a flow rate of 620 l/ph and the 404 has an alleged flow rate of 1200 or 1300 litres per hour. I swear down, the eheim had a stronger flow, even though it was meant to be half as much. The fluval also clogged easily and the flow dropped significantly, I had to clean it often, and I never cleaned the eheim.
SO that's why I would like to do a test.
If the FX5 really does have a significantly higher flowrate, I might change my mind about fluval.
koliveira - in my experience eheims are not overrated at all. In Europe they are roughly the same price as fluvals, and I have found them to be the best filters, hands down.
I had a fluval 404, and a few eheim canisters.
The eheim classic 2215 has a flow rate of 620 l/ph and the 404 has an alleged flow rate of 1200 or 1300 litres per hour. I swear down, the eheim had a stronger flow, even though it was meant to be half as much. The fluval also clogged easily and the flow dropped significantly, I had to clean it often, and I never cleaned the eheim.
SO that's why I would like to do a test.
If the FX5 really does have a significantly higher flowrate, I might change my mind about fluval.
koliveira - in my experience eheims are not overrated at all. In Europe they are roughly the same price as fluvals, and I have found them to be the best filters, hands down.
Well if a filter cloggs fast then its doing its job, its the filters that run for months without needing to be cleaned i would be worried about. i would rather clean my filters once a month then once every 6 months, but i know what your talking about, so only time will tell, but i want BIG turnover rates in my tanks so im going to allways go with more flow, the FX5 is not my only filter i also have a 4ft sump with a 1200gph return as well as a ocean clear running off my sump and back in yealding 1800gph, i will be bumping my return pump up to a 1800gph pump, to make sure of no dead spots in the tank, and IMO there is no such thing as to much filtration, the more filters you have the less work they have to do, and thus the less you have to clean them. you also have to add the 4ft span from your stand to the tank this will also reduce your flow rate, so depending on ware you have your canaster will make a difference.
but in the end i wont mind adding the EH to my setup, beacause i will be moveing up to a much larger tank soon and when i do i will have plenty of seeded filters to move over.
but in the end i wont mind adding the EH to my setup, beacause i will be moveing up to a much larger tank soon and when i do i will have plenty of seeded filters to move over.