The last sentence is not something a moderator should be saying. In fact it indicates to me that you yourself simply lack respect. I have not insulted you, don't insult me. I don't know your experience but to me it comes off as you did your first mod and now think it's the best thing for everyone. I'm here to tell you as someone who's done many many over the years that's simply nowhere near true. In a matter of common sense, if it was truly the best way to do it, a business would already be selling a better version of it for cheaper than you can make it. That's capitalism 101. (unless I'm mistaken and you've patented your design and plan to sue the crap out of anyone who tries to copy it)
First, I've in no way insulted you. If my accusation of acting in a young, ignorant and fanboyish manner is offensive to you, it is because it likely hits a little close to home. Evaluate your manner of debating a point if you don't like the things people have to say about the manner in which you do it, or just grow some thicker skin.
lets start with a point your logic doesn't pan. You list a flowrate of the python using only gravity without an external pump, you list the flowrate of yours using an external pump...seriously? Anyways
http://flexpvc.com/WaterFlowBasedOnPipeSize.shtml
doesn't agree with chompers numbers I'll leave that to others to sort out but by default you're not playing fair, allowing external force to one and not the other.
By YOUR logic and link, I can use my current design as it sits with its 3/4 ID tubing and will still get a 200 GPH flowrate increase over a Python with its 1/2 inch ID tubing WITH NO PUMP. My entire point, that you seem to fail to grasp, is that an electric pump is more efficient than running your faucet to create a vacuum. Now just how can we get an external pump to drain the tank that would avoid the necessity of buying a new pump? Hmmm...
You also seem to fail to notice that this isn't a gravity fed flow chart, which is what a Python is. Even the "Low to Gravity" information on the chart specifically states that it is the flow on the vacuum side of the pump.
Also, we must keep in mind the member who tested the flow of his Python earlier in the thread was only getting one five gallon bucket in 2.5 minutes. That's 120 gallons per hour, no where near the alleged 400 gallons per hour that you allege the 1/2 inch ID tubing of the Python is able to flow, based on your link.
Maybe a Python can flow close to 400 GPH running your faucet full blast, but this is where the "horribly inefficient and wasteful" thing comes in.
Price:
http://www.petco.com/product/2762/P...ean and Fill Aquarium Maintenance System-2762
I could find it cheaper or more expensive if I wanted to, if you have a petco, petsmart, or walmart with a fish center nearby, it's there.
You didn't mention what length of tubing in your guide, also your fill hose appears to be smaller than the standard 3/4" pvc it's also clear and to me appears no different than the python.
I should mention a python could be used in place and hooked to a pump and perform the exact same function as yours without the waste. I should also mention the python performs a function yours does not and that's gravel vac. You could be using bare bottom tanks and not need that, many others do have a substrate that does need to be vacuumed.
The OP made no mention of vacuuming the tank. He asked about water changes. The ability of my system to vacuum or not vacuum is irrelevant to this conversation.
The fact that mine is hooked to a pump is my ENTIRE freaking point. What is more efficient? Running a low electrical draw pump for 5-10 minutes to drain 50% of your water in a water change on a 150 gallon or larger tank or running your faucet for 30-45 minutes or even longer to do the same thing? You may have found a good use for your waste water but most members here, myself included, would not want to waste that much water.
I'll admit, for a 10-20 gallon tank a Python isn't a bad option, but this isn't AC, this is MFK.
This sentence makes no sense to me. Do you not have to also hook to a faucet in yours to fill? Or is your guide incorrect in that step/picture?
^ is the above not correct? if this is the case I'm having trouble seeing why attaching a python is hard but yours is not...considering both can attach in the same manner to the same source...
DERP. Once I have water out of my tank, how do you expect me to get more water back in? Thus far, this discussion has been about draining the tank, not filling it.
Also the attachment to an external pump seems to only give pictures (and no instructions) for an Fx5. What do we do if we have a HOB/sump/or different canister? Will yours still attach to an eheim? Which ones?
I'm not saying your design doesn't work for you. It surely must or you wouldn't be so passionate about it. But in the case of universal application, it does appear to be lacking. I have said that after running several different auto water changers over the years, including one from my pond to my sprinklers in my backyard, I still find the python faster and easier. At the same time it's completely adaptible to do whatever you want, including being run in the same manner as your custom design.
In the beginning of my guide I also specifically stated that it is up to the end user to be able to adapt my design to their needs. All you need to make my system is three ball valves, a T, a brass male end for a hose and some way to splice it into your system. If YOU are simply incapable of thinking outside of the box enough in order to create a version of this that will work with your system, then there's nothing that can be done to help you see how bad of an option running your faucet to create a vacuum to drain your tank is.
I stand by everything I say. A python is an OK method of changing water for a small tank, but horrendously inefficient for a monster tank. You're arguing in a terribly immature and fanboyish manner in support of the Python.
I will allow the member base to make their own decision. Keep in mind that everyone in this thread who uses a Python thus far has said that they only use a gravity siphon to drain their tank. Several have also implicitly stated that they feel the need to run the faucet to drain the tank with a python is a terrible concept.
I suspect that I'm being trolled and I'm going to bow out of this thread before you manage to actually get under my skin.
