The Fluval G Thread of Monster Electronic Filters
- Thread starter JamieH
- Start date
Why do manufacturers keep on creating filters with those extra features? People have them in other equipment.
What they should really get to is a filter that doesn't replace other equipment but a filter that does its job better.
What they should really get to is a filter that doesn't replace other equipment but a filter that does its job better.
if you look here http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/pages/item.php?news=2219
you can see the marketing womans response to all the negative comments about the filter. its the large editorial comment near the bottom of the comments.
you can see the marketing womans response to all the negative comments about the filter. its the large editorial comment near the bottom of the comments.
The only other useful thing I see about this filter is the conductivity probe. I'm curious to know how effective that is. However, my Nitrate test kit was dirt cheap, and that's what I go by for water changes, so I'm not willing to pay that kind of price for it.
Also, has anyone else noticed that it looks like 3/4 of the space in the filter is wasted? It looks like there's a ton of space between those orangeish rings to hold media and the cartridge thing that goes in the middle. Not a very effective use of space any way you look at it. You're now buying Fluval cartridges and Fluval media for in those rings, or you're throwing away 2/3 of the sheets of floss you'd buy elsewhere because you're cutting the middle out.
The way I see it:
Eheim 2217- $135.99.
Flow meter to attach to it- $9.49.
Nitrate test kit- $5.99.
Grand total: $151.47.
Compare to $584.
That gives you 263 GPH compared to 264 GPH with the Fluval G. No word yet how much media the Fluval G actually holds, but I'm betting it's less than 1.5 gallon. A flow meter shows us when the filter slows down, and a nitrate test shows us when we need a water change. Sure, that's MSRP compared to actual price, but you'd have to be able to find the Fluval G for 1/4 the MSRP in order for it to compare to that setup!
Oh yeah, there's ONE other perk to the Fluval G compared to that setup- fine water polishing with a pleated cartridge. So go ahead and add in a $47.99 HOT Magnum. You now have a much higher combined flow rate (close to double!), you're moving water from two different places in the tank (negating the need for a powerhead), and the total cost is still a fraction of the price of the Fluval.
Even those of you who like FX5s- You can get an FX5 for $250. That's less than half of the G series. Are you really telling me a single Fluval G is more effective than two FX5s?
Sure, I haven't seen it yet. This filter could turn out to be absolutely amazing, and blow everything else I've ever seen out of the water. But I have my doubts. Personally, I'd much rather spend the $200 for a filter setup (even with throwing in that HOT Magnum) and have $385 to spend on another tank. You'd have to have a LOT of extra money lying around to ignore a $385 price difference, and today, who has that?
Also, has anyone else noticed that it looks like 3/4 of the space in the filter is wasted? It looks like there's a ton of space between those orangeish rings to hold media and the cartridge thing that goes in the middle. Not a very effective use of space any way you look at it. You're now buying Fluval cartridges and Fluval media for in those rings, or you're throwing away 2/3 of the sheets of floss you'd buy elsewhere because you're cutting the middle out.
The way I see it:
Eheim 2217- $135.99.
Flow meter to attach to it- $9.49.
Nitrate test kit- $5.99.
Grand total: $151.47.
Compare to $584.
That gives you 263 GPH compared to 264 GPH with the Fluval G. No word yet how much media the Fluval G actually holds, but I'm betting it's less than 1.5 gallon. A flow meter shows us when the filter slows down, and a nitrate test shows us when we need a water change. Sure, that's MSRP compared to actual price, but you'd have to be able to find the Fluval G for 1/4 the MSRP in order for it to compare to that setup!
Oh yeah, there's ONE other perk to the Fluval G compared to that setup- fine water polishing with a pleated cartridge. So go ahead and add in a $47.99 HOT Magnum. You now have a much higher combined flow rate (close to double!), you're moving water from two different places in the tank (negating the need for a powerhead), and the total cost is still a fraction of the price of the Fluval.
Even those of you who like FX5s- You can get an FX5 for $250. That's less than half of the G series. Are you really telling me a single Fluval G is more effective than two FX5s?
