on a scale 1- 10
- Thread starter Hellman
- Start date
You are talking apples and oranges. Canisters v. HOB filters. Canisters because of there size can do a whole lot more. So of course the FX5 gets a 10. But if you compare it too a Eheim canister it gets a 5.
I've yet to see any comparison of an FX5 to any model of Eheim that showed the Eheim to be superior in any meaningful way, while even the most basic on-paper comparison will show several ways that an FX5 is better.
It's not perfect but I personally consider the FX5 to be the best value canister available. I give it a 9.5.
It's not perfect but I personally consider the FX5 to be the best value canister available. I give it a 9.5.
You can't beat an FX5, especially for what they sell for on here used.
If you can pull it off, add another AC110 on top of the FX5. Use the 110 for easily cleanable mechanical filtration and mod the FX5 to just be all bio. Your water will be crystal clear. Any time my water seems too cloudy I stick an AC110 on the tank and ten minutes later it's clear. It has great turnover and better suction than any filter I've ever used. I just don't use it full time cause the tank is against the wall...
Well, for many people, bio capacity is meaningful. My 2250 is smaller than the FX5 but has a clearly greater capacity for biomedia. The 2260 and other models are even better. The FX5 dominates on flow rate though. It's not even close.
But if you're just looking for bio, and/or have fish like wild discus that are happier in lower current, the Eheim is a great choice.
If you can pull it off, add another AC110 on top of the FX5. Use the 110 for easily cleanable mechanical filtration and mod the FX5 to just be all bio. Your water will be crystal clear. Any time my water seems too cloudy I stick an AC110 on the tank and ten minutes later it's clear. It has great turnover and better suction than any filter I've ever used. I just don't use it full time cause the tank is against the wall...
Well, for many people, bio capacity is meaningful. My 2250 is smaller than the FX5 but has a clearly greater capacity for biomedia. The 2260 and other models are even better. The FX5 dominates on flow rate though. It's not even close.
But if you're just looking for bio, and/or have fish like wild discus that are happier in lower current, the Eheim is a great choice.
smitty03281964;4880956; said:
This. Keep in mind FX5 are going to cost a lot more than a 2-3 AC110s, but probably a more efficient choice.
Bio capacity is always the first point of contention raised, but the only performance statistics I've ever heard quoted on the capabilities of given quantities of bio media, which were from someone with a pro Eheim anti FX5 bias, clearly demonstrated that an FX5 holds far more media than even a ridiculously overstocked aquarium could ever need. If an FX5 is 'only' capable of handling the production of ~37ppm ammonia per 24 hours, as long as there's more water than fish in your aquarium you should be okay. None of my tanks produce even a quarter of ~37ppm ammonia in an entire week. If you want to use a canister filter to treat raw sewerage an FX5 may not be the best choice, but for fishkeeping it has a tremendous excess of biological filtering capacity.DaveB;4881145; said:
You really put $1000-1500+ into canister filters and didn't consider other options? Interesting.buddha1200;4880011; said:
I think an FX5 filled with a quality bio media will handle any reasonable stock you put in a 125, and then some.
