# Easy, Minimal Maintenance Filter Option?



## WaWaZat (Dec 27, 2007)

Setting up a 125 acrylic... 110 gallons actual because acrylics are cut shorter... and planning to stock with a couple messy Oscars, maybe a Clown Knife, Shovel Nose, Plecos, Earth Eaters and ??? Don't think I want to get into a sump system. So would a canister be good solution for this situation? Is the Fluval FX5 still the best of the best? My goal is something easy to set up & easy for a semi-newbie to understand (hence the avoidance of a sump), quiet... since the tank is in my living room where the home theater is also, and keeps the aquarium as low maintenance as possible.

Also, I have a couple old Magnum 330s & 4 powerheads laying around. Might I use any of this to supplement something like the FX5?

And finally, what kind of media setup would be best to use in said canister(s) to keep things as squeaky clean as possible, keeping water changes to a reasonable rate, might even help keep the bottom clean (planned sand substrate with not a lot of decorative clutter... in other words lots of open space) without getting into overkill that would do nothing more than waste time & energy?


----------



## zimmy (Aug 13, 2010)

WaWaZat said:


> *Is the Fluval FX5 still the best of the best?* My goal is something easy to set up & easy for a semi-newbie to understand (hence the avoidance of a sump), quiet... since the tank is in my living room where the home theater is also, and keeps the aquarium as low maintenance as possible.


Depends on what you're looking for. This is one helpful review:

http://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forum ... hp?t=68458

I did a lot of research before buying a filter. I went with an Eheim 2262...doesn't mean it's "the best of the best" but it was right for what I wanted within the limits of what I could find.


----------



## Jowlz (Dec 19, 2008)

FX5 is a great filter. I have a pair of 405's on a 125. I choose the twin 405's because I love redundancy. If one filter breaks there is still one left, and you can find great deals on smaller filters

You really have to do frequent water changes no matter the filter. The last step of the Nitrogen cycle is Nitrate. The only way to get rid of it is tons of plants or water changes.


----------



## nodima (Oct 3, 2002)

Never used an FX5, but have used other Fluvals and have an Eheim 2128. The Eheim is silent, wheras the fluvals I've used all have some level of noise.

The location of the intakes and outlets on whatever filter you choose is an area where you can make a great difference in the maintenance needs of your tank. You might look into UGJ's to help keep your substrate clear. I've used those to great effect in my Frontosa tank - strategically sending all detritus to one end of the tank where the filter intakes were located. This reduced the need to vacuum the substrate to almost nothing - and really only needed it every other water change in the area of the intakes. Now, your fish are likely to be messier than the Fronts are, but the same principles will apply. I have powered UGJ's with both canisters and powerheads.

You might also look into the really huge Eheim filter - forget the model, but it is essentially a 5 gallon bucket, that said, as the other posters have said, redundancy is a good thing when talking about filters - if something were to go wrong, you are not "dead in the water".


----------



## Britnick (Apr 18, 2008)

I have both a Eheim Pro 3 thermal (which is like a bucket with a kettle element in it) and an FX 5 (which is a bucket with an industrial pump in the bottom) and both are exceptional filters and I would recommend both, but for different reasons.

The Pro 3 is just the most wonderfully put together, but the output is no where near that of the FX5. The FX 5 is like a jet engine and when Ã¢â‚¬ËœcleanÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ moves the water at an initially alarming rate. The downside of the FX 5 is it isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t self priming and the hoses are a pain (the corrugated nature makes them difficult to manipulate).

If you have two filters, running both is a great ideaÃ¢â‚¬Â¦


----------



## WaWaZat (Dec 27, 2007)

I have the 2 old Magnum 330s that I could use 1 or both as extra filtering.

Zimmy, thanx for posting the comparison review!

Britnick, I would love to hear more about what you feel the specific applications/strengths of Eheim Pro 3 & FX5 are.

After reading the comparison Zimmy put up the link for, I think 1 important stated difference between the 2 filters for me to consider is the the conclusion that the FX5 is a better mechanical filter & the Eheim is a better bio. For my somewhat crowded plan of big fish, including messy Oscars, would the mechanical edge the FX5 supposedly has provide a better result in my 125g (110 actual)?? How important is the biological filtering consideration in my setup?


----------



## WaWaZat (Dec 27, 2007)

Can UV Sterilization be accomplished with a FX5, Eheim Pro are even an old Magnum?? Also, I know these filters do mechanical & biological filtering but what about chemical... and exactly what is chemical filtering??

UV & Chem Filter experts please!... :?


----------



## clgkag (Mar 22, 2008)

No matter your choice, you should make sure you are way overfiltered with that stock. That is alot of big, messy eaters for a 110 gallon tank. It is going to take extra filtration no matter what you choose.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

You've got a lot of big, messy fish, and you want to do minimal water changes. So, you want a filter that will pull solids and then not need to be cleaned often. I think what you're asking any filter to do is unrealistic no matter what you buy. The fish are going to produce quite a bit of organics that have to be removed from the 'system' one way or another. You can use the pumps, etc, to move solids around enough to get them to the filters, but those filters will need to be cleaned often to keep them running well, and keep the nitrate levels down. So, I think you're looking at either frequent filter cleanings (assuming you set up a system efficient at pulling solids from the water), or frequent water changes and vacuumings. I don't think you can avoid both. I believe the FX5 has a back flush feature, so the best choice might be one of those with the pumps positioned to keep floaties from settling long enough to get picked up by the filter. Then back flush at least weekly, even if the filter flow appears to be fine. That filter will be a nitrate factory if not cleaned frequently. And you'll still need to do some water changes.


