# Am I Overkilling My Tank



## S2K_Alex (Jul 2, 2012)

I currently have a 120gallon running with 3 AC110 and a fluval 406 with an air stone. and I always keep on hearing about the fx5 and *** always thought I am never going to waste that much money on just one canister but the more I read and how comparable it is to the Eheim pro makes me want to buy the fx5 to add to my tank but would it be too much?? even with everything that i got up and running. Also im looking at the measurements and i read that its 16in Diameter and 17in high. but im pretty sure the diameter is including the motor that comes out the back, can anyone give me an exact measurment on how wide just the canister would be?? i hope i explained my self right. pictures would be a plus :thumb:


----------



## jonathantc08 (Nov 16, 2012)

In my opinion the the f 5 is no where near comparable to the eheim 2075 that I have. Fluval sacrifices so much mechanical and biological filtration just to push their gph. They know a lot of novices only think in "gph" and "turnover". You could get a 50 dollar wet shop vac from Home Depot and it would be just as good as the fx5. The best thing you could do is allow enough space for beneficial bacteria to grow and do weekly water changes.


----------



## S2K_Alex (Jul 2, 2012)

^^^ that did not answer anything or have to do with anything that i asked about but ok... moving on, anyone else have info that would help.
fyi in a test they had comparing the 2 the fx5 had a lot better mechanical filtration compared to eheim and the biological of course the eheim takes it but the fx5 is not that far behind and for the price and performance they are pretty much even.


----------



## rgr4475 (Mar 19, 2008)

I don't think it will be too much, just not needed. If you are looking to get rid of some of the AC110's you could add it. But if your water parameters are handing the amount of fish you have now, then I don't see a reason to add it. I just measured mine. The motor sticks out about 4" and the unit itself is about 13 1/2" wide. (I am rounding up numbers slightly)

And jonathantc08, you are entitled to your opinion but you should provide some data or proof to back up your claims on how awful this filter is. It does a fine job mechanically. My proof, is that I use it.


----------



## S2K_Alex (Jul 2, 2012)

actually i was thinking about removing one AC to fit in the hoses of the fx5 but before i do that i would defenetly like to see if i can fit them all.
my setup includes 20 africans and a pleco but i think I am going to have to remove him because they just pick at him and his growth rate is super slow compared to my friends and i think the culprits are my africans stressing him out and my lfs dont want to take him in and no one on craigs wants a small pleco, if it was a larger one it would of been gone a long time ago...
I know the fx5 has 3 trays and i was thinking of putting (bottom to top)load a tray with prefilters, thena fine filter pad with a polishing pad and the last tray load it up with biomax. do i have the right idea of setting it up?? and/or how do some of you guys have your fx5s setup.


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

I have a 125 gallon. I am running 1 FX5, 2 406's, and a C4. The FX5 takes some getting used to, it's unlike other filters on the market. My chief and now only complaint is the wholes right in the middle of those trays. Many just fill that space with Biomax and leave it at that. To me without some sort of mechnical filtration added its just a big whole for the water to circluate threw the biomax and then back into the tank **** and all. I had one of the user's here on the forum tell me about a polyfiber pad put out my Marineland(cost is cheap like $3.80 a sheet, its what they use in the penguin etc on the cartridges) I have cut two and added one to the top of the bottom tray and one on top they work great clog no worse than any other filters. Allot complain about the 04, 05, 06, series filters I think the trick with these is to follow the maintainence chart to a tea (let me say mine are nice little filters good and strong) I use the C4 mostly for purigen makes it very easy to get at and adds a little mechnical-bio also, It's a very underrated filter it's kinda like a small 06 series in the way it's setup. Sorry this did not follow or answer your questions all the way just my take on these filters. I have often wondered if you put a good HOB next to say the 406 can it keep up where it does have a much lower media capacity. This is not ment to start a canister vs hob war it has just been a curious thought that I have had.


----------



## jonathantc08 (Nov 16, 2012)

S2K_Alex said:


> how comparable it is to the Eheim pro makes me want to buy the fx5 to add to my tank but would it be too much?? even with everything that i got up and running.


^^^how did that not have anything to do with what you asked? you were interested in getting an fx5, I gave you my opinion on it, and you also asked if that would be overkill and I told you they really dont work that well.



S2K_Alex said:


> ^^^ that did not answer anything or have to do with anything that i asked about but ok... moving on, anyone else have info that would help.
> fyi in a test they had comparing the 2 the fx5 had a lot better mechanical filtration compared to eheim and the biological of course the eheim takes it but the fx5 is not that far behind and for the price and performance they are pretty much even.


Im sure that I read the same article but the mechanical is grossly inefficient. Also the eheim gph is actually closer to its rated gph I think it was 70% and the fluval fx5 was barely 40% of its gph. For the amount of mechanical thats in the fx5 it is horrible. you can just put some fine filter pads or poly filter in an eheim and get the best of both worlds. I have used fx5 and other fluvals and there is so much bypass in all their designs I'd never buy another one.


