Filter Dilemna

[duanes]

I must also admit I don't like canisters, there is nothing magical about pressurized can, to me they are no better than HOBs, and the last one I had made me hate doing maintenance.
If you're ready for a sump, they have endless possibilities and options for adding on different types of chemical, mechanical and bio filtration, and in the end can be DIY and inexpensive. I run biotowers, fractionation and fluidized beds in the same sump, you can even put in a plenum, and of course hide all unnatural gear, like heaters, wires, pumps etc.
But you need to be up on flows, plumbing and other facets or they can be problematic.

 

[slippery slimecoat]

I ran a couple AC110's on a 120 for a long time. Upgraded to a 2262. Now have a 150 gallon with a sump. The sump is the best hands down imo. With that said, considering your situation, I'd stick with the Aquaclears until you move and upgrade. Then build your sump for the new tank. I liked the 2262, but cleaning the AC110'S is a breeze compared to the 2262.

 

[rodger]

Where

I have each of the filtration methods you have described currently running at my place right now. I do not see an Eheim being easier to clean than an FX5. Better, yes, easier to clean, no. Let's be real all canisters are a pain in the butt to cleab. The Eheim is a very well balanced piece of equipment so I would not go inline for heat (in general for anything larger than 75 gallons). It's a waste of electricity and far less efficient than being in the tank. Additionally the choke the flow of a canister which is important if this is your main filtration.

In your case I would suggest a sump. Socks, media and done. If you want more flow you switch pumps and be done. With canisters this is not an option without purchasing another. That out budgets most sumps quickly for little return on the initial investment.

Where did you get the information that an inline heater is inefficient? In my feeble mind that makes no sense.

 

[nzafi]

Where
Where did you get the information that an inline heater is inefficient? In my feeble mind that makes no sense.

Not sure if I agree with everything he said. I would expect it to possible reduce flow, but from what I read inline heaters were more efficient. Found a bunch of folks that were running lower wattage heaters than when inside their tank. Don't ask me why, because I have no clue.

 

[JK47]

Where
Where did you get the information that an inline heater is inefficient? In my feeble mind that makes no sense.

Where = my personal experience. They reduce flow of canisters and IMO do not bring additional efficiency from a heating perspective. Heating requires contact time. Not to say they do not work and I am happy for folks if they make that application work for them but it does not work well for all. They are just less efficient than a conventional heater placement. The most efficient place for a heater is in the tank (maximum contact time vs power consumption). Next up would be the sump. Lastly, inline. Hence why I say they are less efficient. Think of it in terms of UV sterilization. That concept is nearly identical from an inline heating efficiency perspective.

 

[rodger]

Where = my personal experience. They reduce flow of canisters and IMO do not bring additional efficiency from a heating perspective. Heating requires contact time. Not to say they do not work and I am happy for folks if they make that application work for them but it does not work well for all. They are just less efficient than a conventional heater placement. The most efficient place for a heater is in the tank (maximum contact time vs power consumption). Next up would be the sump. Lastly, inline. Hence why I say they are less efficient. Think of it in terms of UV sterilization. That concept is nearly identical from an inline heating efficiency perspective.

Hmmmm....... If you compare to UV, you want the lower flow for dwell time. I would say that would increase the heating efficiency but might somewhat affect filtering if you are nearing capacity of the filter.

 

[rodger]

Anecdotal evidence is the equivalent of no evidence.

 

[JK47]

Anecdotal evidence is the equivalent of no evidence.

I do not have evidence nor was I asked for any. I can only share my experience to date. Watt for watt one cannot do what the other can. I have a brand new 300 watt Hyder inline heater in my drawer yall can buy if you decide to go that route. Not enough for my large tanks. Sorry, busy day at work and I am on mobile between warehouses at the moment.

 

[Fish Eat Fish]

The heater will put out 300 watt either way. Dwell time doesn't matter for a heater...a UV sterilizer sure because it requires target materials to have a certain amount of exposure...but heat is heat and although the water coming out won't be as hot at first it will still heat a volume of water at the same rate. It's just physics. That being said the inline heater you used may not be up to spec or your comparison may be over spec...who knows. As far as flow and construction you just use a bigger pipe...again this could be a design flaw in your unit.

 

[Timmy]

I agree, sump is the way to go...... HOWEVER, I do love my fx6's (2 of them) on my 210 gallon. Good amount of media, good flow and VERY VERY easy to clean.....