----------



## WaWaZat (Dec 27, 2007)

So I think with the choice between the FX5 & Eheim Pro, possibly the FX5 might serve my purposes better since it rates a big higher for mechanical filtration??? I also have 2 old Magnum 330s I could supplement with.

Also, will UV Sterilization and/or chemical filtering help me in this scenario? I'm still hoping to get a bit of an education on these 2 types of filtering.

And... how will using sand as a substrate effect the filter options I'm considering and the setup of them? How will I keep sand out of the filter intakes while making sure the setup is conducive to grabbing large waste before it settles?


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> Also, will UV Sterilization and/or chemical filtering help me in this scenario? I'm still hoping to get a bit of an education on these 2 types of filtering.


 Chemical filtration is simply the use of some type of granular media that removes dissolved impurities.

You can use something like 'Purigen' to remove organics, but you'll need to use a lot of it, and it'll need to be recharged frequently. It also will only remove dissolved organis, and not help you with organic solids. It's more of a supplemental polisher to keep water clear. It may be helpful, but I don't see it reducing the need for other types of maintenance. It should help keep nitrates down a bit, but how much depends on a lot of other things.

There are other types of chemical filtration that remove other potential toxins, but unless you're having a problem, then I'd not invest in them.

Same with the UV. It can help reduce organics, but is more of a polisher used to keep water crystal clear. Depending on the other types of maintenance done, it may get overwhelmed. Some use them to keep control of parasites, but never necessary in a typical, well maintained tank. Note that it would also kill useful stuff like infusoria that would be a good food for fry.



> possibly the FX5 might serve my purposes better since it rates a big higher for mechanical filtration???


A lot depends on flow rate, intake placement, and proper placement of supplemental pumps to generate enough current to keep solids suspended.  But, I'd opt for the higher flow rate unit, the FX5. I also think the 'purge' valve will be helpful to you.


----------



## WaWaZat (Dec 27, 2007)

I really appreciate the primer Tim. Makes things more clear! I appreciate that a lot of what I need to do "depends" but I'm trying to get some specific, experienced input here so I can at least have a good idea on the correct direction and not do or buy anything I'll find out later needs to completely change. I am new back into the hobby and have never run a tank over 20 gallons, never used sand as a substrate, etc. I'm a lot older now and more concerned with doing things correctly, keeping my water & fish as healthy as possible, being efficient with my time & $$ and especially since this tank is in my living room which doubles as the home theater, making sure things look nice and run quietly!

So are there different ways to load up a canister to serve different purposes for mechanical & biological filtering & polishing? If I purchase an FX5, I still have 2 old Magnum 330s that I can use to supplement. Would it maybe make sense... or even be possible... to say use the FX5 exclusively for mechanical, a Magnum exclusively for bio and maybe another Magnum if I need polishing? Or for the sake of picking up the most solids, would it be best to space filters along the back, all with mechanical & bio filtering? Of course I certainly wouldn't want to unnecessarily use electricity & get into filter pump motor overkill.

Does anyone have suggested placement of said filter intakes for picking up waste most efficiently? Also, what am I in for with using sand as a substrate and trying to balance my filter evac of solid waste from big messy fish with keeping sand out of filter intakes?


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

I'd go with your thought of using the FX5 for mechanical filtration since it has the most horsepower. Put the intake in the middle of the tank high enough off the sand that it doesn't pick up sand.

Add a second cannister with a sponge filter over the intake. Load it up with biomedia. You'll rarely have to open this one up. Put the intake in a place where it's easy to get to the sponge to remove and clean. Use a fine prefilter before the biomedia. This will keep the media clean and do some polishing as well.

I like to direct outflows of filters near the surface to break up the surface water and aerate the water returning to the tank.

Add a couple of hydor koralia water pumps in the back corners aiming toward the sand a bit to keep water circulating well and keep solids from collecting. Experiment with this as you may find certain points where debris seems to like to collect. Sometimes this is a good thing as it makes it easy to vacuum up.

Watch out for rock edges where debris can easily get trapped. You may want to consider this when aqauscaping and go with round river rocks somewhat imbedded in the sand so there are no edges to trap detritus.

Regarding sand in the intakes, it happens, but won't hurt a cannister. And the 'bio' cannister won't pull sand due to the sponge on the intake.

As far as loading up the cannisters, load the 'bio' cannister with biomedia and maybe one fine sponge or similar prefilter.

You could then load the FX5 with the mechanical and biomedia that the manufacturer recommends. I don't see any advantage to only going with mechanical media in all 3 baskets. Let it do some bio as well. You'll probably need to open that guy once per month to clean that media. I wouldn't let it go longer. Do this during a water change, although water changes will need to be done more often. 50% twice per month is probably going to be a minimum.

You could add the thrid cannister, but gets to a point where the tank beocmes a jumble of hoses. Plus, the more filters you have, the more you have to open up and clean. I think I'd hold that one off for the moment. if you do add it, you could use one of the chemical medias designed for polishing like the purigen. Get enough to keep one load in wihile you recharge another.

Another note, you don't want your bio or chemical filters to be real high powered as far as gph because you don't want to encourage them to pick up the solids. I'd put those intakes higher than the one for the FX5. The turnover rate on those can be much less than the FX5.

HTH


----------



## WaWaZat (Dec 27, 2007)

prov356 said:


> HTH


This helps a ton!

Do you have suggestions on specific media I should use in both canisters?

I can buy the FX5 alone or with certain media... which at this point, I'm not sure will be useful to me or not. If so, some of the packages I see on ebay seem to be nice deals. For instance;
One includes;
3 PACK OF FLUVAL AMMONIA BAGS
3 PACK OF CARBON MEDIA BAGS
3 PACK OF WATER POLISHING PADS
1 PACK OF PRE-FILTER FILTERING MEDIA

Another;
Fluval A1470 Pre-Filter Media 750 Gram 26.45 Oz.
Fluval A1456 Biomax 500 Gram 17.63 Oz.

And yet another;
Hagen Fluval Fine Filter Pad Fits FX5 3 Pack
1 box (300g) of Fluval Carbon

Which of the above media would be good for my scenario?

The aquascape I'll be doing is very simple & clean... a beach setting... so I'd like to keep the necessary equipment used clean & as unseen as possible. Not sure I like how bulky those hydor koralia water pumps are. Have you ever used an Under Gravel Jet system? I'm wondering if I could incorporate that in with the 2nd canister that's loaded up with bio... or maybe even add the 3rd specifically to run the UGJ???


----------



## KaiserSousay (Nov 2, 2008)

:lol: 
Would seem we have left the easy zone behind.
:lol: 
There is no "RULE" when it comes to how your media is stacked or what media you use.
There is the general routine of coarse at the bottom, with media getting finer towards the filter exit.
I always followed the above, with the exception of any bio specific media being the last in the stack before exiting the canister.
First thing I did, with a new filter system, was hunt up alternative media. The filter manufacturers do a pretty good job with the media choices offered, but it does come with a price tag and maybe availability issues.
If I can go to a local store, not LFS, and get material I can use, that is what I do.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> Would seem we have left the easy zone behind.


Yeah, I'd agree. 



> 3 PACK OF FLUVAL AMMONIA BAGS
> 3 PACK OF CARBON MEDIA BAGS


Don't bother with either of these. Ammonia removers aren't necessary, and neither is the carbon. Just go with some type of biomedia like ceramic rings or simlar and prefilter pads or sponges. None of that needs to be replaced like the chemical medias. I also prefer biomedia that's not granular. Granular media can become clogged if/when organics get past the prefilter.



> Have you ever used an Under Gravel Jet system? I'm wondering if I could incorporate that in with the 2nd canister that's loaded up with bio...or maybe even add the 3rd specifically to run the UGJ???


I haven't and wouldn't. Keep it simple. Once you do that, you've got plumbing to hide and keep hidden.


----------



## Frogman (Jan 26, 2005)

I've got an Eheim Professional 2 and a Fluval 403 on my 150. The eheim is strictly for biological filtration and I only open it up once a year. The Fluval has sponges and filter floss that I change monthly.

My ideal filtration system would have the eheim or any good canister filled with high surface area media, a better particulate filter something like this ocean clear http://www.aquacave.com/ocean-clear-325 ... -1379.html and a denitrator like this http://www.aquacave.com/nitrate-reducto ... c-425.html

I do like undergravel jets. I run one on my reef tank and on my cichlid tank I have a pvc pipe with holes drilled on each side that runs down the center bottom of my tank. I have rocks on top of it but this way the water blows gunk from under the rock pile out to the edges where I can suck it up or at least it moves to the filter return.


----------



## WaWaZat (Dec 27, 2007)

Ok, I've got my FX5 and hoping to use it and one of the Magnum 330s as recommended here.



KaiserSousay said:


> If I can go to a local store, not LFS, and get material I can use, that is what I do.


Can you give me specific examples of what materials you might use from the local store and for what purpose as media?



prov356 said:


> I also prefer biomedia that's not granular. Granular media can become clogged if/when organics get past the prefilter.


Tim... can you give a specific example so I know what to look for?

Also, the basket in the 330 isn't very big and I don't think this filter was ever intended as a bio filter. How much bio media would I have to be able to get in to the basket for it to be effective?

Bare with me guys... I know this is probably all easy stuff, I just need to get a grasp of the basics.


----------



## WaWaZat (Dec 27, 2007)

How does one determine how much bio filtering is needed? I'm wondering if filling the little carbon basket (approx a quart in size) in the Magnum 330 with bio will actually provide an advantage. I do plan to fill one of the trays in the FX5 with bio media and 1 of those trays will probably hold twice as much.


----------