Sure, I haven't seen it yet. This filter could turn out to be absolutely amazing, and blow everything else I've ever seen out of the water. But I have my doubts. Personally, I'd much rather spend the $200 for a filter setup (even with throwing in that HOT Magnum) and have $385 to spend on another tank. You'd have to have a LOT of extra money lying around to ignore a $385 price difference, and today, who has that?
rnocera;3452654; said:
Ive been seeing them go for 180$ on ebay and I have been watching them alot of time the sellers are relisting them so I expect the price of the fx5 to drop again.
jack frost;3453204; said:
I guess there's some good news. As much as I've disliked every other Fluval filter I've seen, I wouldn't mind picking up an FX5 so I can get some more first-hand experience with it.
OK I am obviously a newbie but I have noticed another problem with these filters. I have a 175 gallon tank so neither of these new 'G' filters will work with that size of a tank. I would need two of them and the price of one is bad enough but no way in heck would it be worth spending almost $1000.00 'US money' to get filtration for my tank.
I can use the 'Fluval FX5' or the 'Eheim Pro 3' and only use one filter. I haven't set up the 175 yet because I am still in the process of acquiring it. Bought it, but haven't gotten the friends together to move it. LOL Any volunteers?
I decided that my cichlids needed a bigger tank since I have a lot of them. Well right now I don't have a lot but the ones I have are getting a little big for the 55 gallon tank and I want them to be able to play.
I currently use a Fluval 305 and it works great. The outlet gives the tank a slight current and keeps it clean easily. I once wasn't able to change the filter for two months
and when I finally got back there was no way to tell. The water tests all were acceptable and the water was still clear. So basically I'm saying I like the Fluval line. I haven't had experience with any other canister filters so I can't really give much of a opinion on canisters but I love the way mine works. Extremely easy to clean and run, plus it's extremely quiet. So I was excited to hear about this new line, but since it costs almost twice what I can pick up a FX5 for on eBay and the FX5 could theoretically clean my whole tank I can't see why this filter would be worth it.
Well, as everyone can tell, I am really long winded. All this just to say that I can't believe that Fluval's top of the line filter leaves out all enthusiasts beyond 150 gallon. Plus with most people wanting to get a little extra headroom they are leaving out everyone with over a 125 gallon tank. Which I would be willing to bet is a majority of aquarium lovers who would be in the demographic to buy such a high priced filter. Maybe it's just me but????
I can use the 'Fluval FX5' or the 'Eheim Pro 3' and only use one filter. I haven't set up the 175 yet because I am still in the process of acquiring it. Bought it, but haven't gotten the friends together to move it. LOL Any volunteers?
I decided that my cichlids needed a bigger tank since I have a lot of them. Well right now I don't have a lot but the ones I have are getting a little big for the 55 gallon tank and I want them to be able to play.I currently use a Fluval 305 and it works great. The outlet gives the tank a slight current and keeps it clean easily. I once wasn't able to change the filter for two months
and when I finally got back there was no way to tell. The water tests all were acceptable and the water was still clear. So basically I'm saying I like the Fluval line. I haven't had experience with any other canister filters so I can't really give much of a opinion on canisters but I love the way mine works. Extremely easy to clean and run, plus it's extremely quiet. So I was excited to hear about this new line, but since it costs almost twice what I can pick up a FX5 for on eBay and the FX5 could theoretically clean my whole tank I can't see why this filter would be worth it. Well, as everyone can tell, I am really long winded. All this just to say that I can't believe that Fluval's top of the line filter leaves out all enthusiasts beyond 150 gallon. Plus with most people wanting to get a little extra headroom they are leaving out everyone with over a 125 gallon tank. Which I would be willing to bet is a majority of aquarium lovers who would be in the demographic to buy such a high priced filter. Maybe it's just me but????
I guess I should have read more on this site. I was just emailed and told that my facts were messed up. I checked and yes there was some mistakes. So thanks to who wrote to me. I guess the new G6 can handle 160 gal and the Pro3 handles 180 gal so those two are really close. Of course the flow rate and tank size of the fx5 is a lot higher but I have heard plus read on this site that that is not always all you need to know. I guess I will have to wait until someone can afford to buy the new monster G6 and tell us all if it's better then all the rest?
this fiilter is just too much money for me. i mean, i could spend roughly the same amount on an eheim 2260 with eheim substart pro media and eheim mech. those eheims last like forever but this new filter looks too pretty and fragile to me. it'd be using a lamborghini for the morning commute in new york city. a waste of money is my atttitde unless that lamborghini is used to show off yourself right.
