# So, I bought an FX5 ...



## littleolme (Nov 1, 2011)

I bought a new FX5 yesterday and I'm considering taking it back.

I've read a ton of reviews here and elsewhere on them and they always seem to rate fairly high. When I took it out of the box and had a good once-over however, I was less than impressed with both the design and the quality. I use both Eheim classic and Rena XPs, so I guess the comparison sets the benchmark pretty high. I've read that the sponges aren't overly effective yet they take up a massive amount of internal space, space that seems like it could be much better utilized. Maybe it's because I'm a big fan of the Eheim classic series that I'm finding myself wondering if I just bought the wrong product. I would expect to pay about $150 more for an Eheim 2262 but I'm somehow left with the impression that I'm getting more than a 50% upgrade in value with the Eheim.

I have some time to consider my options so I have a couple of questions ...

Has anyone used Poret foam as a replacement for the sponges?

For those that own both the 2260/2262 and the FX5, do you feel that your FX5 is worth it's price?


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

Ppl laud the FX5 and say what a great filter. It seems to me that if you pay $$$ for a filter you should not have to modify it in any way. No spray bar, micro bubbles, sponges don't work right. Then there's the construction of it. Cheap. You might as well throw in a couple more bucks and buy an eheim.


----------



## cichlid-gal (Apr 27, 2012)

I have Eheims and an FX5...although I feel my FX5 does the job there are things that I don't like about it. On the flip side, I like everything about my Eheims. Nuff said


----------



## littleolme (Nov 1, 2011)

cichlid-gal said:


> I have Eheims and an FX5...although I feel my FX5 does the job there are things that I don't like about it. On the flip side, I like everything about my Eheims. Nuff said


Ya, I hear ya. I'd like to think that you get what you pay for but the FX5 is *NOT* cheap.


----------



## DrgRcr (Jun 23, 2009)

I'm trying to wrap my hands around why you guys feel it's not up to par? I would like to know which part is built cheaply? It's basically a 5 gallon pail with channeling built in to direct water flow the right way. I've seen plenty of filters with thinner plastic than what's on it. The 8 bolt hold down is probably better than most clamping systems out there as well IMO. Also, what qualifies a sponge as not working right? When I open mine, the sponges have obviously done their job catching plenty of debris. Plus 4 baskets that can carry whatever media you choose! They even give you an extra valve. You can use it to do water changes. I'll take that over a spray bar, which IMO, really provides no advantage. And it has a drain valve as well. I have 2 of them that have run flawlessly on heavily stocked 125's. I've seen no reason to modify or change anything.


----------



## scifisarah (Jan 4, 2013)

They seem to get quite good reviews on Amazon. I just ordered mine from (PM for website) with the 10% new customer discount and am waiting for it to arrive. Can't beat $211.50 with media included.


----------



## littleolme (Nov 1, 2011)

$211.50 shipped? I wish I could get that kind of pricing up here. I bought mine for $300, taxes included, and that was on sale. An older used one tends to go for $200.


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

DrgRcr said:


> I'm trying to wrap my hands around why you guys feel it's not up to par? I would like to know which part is built cheaply? It's basically a 5 gallon pail with channeling built in to direct water flow the right way. I've seen plenty of filters with thinner plastic than what's on it. The 8 bolt hold down is probably better than most clamping systems out there as well IMO. Also, what qualifies a sponge as not working right? When I open mine, the sponges have obviously done their job catching plenty of debris. Plus 4 baskets that can carry whatever media you choose! They even give you an extra valve. You can use it to do water changes. I'll take that over a spray bar, which IMO, really provides no advantage. And it has a drain valve as well. I have 2 of them that have run flawlessly on heavily stocked 125's. I've seen no reason to modify or change anything.


