FX5 running strong...

[Leptar]

I will snap pics once i open it up for it's maintenance...

I did a water change and didn't shut the filter off and thought... I need to get this on video... I don't know.. I hear people talk about how weak their FX5 is and the "problems" they have.... I say "post" it...

Bottom basket has a layer of fluval rings topped by Eheim substrat pro then a fine pad, middle basket is full of substrat pro then topped with a blue pad, top basket is 2 blue pads and i think ( i don't remember some extra blue marineland filter media), i left the upper basket empty for that just incase... until then i am saving $$ for another 4 liters of substrat pro...

I am looking for some lattice to make the baskets substrat pro proof(lol)...

neways little over 3 months since i cleaned it.. no carbon = longer time inbetween breakin it down.

video of the output...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ6_uPsKO-c

 

[BigBubba]

i couldn't be happier with mine as well. even the flow from the factory nozzel is impressive. i just feel its a little over rated by fluval. 925 gph is the pump itself sitting on the bench not the entire canister with media and baskets. the book says 565gph with no baskets or media and up to a 400 gallon tank. 100 gallon tank is more like it. 925 on the bench is great, but who cares. and who is gonna run it with no baskets or media? they should tell us what it flows with a standard load of medias they suggest..

my fx does a great job on my 90 for 3 peacocks and friends. with nano balls in the top basket, ceramic bio rings with fine filter pads on top in the middle and bottom baskets. i'm also running a cascade 1500 full of bio sponges and ceramic rings with the fx.

i have a xp4 that does ok on a 55 with a couple of oscars and friends and its rated up to a 265 gallon tank and 450 gph. the fine print says 190gph with media, now thats a usefull number.

I wish the filter companies would come up with a standardized system for rating thier equipment.

 

[ira]

I recently read athread on this forum comparing the fx5 and Ehiem the conclusion was that the Ehiem was superior for biological filtration and energy consumption the fx5 was better for mechanical filtration and bang for the buck because of its lower price. The Ehiem also had a higher % of its advertised folw rate when loaded with media. They were both rated as good reliable products but it seems as if the fx5 is winning the hearts and minds of fish hobbyists, I just purchased a new one from a member on this forum on Friday, thanks again Cornbread, I ordered extra media and other supplies from Pet Solutions which will be delivered Tuesday and I'll set it up then. I do have one question, my 125 gal sits on a double stand with a 100 gal on the bottom, will placing the fx5 on the side as opposed to in the center under the tank make a noticable difference?

 

[12 Volt Man]

I hear people talk about how weak their FX5 is and the "problems" they have.... I say "post" it...

I hear ya. people say the same thing about the Rena XP3's on occasion and mine are powerful as hell..

posting it for everyone to see is a great equalizer between the truth and exageration..

great job and great filter!

 

[Leptar]

will placing the fx5 on the side as opposed to in the center under the tank make a noticable difference?

No as long as you make the output end the shorter end.. For example if you put the FX5 on the left side of the tank, keep the return also on the left side..
Less water for the motor to push...

I'm not slamming other filters... And true test to the reliability of the Eheim 2217 is in my 40g breeder tank...

I changed to "play sand" (WTF was i thinking) and ruined 2 impellers for the AC300 and also ruined (after my catfish knocked the foam block off) a 402 powerhead..


I had the FX5 on a 65g tank along with a AC110... kept the water spotless and chemistry was in check... I took the FX5 and set it up on a 75g and put my 2028 on the 65g... chemistry is in check in both tanks less occupants in the 65g but i find myself vacuuming the gravel every week... Upside the JD fry aren't getting blown around and sucked in to the filter but the down side is more tank maintenance.


What i am getting at is each filter has its own desired application and finding this application is up to the sole individual that is going to try and utilize proper filtration....

I'm still wet behind the ears with this stuff and have spent $$ on trial and error... It is already an expensive hobby and if i can help the fellow fishkeeper out by showing them then so be it...

with that said here is the video of the 2217 running...
Setup is Stock, EHFIMECH, 1 coarse filter pad, EHFISUBSTRAT, 1 fine filter pad. Carbon pad was used for the first 2 weeks of the tank cycle. Tank cycled in 21 days using the seeding method. ( I washed the trays for FX5 back in October/November in the 40g breeder tank)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvBRcuH3ULo

 

[LouieV]

I will snap pics once i open it up for it's maintenance...

I did a water change and didn't shut the filter off and thought... I need to get this on video... I don't know.. I hear people talk about how weak their FX5 is and the "problems" they have.... I say "post" it...

Bottom basket has a layer of fluval rings topped by Eheim substrat pro then a fine pad, middle basket is full of substrat pro then topped with a blue pad, top basket is 2 blue pads and i think ( i don't remember some extra blue marineland filter media), i left the upper basket empty for that just incase... until then i am saving $$ for another 4 liters of substrat pro...

I am looking for some lattice to make the baskets substrat pro proof(lol)...

neways little over 3 months since i cleaned it.. no carbon = longer time inbetween breakin it down.

video of the output...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ6_uPsKO-c

Nice..Let me ask you a question!!! how did you installed or make that spray bar for your FX5?? you have to let me know!

 

[Leptar]

Nice..Let me ask you a question!!! how did you installed or make that spray bar for your FX5?? you have to let me know!

Very easy...

I actually got lucky on the first attempt as everything is cemented in place...

Everything is connected via 1"..
1" heavy duty high pressure washing machine hose
1" hose barbs in 1" threaded/slip 90 PVC fittings
A small section of 1" PVC pipe connected to another 1" PVC shutoff valve.
1" PVC pipe to the top of the tank connected by 2 90 PVC elbows with 3" piece of PVC pipe in between the 2.. I was going to use street elbows here but with a plumbing background i didn't wanted a full seating and this did not give me the proper clearance to clear the lid.
Another piece of 1" PVC pipe to another 90 then a capped piece of 1" PVC pipe.
Drill your holes first for the spray bar... then clean it out before putting it all together.
Dry fit everything first.

Jgray152 started a thread about modifying the FX5 and goes into detail on the install that can be found here.

I thought i took pictures before i glued it and put it in the tank... can't find them....

 

[Jgray152]

How many holes do you have in your spray bar, and how large are they?

I think I have a video some where of the Fx5's output from the 1" tubing. The water gets throw about 8-10" I think. It was a while ago.

 

[tcarswell]

i couldn't be happier with mine as well. even the flow from the factory nozzel is impressive. i just feel its a little over rated by fluval. 925 gph is the pump itself sitting on the bench not the entire canister with media and baskets. the book says 565gph with no baskets or media and up to a 400 gallon tank. 100 gallon tank is more like it. 925 on the bench is great, but who cares. and who is gonna run it with no baskets or media? they should tell us what it flows with a standard load of medias they suggest..

my fx does a great job on my 90 for 3 peacocks and friends. with nano balls in the top basket, ceramic bio rings with fine filter pads on top in the middle and bottom baskets. i'm also running a cascade 1500 full of bio sponges and ceramic rings with the fx.

i have a xp4 that does ok on a 55 with a couple of oscars and friends and its rated up to a 265 gallon tank and 450 gph. the fine print says 190gph with media, now thats a usefull number.

I wish the filter companies would come up with a standardized system for rating thier equipment.

I agree it would be easier on us since the actual output to rated output is different for every filter. some with no by pass will have really low output compared to some with huge bypass channels. its good to know what your getting really.

 

[tcarswell]

Also I dont understand the 2217 on the 40 gallon breeder? Was it a good match or no ? Looked sweet to me. Do you mean the reliability while running in play sand? If thats the case then it must have no by pass I love my Eheim 2215 and am hooking up a 2217 to the same tank here soon.