----------



## ngrubich (Jun 3, 2012)

jonathantc08 said:


> S2K_Alex said:
> 
> 
> > how comparable it is to the Eheim pro makes me want to buy the fx5 to add to my tank but would it be too much?? even with everything that i got up and running.
> ...


I've got to agree with jonathan here: you asked for an opinion so I don't really see the need for the snide remark. If you really don't want someone's opinion, then don't ask. Adding an FX5 would be overkill with the amount of filtration that you already have in place, but overfiltration isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as the flow created by the outputs of the filters isn't throwing the fish around too much.

The 17" tall in the product dimensions only goes to the top of the canister, it doesn't include the height for the hose connections that go into the canister. Here is a link to the manual for the FX5: http://www.hagen.com/pdf/aquatic/FX5_user_manual_EN.pdf


----------



## ngrubich (Jun 3, 2012)

Update:

after a quick search on another forum, I found the dimensions that you are interested in:

diameter at the top of the canister is 37cm (~14.5"), but due to the motor at the bottom (as you noted earlier), the diameter at the bottom is 45cm (~17.7"). 
The height to allow for hose attachments: 56cm (~22")


----------



## S2K_Alex (Jul 2, 2012)

jonathantc08 said:


> S2K_Alex said:
> 
> 
> > how comparable it is to the Eheim pro makes me want to buy the fx5 to add to my tank but would it be too much?? even with everything that i got up and running.
> ...


its no where near 40% of its rating its more and at the end its more than the eheim and mechanical is much better the eheim is more biological and the fx5 is more mechanical.

FLOW RATE 
Manufactuers rate their filters by the maximum produced by the pump under ideal conditions without media and things like hoses which isn'tvery helpful in the real world. Most cannisters seem to get less then 50% of their rated flow capacity when used in the real world but both these filters did better then that. 
The Fluval showed a flowrate of 1991 litres per hour when full of media and connected which is about 57% of its rated pump capacity of 3500 l/ph but the Eheim did even better giving 1207 litres per hour out of its possible 1700 l/ph for a amazing 71% ! 
This still gives the Fluval a nearly 800 litres per hour flowrate advantage when used in real life situations but filtration is more then flow alone its also about capacity.

MEDIA CAPACITY 
Both filters are huge and hold a lot of media however the Fluval contains 25 litres of foam media around the sides of the baskets and only will hold about 6 litres of bio and mech media in its baskets while the Eheim holds a full 12 litres of bio and mech media and only has about 2 litres of foam.

Will the bigger flow rate of the Fluval make up for its lack of media ? 
.

THE FILTRATION TEST

Mechanical filtration 
We wanted to test the ability of these filters to remove particals from the water so we emptied a big container of tetrabits near the intakes. The Filters both did a great job catching most of the gunk in their pads but if I had to give to one of them I'd give it to the Fluval that 25 litres of foam really can catch some gunk!

Biological Filtration 
The most important function of a filter is its biological filtration capacity and here is the best test for these filters. The clear winner here was the Eheim taking only 11 days to cycle the 700 litres of water from 4ppm of ammonia to Nitrate only vs the FX5's 13 days. It just shows that that extra 6 litres of bio media in the Eheim more then makes up for the 800 litres per hour flow advantage the Fluval has. a 2 day difference is quite significent and its more then we expected.

CONCLUSION A matter of price 
While the Eheim is the clear winner in the performance stakes the decision is not clear cut. The Eheim is the better biological performer and has a better % flowrate when full. Its a lot quieter and holds a lot more media and uses less power then the Fluval. So its a no brainer to the Eheim on most areas right? Well no ... The fluval still does a excellent job its a bit easier to set up and it does a slightly better job at mechanical filtration and and here is the big kicker .... IT IS ABOUT HALF THE PRICE OF THE EHEIM So while the Eheim is clearly the better filter here I cannot honestly say its twice as good as the Fluval... issues of reliability and longevity not withstanding. If moneys not a issue its got to be the Eheim but the Fluval is a very good filter and its attractive price is going to win it a lot of fans. As for me personaly I like the Eheim better but I also have 6 FX5's for tanks where I can't justify the cost. 
The only real winner here is us ...we have 2 great filters to choose from that both do a great job.

like I said for the price its not bad if it can be compared to something like the Pro but I think this should be going head to head with the G6 the higher end model due to there similiar price bracket are somewhat the same.
I did ask for your peoples opinion BUT it was about adding the fx5. Never did I say which filter should I add. I only mentioned that this filter is comparable to an Eheim


----------



## jonathantc08 (Nov 16, 2012)

well in my opinion you shouldn't add the Fx5 because you already have enough equipment. You can better use the equipment you have for whatever your need, may it be particulates, chemical or biological. The nice thing about having multiple filters is each one can serve a specific purpose. If your just looking for extra tank turnover then I ask why? tank turnover is a small portion of filtration. If you just want an fx5 then just get an fx5. Seems like you already have your mind set and you're just seeking validation.