I have read about problems with the hose clamps cutting the hose and the 8 bolt clamping system breaking. 8 blolts? Really?
Sponges causing micro bubbles. A spray bar disrupts more surface for gas exchange. Fx5 doesn't have one. Ppl are always asking how to diy one. Just seems like a lot of money for a canister that isn't plug and play. :dancing: 
Hot topic........beware :zz:


----------



## scifisarah (Jan 4, 2013)

littleolme said:


> $211.50 shipped? I wish I could get that kind of pricing up here. I bought mine for $300, taxes included, and that was on sale. An older used one tends to go for $200.


The silly thing is, you aren't even that far away from me here in Michigan. Yep, that price shipped, with no tax. If I do decide to sell it eventually, I probably won't lose much on it since I got such a good deal. Personally, I think I would rather make my own spray bar. Looks super easy, supplies are cheap, and then you can customize it to the size of your tank.


----------



## JoeE (Jun 11, 2012)

There's a lot to like about the FX5. I don't get the complaints about the build quality - the bucket is a solid piece of plastic and the lid's locking mechanism is much better than the Aquatops and Eheims that I've used. The intake strainer, the rim adapters, the non-kink flexible ribbed tubing - all the best on the market. I would probably prefer a spray bar but the nozzle can create quite a bit of surface agitation when one of them is pointed at the surface.

The sponges are far from ineffective. They are so effective that they will clog if not properly maintained, which is why the FX5 requires monthly cleaning. Microbubbles are usually a sign of needed maintenance.


----------



## Deeda (Oct 12, 2012)

I own both the 2260/2262 and the FX5 so I can understand your questions.

I don't know if I would return the FX5 since you just got it and having even used it yet. I do understand your first impression of the appearance of the filter, I felt the same way when I got mine. I don't see any need to modify the filter, as noted by DrgRcr. He brings up valid points regarding the design of the filter, though I'm sure he meant 3 media trays and not 4  ! The only problems I have had with my FX5 is the occasional clogging of the pump with Malaysian Trumpet snails and the fine sand my fish stir up. This has caused the pump to stall and necessitate the complete disassembly of the filter for maintenance.

On the other hand, my Eheim 2260/62's have run flawlessly so I have to agree with cichlid-gal's statement! =D>

I personally don't care for media baskets/trays, ribbed hoses or circuit boards on filters. I like spray-bars, top mounted pumps and a simple design. There are differences between the two filters but they do share some similarities. The hold down fasteners secure the canister lid and provide a good seal provided they aren't over tightened. Both have drain valves to remove water for maintenance. Both filters work as advertised and provide good filtration for a properly stocked aquarium.

Littleolme, you could use Poret foam to replace the FX5 sponges but I wouldn't use a denser foam than what came with the filter because it will probably plug up faster than 'normal'. I will eventually convert mine over to Poret when I get around to copying the FX5 shapes to fit the basket properly.

As far as servicing either filter, hands down it is the Eheim. There are fewer parts and I can be done in 30-40 minutes. The FX5 takes me at least an hour, mostly due to pump removal/cleaning and cleaning dead plants and snails from the sponges. For some reason I find the FX5 a real chore to clean, maybe it's because of the media baskets and finding some where to place all the filter parts during cleaning. The pump is a pain to remove & install compared to the Eheim. It's just the little things that make servicing the filters very different.

The FX5 was around $225 in 2010 and the Eheim 2260 was $250 in 2005. Neither filter came with media (besides the stock FX5 foam) and I needed to spend an additional $53 for valve taps for the 2260 plus any media for either of the filters. Of course prices for the Eheim seem to have gone up over the last few years while the FX5 stayed around the same. The used filter market will greatly vary depending on where one lives and prices always seem higher for our members in Canada. I've been lucky buying used Eheims 2260/62's for under $200 and some have even come with media and all needed parts.

I know that the initial cost of filtration can be expensive, especially for large canisters or multiple canister filters. You have to balance that initial cost versus how many years that filter will last. The FX5 is still a relative newcomer compared to Eheim 2260/62. I have seen people complain about having problems with both brands and it usually comes down to not following the instructions regarding installation, maintenance or media stacking.


----------



## littleolme (Nov 1, 2011)

Thanks Dee, you've touched on a lot of the aspects I was looking for. I guess my delima comes down to value for the money. The FX5 is $300, no media (except the sponges). The Eheim 2262 is $450, again no media. I truly believe the Eheim is a higher quality product and a smarter design (and I recognize that this is my opinion, others love their FX5s).

I don't need the filter right now but I bought the FX5 because of the sale (20% off). My original intent was to buy one of each for a 125 mbuna tank but now I'm doubting the FX5. Used 2262s show up once every 4-5 months on kijiji (our free classified listings similar to CL) or on other local fish forums but they get bought in hours if not minutes so that's pretty much like winning the lottery. Used FX5s show up often enough, but are rarely, if ever below $200 and I normally expect I may have to spend money on o-rings, hoses, new sponges and media for any used filter I buy so they aren't really screaming deals.

Do you believe that the 2262 is a 50% increase in value over the FX5?


----------



## Deeda (Oct 12, 2012)

Value, IMO, is not only about the price. How about a quick comparison.

All the following info was taken from the Fluval FX5 literature and the Eheim 2260 canister box, the 2262 will obviously be a larger pump so you need to infer the GPH numbers.

FX5 = $300
Aquarium capacity= 400 Gallons
Pump output= 925 gph
Mechanical area (Foam)= 2,100 cm2
Biological volume= 5.9 liters or the amount of media the baskets will hold.
Filtration volume= 20 liters
Filter circulation= 563 gph with intake & output hoses of the same length and without media. 
Wattage= 50 watts

Eheim 2262 = $450
Aquarium capacity= 396 gallons
Pump output = 900 gph
Mechanical media= 5 liters
Biological media= 15L
Filter volume= 18 liters
Filter circulation= 502 gph with intake & output hoses of the same length and with recommended new media
Wattage= 80 watts

Now, I am going to assume the FX5 filter circulation does include the stock sponge filter inserts in the baskets. There doesn't seem to be much difference between the GPH rating of the two filters, even when you take into account the addition of media to both filters. They both seem to average about 500 gph when filled with new/clean media.

I also can't account for the slight difference in the 2262 filter volume of 18L when it suggests using 20L of media.

Electricity costs will also be different. Here is a quick overview using .10 or 10 cents per kWh, your local utility charge will vary so check your bill.
FX5= 50W x 720 hours (30 days) divided by 1000 (1kwh) x 10 cents per kWh= $3.60 per month.
2262= 80W x 720 hours (30 days) divided by 1000 (1kwh) x 10 cents per kWh = $5.76 per month.

I would still prefer the 2262 over the FX5 for the reasons I previously stated. I think it is a good value because it has been around for a number of years, there are few parts that may ever need replacing and it is easy to maintain. The upfront costs are high but some people have had theirs for over 20 years. I think that speaks well for the general construction of the Classic series filters and it is the reason I bought my first Eheim filter.


----------



## rgr4475 (Mar 19, 2008)

Having not used the 2260 or 2262, I can not compare between them and my FX5. I believe and understand the problems that have come with the FX5. Fortunately, I haven't had any problems with the unit (knock on wood). I got the filter basically for free with a used tank purchase. So IMO, although it may have some problems and the Ehiem may be slightly better, I don't think the FX5 is this horrible filter that some people paint it out to be and wouldn't steer people away from it. However, my next canister is going to be one of the larger Ehiems. I'd like to compare them for myself.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

While I like my FX5 and my other canisters I can usually find something wrong with them. The main issue I have with the FX5 is bypass as it relates to the sponges. So on Tuesday I wrapped the outside of the sponges with a single layer of extra-loft quilt batting. Worked well except I started hearing water making the whooshing sounds as the batting was working too well in eliminating the bypass. So instead of waiting to see if that cleared up I went ahead and took the batting off yesterday and simply put three blue/white cut to fit filter pads in the top tray with biomax in the other two trays. Today the water is sparkling clear again.

While I have never owned a Eheim 2262 I have owned other Eheim classic canisters and liked them. I was debating saving another $200 to get the Eheim and probably should have done that because there is a lot less to worry about and I worry too much as it is. I will probably go ahead and order one this summer and fill it completely with blue/white pads and skip biomedia and anything else.

PS...also folks need to remember we have a lot of people including the OP from Canada so pricing isn't always in US dollars so keep that in mind.


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

I now own two FX5's and I have to rate them as just OK. As mentioned about one of the members made the statement that you should not have to modify a brand new filter in order for you to get it to filter as it should standing alone with it's own design. I've made these statements in the past and got flammed in a big way. I said it then and I will continue to make this statement: The FX5 has quite a few Design flaws period. 1. Bypass everywhere look at the hugh whole down the middle that is suppose to hold all your Biomax. If you do not use a filter pad there is nothing but the Biomax to stop the dirty water cra? and all right through the filter and back to the tank. On the other hand if you use a pad it clogs in no time and has a large effect on your GPH for which this is suppose to be a monister? 2. You had better put this back togethor just right or you will have a new swimming pool in your living room. I've had trouble with the input/output nozzles leaking, need vasaline to silicone it seems to control it. 3. the motor has a history of issues if you use fine gravel or sand not to exclude the motor burning up (which is $$$ to replace). It's by no means a Eheim. My issue is I have so much invested in the Fluvals that I have to use them until I can afford to replace them. I have a Cheap C-530 that I think does just as well and I don't need to change a thing to get it to work. To sum this up I love Hagen HOB's but they are way off with the designs on there canisters, I don't hate my FX5's but will never buy another. Get your money back and put it into a Eheim and I'm telling you this as a person who ownes all Fluvals except for a C530 Marineland.


----------



## littleolme (Nov 1, 2011)

I've tried to find info relating to the FX5 motor/impeller and sand and have found more concerns about failures than actual failures. I'm currently using a very fine argonite substrate and I always find it in the bottom of all of my filters, including my aquaclears with intakes that sit high up in their tanks (mostly due to the fish sifting through and spitting sand) so I know that it'll get into the FX5 as well. I don't think a prefilter is the answer because the filtration required to keep the fine sand out would cause flow restrictions and clog fairly quickly and would be less than ideal on a high flow filter like the FX5.


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

It seems that since you have already purchased an FX5 you have made up your mind. Here is a link to help in the future. :fish: 
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... 4429,d.dmQ


----------



## JoeE (Jun 11, 2012)

hawkkerw said:


> I now own two FX5's and I have to rate them as just OK. As mentioned about one of the members made the statement that you should not have to modify a brand new filter in order for you to get it to filter as it should standing alone with it's own design. I've made these statements in the past and got flammed in a big way. I said it then and I will continue to make this statement: The FX5 has quite a few Design flaws period. 1. Bypass everywhere look at the hugh whole down the middle that is suppose to hold all your Biomax. If you do not use a filter pad there is nothing but the Biomax to stop the dirty water cra? and all right through the filter and back to the tank. On the other hand if you use a pad it clogs in no time and has a large effect on your GPH for which this is suppose to be a monister? 2. You had better put this back togethor just right or you will have a new swimming pool in your living room. I've had trouble with the input/output nozzles leaking, need vasaline to silicone it seems to control it. 3. the motor has a history of issues if you use fine gravel or sand not to exclude the motor burning up (which is $$$ to replace). It's by no means a Eheim. My issue is I have so much invested in the Fluvals that I have to use them until I can afford to replace them. I have a Cheap C-530 that I think does just as well and I don't need to change a thing to get it to work. To sum this up I love Hagen HOB's but they are way off with the designs on there canisters, I don't hate my FX5's but will never buy another. Get your money back and put it into a Eheim and I'm telling you this as a person who ownes all Fluvals except for a C530 Marineland.


The pad clogs because it's doing its job and taking detritus out of your tank. It needs to be cleaned on a regular basis according to your stocking and feeding levels. I can usually get away with 6-week periods between cleanings, other people need to clean monthly, some people with lightly stocked tanks can go three months. Other people are overstocked or overfeeding, which isn't really the filter's fault. But there are lots of FX5 owners who properly maintain the filter and don't experience clogging issues that people who don't clean the filter get.

A filter which doesn't require regular cleaning is a filter that isn't doing its job, at least at mechanical filtration. Even the flow on my Aquaclear HOBs slows considerably if I don't thoroughly wash the foam block once every month or so.


----------



## littleolme (Nov 1, 2011)

smitty814 said:


> It seems that since you have already purchased an FX5 you have made up your mind. Here is a link to help in the future. :fish:
> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... 4429,d.dmQ


Really? I wouldn't have asked if I had already made up my mind. As I've done nothing but open the box and look at the contents, I can always return it.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say with your link. You have the exact same thing that's going on right here, people going back and forth with those that like it and those that aren't overly impressed. The first post about one guy having lost 5 out of 6 pumps strikes me as really odd. If it had that kind of track record, it would not still be on the shelves.


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

Now I could be way off here, but reading his first post on this thread made it sound like he had just bought it and was not impressed when he opened it up? Now I was taught never to assume, but in this case it seemed like he was trying to decide to keep it or not. If you check out monister there have been FX5 issues left and right even the admin chimed in about the hugh number of posts. I maintain my tank and filters to a tea. So I was pointing out as a owner what my issues have been. And am repeating myself but it's not a hidden fact with me that I call the problems with this filter as I see them. The tray design sucks (hope its ok to say that?). I got caught up in the hype and if I had it to do over my equipment would look very different. I believe that the issues I pointed out as a owner are well supported facts that if you where to research online would find plenty of documentation for support of these issues. My money is invested I have to make do with what I have as I can't afford to start over. Now to a new person in a position to keep or return this model I'd have to say return it!!! There are many others out there better with allot less issues and in many cases cheaper.On my other unnamed filter my pads can go two months with two oscars, Silver dollars, three large cats and a parrott cichlid. You stuff those pads in the Bio section on the FX and you will at least have to open it roughly every maybe two weeks. Heck I hear some Eheim folks say they don't have to open a classic but every three months or more? Look bottom line the FX is a OK filter as a new owner you need to follow those instructions to the letter and then there's still allot of in and outs not in the manual you will learn after a while using it. Funny Filters are like Sports teams or Cars each has its fans. With me I refuse to join that crowd that thinks the FX is the end all filter go online and say YEAH....FX5 amen. Sorry not me.


----------



## JoeE (Jun 11, 2012)

Any canister that you don't have to clean but every three months is either on a lightly-stocked tank or has bypass issues. Eheims require less cleaning because they provide less mechanical filtration. The detritus has to go somewhere, and if it isn't getting caught by the filtration it's going right back into your tank.


----------



## JimA (Nov 7, 2009)

littleolme said:


> smitty814 said:
> 
> 
> > It seems that since you have already purchased an FX5 you have made up your mind. Here is a link to help in the future. :fish:
> ...


Both the FX5 and Eheim have their pro's and con's I just picked up a FX5 off C,list for a nice price. Had it not be for the price I wouldn't have bought one. Same goes for the Eheim they are a nice filter but expensive and the parts are not the cheapest either. Everything I have read on both is the Eheim makes a great bio filter and the FX makes a great mechanical filter. No matter what the product you can always find someone who is not happy with what they bought. I bought this FX5 used without any instructions and had it up and running in 10 min if not less, not rocket science. After seeing it I don't believe it is worth the price or the the hype it gets, but it does move a lot of water! That being said many many people have bought them and are happy. 
Same with Eheim check out the reviews of the 2075 and the issues they had with it leaking. They still make a great filter with many followers that buy them like the FX.

Anyway to the original poster keep it or send it back it's up to you. I happen to like mine and plan to load it up with bio as I already have the mechanical end taken care of on my new 240 once it's set up. Good luck to you!


----------



## scifisarah (Jan 4, 2013)

Things our country can't agree on, health care, gun control, immigration reform, canister filters...  Just enjoy your filters and agree that we all like to disagree.


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

littleolme said:


> I've tried to find info relating to the FX5 motor/impeller and sand and have found more concerns about failures than actual failures. I'm currently using a very fine argonite substrate and I always find it in the bottom of all of my filters, including my aquaclears with intakes that sit high up in their tanks (mostly due to the fish sifting through and spitting sand) so I know that it'll get into the FX5 as well. I don't think a prefilter is the answer because the filtration required to keep the fine sand out would cause flow restrictions and clog fairly quickly and would be less than ideal on a high flow filter like the FX5.


It was sand of fine gravel getting into the motor assembly. I don't think the motor burns out in every case but I think the computer chip senses the issue and shuts the filter down. Fix is to take it all apart whenever this happens. I will say I think the motors are pricey if you have to replace them. With the design with this filter you can use a outside prefilter or add filter pads to what I call the Bio section of the trays ither way they both clog quickly. As for my filters I clean them every two weeks I alternate one each week. There are people out there that claim they go much longer with no tank issues whatsoever. So many people will take what they know is a design flaw and turn it into the owners fault. The funny thing is you take that person with another filter and the issue is gone. I', sorry to everyone if I am long winded I worked in customer service management for many years, many companies will hold off admitting to a problem until they can't do it any longer it bites into there profits. I have been keeping fish tanks since the early 1970's most of the time when a product fails it's the company trying to cut conners with materials to save money or flat out poor design catches up with them. In the case of the FX it's past time for a Revamp with its design flat out it's not a Aquaclear 110 or Eheim Classic.


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

scifisarah said:


> Things our country can't agree on, health care, gun control, immigration reform, canisiter filters...  Just enjoy your filters and agree that we all like to disagree.


 :lol: I need to be way more like you!!!! I wonder about the way I'm wired sometime?? I'm just a opinionated old fart who tends to be over passionate with many things...... you know the filters are just a bleed over to about anything else in buniness or even goverment sometime :thumb: .


----------



## GTZ (Apr 21, 2010)

This thread has been filtered by my FX5. 
Stick to the facts folks, opinions are fine but shouldn't be attacked per se.


----------



## cichlid-gal (Apr 27, 2012)

GTZ said:


> This thread has been filtered by my FX5.


 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

cichlid-gal said:


> GTZ said:
> 
> 
> > This thread has been filtered by my FX5.
> ...


Sorry It's me!!! I see a post that posses a question such as this and I have to stick my two cents worth in shall we say  . Especially when its about something I've had issues with. And lets face it....its a whole lot better subject than who we want for President or something along those lines :dancing: . But couldn't the thread have been filtered by something like or 406 or something else???? =D> =D> =D>


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

Honestly is not a good forum about good debate and questions that make you think with maybe a little humor added in? And yes help people solve problems? I mean wouldn't a forum be boring if say someone just bought a Eheim and hated the green hoses (which I happen to like by the way  ) so they wanted to know what color to replace them with Pink or Orange???? Those are the forums where you see new post only every week or so.Besides any forum that can put up with me is saying something!!!!


----------



## DrgRcr (Jun 23, 2009)

Do not take this as personal bashing, but rather my rebuttals to some of the statements. My FX5 has been running for nearly 4 years on a heavily stocked 125(40 mbuna and 7 catfish). I also have an AC110. Pool filter sand as substrate. I use the 3rd valve on an extra hose to do water changes on occasion with the pump itself. Never once have I had to grease a valve, had a broken hold down bolt, or had the motor sieze, stop, or fail to restart. I run a sponge with a pad, bio max, crushed coral, and ehfimech(which is awesome IMO) in the baskets. I do maintenance on it roughly every 3 months and my nitrate generally stays under 20. Doing that takes me about 20 minutes. A little bypass is not always the end of the world either. Perhaps it allows the pump motor to work a little easier?


----------



## Floridagirl (Jan 10, 2008)

I love my FX5s. I own 3...have them loaded down with nylon pot scrubbers. Clean them appx every 3 months, put new sponges in (have a spare set). I rinse the dirty ones in the washing machine with very light bleach and many rinses and a soak in Prime. Rinse the pot scrubbies in aquarium water, during water chage, and keep on going.


----------



## GTZ (Apr 21, 2010)

DrgRcr said:


> A little bypass is not always the end of the world either. Perhaps it allows the pump motor to work a little easier?


I've wondered if the bypass is intentional due to the high flow. Or some other design aspect necessitates some bypass. I'd love to see some GPH comparisons with stocked filters.
For my 2 cents, I've had the impeller stick once in the past year due to sand. Other than that, no problems. I enjoy the extra valve connector along with my crossbred hose for easy water changes.


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

I respect the fact that many folks have bought these over many years (what was it like 2005 when it came out) From what I am seeing it seems more with later purchases I mean just read over the forums it's everywhere. Me on the personal side run my two but do not trust them for a second. I've had leaking problems as well as micro bubbles and it just seems its a pain to clean and I have not even started with my personal design issues with this filter. I am one of the victims of our economy and can not afford to just go out and replace them at this time and be responceable so I live with them. and I've put my replacement filters on my wish list which seems to get longer everyday. Allot of the forums have what I like to call the FX5..Uber Filter Club which should start a forum just for that. I mean read about all the mods people do on this filter I was mentioning on one of the threads all we are missing is duct tape to fix the bypass issues. Again for those that disagree I respect that, but at my first oppertunity my equpment will look nothing like it does now.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

GTZ said:


> DrgRcr said:
> 
> 
> > A little bypass is not always the end of the world either. Perhaps it allows the pump motor to work a little easier?
> ...


Yes...it has to be. The reason I know this is, I even started a thread on it titled "quilt batting", when I wrapped the outside of the sponge to eliminate SOME of the bypass, not all or even 50%, I could hear it making whooshing sounds the next day. I never did go back to that thread and update it but I should. Anyways, I pulled the batting the next day and it is working well again. The only bypass this filter has is when the water is making its way upwards around the sponges. There is zero bypass when the water makes its way down through the baskets. That is why the polish pads when inserted in the basket clog so quickly and start blowing micro-bubbles.

The problem I have with the filter, besides the dual nozzle but I digress, is the way the water enters and exits the sponges. Would have been better to make holes under the sponges so the water can travel vertically from the bottom of the sponge instead of entering the sponge from the side. I am going to order 3 extra baskets and drill a bunch of 1/4" holes in the bottom of the baskets where the sponges sit and see what happens. I bet that not only helps with flow but reduces some of the bypass. I haven't looked at the price of baskets but if they are too much I might look for a few used ones.


----------



## MPKS92 (Nov 5, 2010)

I have 4 FX-5's Love them had only one minor air issue or micro bubbles. It seemed that on the intake side it was sucking air above water line at the hose to the rubber coupler. Tightened it and pushed it further in water no more bubbles. I have yet to pay more then $220.00 for one and that was this last one about 6 months ago,  prior to that our loacal petstore was selling them for $200.00 even.


----------



## JOHN/VAL (Aug 4, 2011)

we have two FX5s, one on a 180 Gallon & 120 Gallon tanks, they run very quite and keep water crystal clear.
clean them out it 60-90 days , tanks are not over stocked and weekly 20% water changes, fish fed once a day.
could not ask for a better filter, all i have ever owned is Fluval products, so i can not make comments about any other filters.


----------

