REVIEW:Fluval FX5 vs Eheim Pro3 compared

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
eheim all the way; i hate fluvals(no offense)
it gave me a real bad trauma, i had a experience with them that makes me mad whenever i think of them.
 
brianp;1381787; said:
The Eheim prefilter also has a large, central piece missing which further reduces its mechanical filtration capacity. QUOTE]

While the prefilter looks like it is missing a piece, it actually is designed in a manner where there is no bypass.

Just the existence of an easily cleaned prefilter makes Eheim, IMO, the superior mechanical filter too.
Click to expand...
 
just my 2pence

since the pro 3 and fluval excel in different areas, so not direct competitors, can the fx5 be compared head to head with the 2262. that would be a more equal challenge i think.
 
turbid;1385039; said:
just my 2pence

since the pro 3 and fluval excel in different areas, so not direct competitors, can the fx5 be compared head to head with the 2262. that would be a more equal challenge i think.
Click to expand...

Not really ...a 2262 has a live flow rate that is about 50% above a FX5. The 2262 cannot be compared to any canister as its probably twice as powerful and effective as anything else on the market. Using the same test methods as use in the 2080/FX5 comparison the 2262 was only a day quicker to cycle but happily processed massively larger amounts of free ammonia to nitrate then a FX5 .... in fact you would need 4 FX5's using Eheim media to equal the performance of 1 2262.
 
...and i thought the 2262 wasn t so good as a biological... silly me. that s one hell of a monster filter then.
 
basically it all depends on budget at the end of the day :D

lets see how many fx5s are around in 10yrs i know my pro3s with still be going strong :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom