What Bio Media has the most surface area?
- Thread starter kwantz
- Start date
kwantz;1372074; said:
companies often claim outrageous things that there is a small loophole in saying so...such as using regular bouncy balls as their "bio balls". i'm not saying that that is what is being done, but just know that pretty much ALL ceramic or cell pored bio medium is going to have aproximately the same surface area, so just go for the cheapest and it would be prefurable to get it in smaller shapes as water reaches through all the surface area in small pieces much more efficiently then in a huge bio-slab.
Raul-7;1372058; said:
Well, according to their own sites.........
each liter (standard jar) of Matrix contains 170 Square feet of surface area
Each individual ceramic ring of BioMax contains (at least) 100 sq feet of surface area. Guessing their are 50 rings in a similar size pack of bio-max (probably more), which means a box of BioMax will have at least 5,000 sq. feet of surface area vs 170 sq feet for an equivilant sized container of Matrix... or about 30x the surface area of Matrix.
If there are more rings the difference would be even greater
Lol
I'm not gonna say that it's better than the Eheim stuff as I have no experience with it. What I will say is that Bio-max versus Matrix = no contest IMO
I'm not gonna say that it's better than the Eheim stuff as I have no experience with it. What I will say is that Bio-max versus Matrix = no contest IMO
http://wernersponds.com/biofiltermedia.htm
Thats a good chart.
Back to the question at hand, not sure on the math behind calculating (assuming?) the actual surface area, since we are usually just fed the information from the companies anyhow, but why not ask which bio media has been working good for people? Its been mentioned before in the thread, I like eheims substrat pro, but I also use cheap knock off ceramic rings, that work great, and also biomax from hagen, which is an excellent bio media.
Thats a good chart.
Back to the question at hand, not sure on the math behind calculating (assuming?) the actual surface area, since we are usually just fed the information from the companies anyhow, but why not ask which bio media has been working good for people? Its been mentioned before in the thread, I like eheims substrat pro, but I also use cheap knock off ceramic rings, that work great, and also biomax from hagen, which is an excellent bio media.
TAPEWORM,
How do you know bio-media is working good?
I went through a phase where I was trying many of the "high-tech" bio medias. Problem was I couldn't tell if one worked better than the other; or if it was working at all. The parameters never changed going from one bio-media to the other; ammonia & nitrites zero, nitrate production the same.
I have a medium stocked 26G tank right now that has been running without a filter for four weeks. The BB in the substrate and water circulation from a bubble wand and power head is keeping the ammonia & nitrites at zero; the same as when I had the Magnum 350 on it.
Are we being manipulated by the manufacturers into thinking we need high-tech mega-bio media?
How do you know bio-media is working good?
I went through a phase where I was trying many of the "high-tech" bio medias. Problem was I couldn't tell if one worked better than the other; or if it was working at all. The parameters never changed going from one bio-media to the other; ammonia & nitrites zero, nitrate production the same.
I have a medium stocked 26G tank right now that has been running without a filter for four weeks. The BB in the substrate and water circulation from a bubble wand and power head is keeping the ammonia & nitrites at zero; the same as when I had the Magnum 350 on it.
Are we being manipulated by the manufacturers into thinking we need high-tech mega-bio media?
