XP3 - Not to Impressed.

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have 2 XP3s and been using them for years with no problem. They do an excellent job cleaning the tank. I just sold them to switch to a wet/dry system. I would definitely go back to XP3's if I had too.
 
12 Volt Man;2813363; said:
I would like to know more about this 'bypass' feature that Jgray says Rena told him about.
Click to expand...

I can't find any way to bypass clogged media baskets. The motor is thermally protected, so if the impellar became jammed and the motor heated up from to much load it will shut down.
 
the reasoning behind the argument in the first place is flawed
Click to expand...

You keep thinking that. I remember all of your flawed logic or reasoning in the other thread to which you were trying to prove mine was flawed.

You never once answered my questions in the other thread because you never wanted to make a fool of your self.

If you don't remember the questions, some of the went like this,

Which would clog first, (A) The filter with 1000 GPH, a 6x6x8 30 ppi sponge or (B) The filter with 1000 GPH a 12x12x8 30 ppi sponge. Im counting the "thickness" as well that you think is so darn important in this case. Like I said, you can have 8 feet thick of mechanical media at 30 ppi, the cross section surface area will clog before the rest of the sponge fills up.

Wait, you won't answer it.

I can't find any way to bypass clogged media baskets. The motor is thermally protected, so if the impellar became jammed and the motor heated up from to much load it will shut down.
Click to expand...

Thermal protection is a last resort if all else fails. You don't wan't to rely on this protection though. The motor does have to heat up quite a bit before the circuit opens. This increase can still ruin the motor over time.

Supposidly, the bypass was built into the cover some where from what I remember. Like I said before though, I couldn't tell you how it works.
 
I don't feel like reading all the silly bickering. Whats so bad about the XP3?
 
Jgray: I remember that you were being proven wrong so badly that you were becoming hostile to other members and begging the mods to close the thread...

do you remember that Jgray? LOL

Here is a question for you: which filters are you comparing the Rena against that makes you claim it has a 'very small cross sectional surface area' and 'low flow"?

which ones?


because what you are not getting is this:


in the real world, the XP3's go a long time without clogging and they actually have higher flow rates then say comparable eheims.. you keep claiming they clog so quickly and have crappy flow compared to other canisters and if you had any real experience with them you would know that is pure BS.

but you don't.


did the rena rep really tell you about a supossed bypass feature or did you make that up to make the renas look bad?

you don't advertise a filter as being 'bypass free' with a built in bypass feature on it. it doesn't make sense..

do you work for Fluval or something? LOL
 
I have two of each and love all four filters. I wouldn't really compare them though. It's two totally different markets. The XP3s are on a 75g african cichlid tank and I love them - the returns are great, they're light, easy to clean, and don't take up much space. They're the quietest filters I own too. (I also have an Eheim 2028 - this is the one I have had leaking issues with and I currently have it stuck inside a 5g bucket and am afraid to clean it because I don't want to start it leaking again.) But I wouldn't ever consider it an either/or proposition with the FX5s. In a big tank with big fish, FX5 wins hands down. Bigger, better flow, nice powerful return.
 
XP3's are very good filters. I'm running 1 XP3 (w AQ110) on a 120 gal and 2 XP4's on the 400 gal with no problems. They are simple to clean compared to my Eheim Pro 3 and provide good filtration.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom