Out of these what would you go for?

[taksan]

I'll leave most of your points as you do not operate both types of filters except to say that you have the worlds fastest FX5 because none of the others tested could do more then 525gph and in fact all did around that. But I will pick you up on one point about the FX5's design which is critical to the way it works that you do not seem to understand.

I don't think anything short of a controlled long term trial is going to prove anything conclusively.

Which is exactly where all this data comes from BTW.

the foam can be replaced with whatever you want.

Actually no it can't. The FX5 is a circumferential flow filter which means that the outer baskets MUST be filled with foam and the foam MUST touch the bottom of the basket on top or else all the filter would do is bypass. In order to stop premature clogging the foam in the FX5 is 20ppi which is quite course. If you want to filter finer then that Fluval provide the polishing pads and we have seen what happens to people who use them (because of the small size of the baskets). The outside baskets must be filled with a foam type substance packed in hard just like the original pads in order to stop the filter from bypassing the media baskets completely. If you filled the outer baskets with say ceramic rings the water flow would not reach the top basket to flow down to the pump.

I've got 6 FX5's ... and they work if correctly maintained and setup. But the Eheims work better.

 

[HarleyK]

Eheim 2260. Classic. I wouldn't mess with the newest high-tech.

 

[fishbum]

Eheim 2260. Classic. I wouldn't mess with the newest high-tech.

If it aint broke,don't fix it. 2260 all the way.

 

[Burto]

I'll leave most of your points as you do not operate both types of filters

The fact that I do not own both filters does not invalidate my skepticism. The major points you have claimed in favour of Eheim 2080 superiority remain unsubstantiated or are demonstrably irrelevant or wrong.

except to say that you have the worlds fastest FX5 because none of the others tested could do more then 525gph and in fact all did around that.

Sweet. Further to that, I'm pretty sure I put the fine pore sponge pad from my old filter on top of the bio ball-filled basket as well. The hoses are also full length and have enough slack in them to make a 'drip loop'. I could make it faster if I wanted to.

Which is exactly where all this data comes from BTW.

You presented no data quantifying the long term reliability of either filter.
Tested by who? When? Where was their trial, methodology and findings published? Do you have a link?
I presume you are getting most of your information from the same 'FX5 vs. 2080' thread that's been re-posted on every aquarium forum on the internet, that you originally posted on MFK yourself, that provides no hard data and carries a tone of Eheim favouritism?

Actually no it can't. The FX5 is a circumferential flow filter which means that the outer baskets MUST be filled with foam and the foam MUST touch the bottom of the basket on top or else all the filter would do is bypass.

You are telling me that it must be filled with a highly porous material (something through which water can pass and escape in any direction it wants easily), otherwise the water will bypass? Bypass what? The highly porous foam forms some kind of water-tight seal? It forms some kind of channel from which the water cannot escape? I do not follow.

I've got 6 FX5's ... and they work if correctly maintained and setup. But the Eheims work better.

How do the Eheims work better? They don't move more water. Do they keep ammonia and nitrite at less than 0?

 

[taksan]

Its useless debating this with you. When you don't like the facts you dispute their authenticity. Enjoy your FX5 its the worlds fastest you know ....

 

[Burto]

What facts? Do you have any evidence to support the claims you have made? Any?
If I told you that Chad Jones at the university of Derp had conducted a study on apples and oranges and concluded that apples are superior, would you accept that as fact? Because it's a pretty close analogy to what you're expecting me to do.
If someone tells me X is better than Y, I would like to know how X is better, not be repeatedly told that it is. You are making a proof by assertion logical fallacy.

 

[taksan]

I think the results of testing under controlled scientific conditions qualifies as fact. You obviously don't agree. Therefore its pointless debating the outcomes be it apples, oranges or fish filters.

 

[Burto]

I am not rejecting the results of testing under controlled scientific conditions, I am asking you to present me with the documentation of the testing under controlled scientific conditions. Do you see the difference?
Have you actually seen the documentation of these tests yourself or are you just repeating what you have been told by someone else?

 

[taksan]

Have you actually seen the documentation of these tests yourself or are you just repeating what you have been told by someone else?

I've seen them personally and was actually present during the start of the tests.

 

[robroy]

I use both an FX5 and Eheim 2078 on my heavily stocked 100G. Pleased with both but had to make some mods to the FX5 to get it to filter better.

The foam supplied with the FX5 is poor-I replaced it with 30 ppi foam which overlaps the basket edge and therefore reduces the likelihood of flow bypass. This also improved my water clarity. The flow output on the FX5 is great-can't fail to be with that gph rate. I've had it up and running for over 3 years with no problems other than 2 or 3 of the fastening screws snapped.

The 2078 I've had since April this year. The flow isn't as great as the FX5 but it is still powerful and it surprised me. It beats the FX5 with regards bio filtration hands-down as it holds a lot of media. With regards cleaning I find it quicker and easier to clean than the FX5-don't know why but just do. With regards the unit itself it just solid and built to last

The 're both very quiet I've find-only noise I get is if I position the outlets at the surface and you hear the water moving (my Wife hates this ). To be honest the deciding factor for me would be flowrate: if I wanted the water
moving round lots I'd go with the FX5 but if it not then the 2078.

Hope this helps