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

S2K_Alex said:


> ^^^ that did not answer anything or have to do with anything that i asked about but ok... moving on, anyone else have info that would help.
> fyi in a test they had comparing the 2 the fx5 had a lot better mechanical filtration compared to eheim and the biological of course the eheim takes it but the fx5 is not that far behind and for the price and performance they are pretty much even.


I also honestly don't see why you would compare the 2075 with the FX5.....to me very different filters. The 2075 would be a better match with his current equipment but he asked about the FX5 specific. Alex you are like me with the Eheim I want, I just need validation (someone to kick me in the a?? to make my decision). I gave you my dislikes about my FX5 above (It's not perfect and I will tell you what if you try to bad mouth the FX in any way be ready to be flammed from all sides). Honestly with your current equipment you don't need it.If your looking for flow a powerhead on a sponge would do the same thing for much less $$$. Now if you just want a FX5 buy it!!!, you can then remove some of your current filters to be used elsewhere. No matter what anyone says it does move some water thats for sure.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

S2K_Alex said:


> I currently have a 120gallon running with 3 AC110 and a fluval 406 with an air stone. and I always keep on hearing about the fx5 and I've always thought I am never going to waste that much money on just one canister but the more I read and how comparable it is to the Eheim pro makes me want to buy the fx5 to add to my tank but would it be too much?? even with everything that i got up and running. Also im looking at the measurements and i read that its 16in Diameter and 17in high. but im pretty sure the diameter is including the motor that comes out the back, can anyone give me an exact measurment on how wide just the canister would be?? i hope i explained my self right. pictures would be a plus :thumb:


Well...I can't give you an exact measure tonight as my tank room is blacked out for the night but 16" sounds right including the pump.

You can add the FX5 to your tank but if your AC110 filters are working properly and you like them then I am not sure why you would want to change. You could add the FX5 to your setup without hurting a thing. There is no such thing as overfiltration only too much current in the tank.


----------



## rgr4475 (Mar 19, 2008)

13razorbackfan said:


> S2K_Alex said:
> 
> 
> > I currently have a 120gallon running with 3 AC110 and a fluval 406 with an air stone. and I always keep on hearing about the fx5 and I've always thought I am never going to waste that much money on just one canister but the more I read and how comparable it is to the Eheim pro makes me want to buy the fx5 to add to my tank but would it be too much?? even with everything that i got up and running. Also im looking at the measurements and i read that its 16in Diameter and 17in high. but im pretty sure the diameter is including the motor that comes out the back, can anyone give me an exact measurment on how wide just the canister would be?? i hope i explained my self right. pictures would be a plus :thumb:
> ...


I gave the OP a close to exact measurement using a tape measure. Motor sticks out 4", canister itself is 13 1/2" at it's widest point for a total of 17 1/2". (I did round up some of the numbers slightly)


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

rgr4475 said:


> 13razorbackfan said:
> 
> 
> > S2K_Alex said:
> ...


Yep...it is a wide unit for sure.


----------



## S2K_Alex (Jul 2, 2012)

ok so i decided to ditch the idea of an FX5, but i want more bio filtration and i was thinking what if i get a AC70 and just load it up with nothing but biomax, has anyone tried doing that. i couldnt find an answer exactly for that. so on top of my 3 AC110 and 406 i have room for an AC70 to add but like i said i just want to add biomax would that be a good choice???


----------



## Deeda (Oct 12, 2012)

I would still recommend using a sponge insert in the new AC70 to help keep your biomedia cleaner.


----------



## Mschn99 (Dec 24, 2012)

Deeda said:


> I would still recommend using a sponge insert in the new AC70 to help keep your biomedia cleaner.


I second this. Without one sponge in the bottom the bio media will just get plugged with debris and it will lose its surface area for the bacteria to grow.


----------



## B.Roberson (Nov 6, 2011)

if 13razorbackfan could add to this. i learned how important from him the sponges and pads related to the direction of flow from the filter also very important. just like Deeda and Mschn99 says it affects the bio. He affirmed what i had overlooked>...


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

B.Roberson said:


> if 13razorbackfan could add to this. i learned how important from him the sponges and pads related to the direction of flow from the filter also very important. just like Deeda and Mschn99 says it affects the bio. He affirmed what i had overlooked>...


Yeah....you definitely want to filter the water before it reaches biomedia otherwise it will become covered in gunk and bacteria not desirable for nitrification process and will suffocate the beneficial bacteria we want.


----------



## vann59 (Jun 20, 2011)

If you decide to go with the fx5, you might want to use seachem matrix bio media to get the best of both worlds. Tests show it is much more effective than eheim substrat or fluval biomax.


----------



## B.Roberson (Nov 6, 2011)

would? or could seachem matrix be better in other canisters? Besides the fx5? Mine, xp3 have the ceramic rings> And they all say to put the bio at the end of filtration? So bio should always be at the back end of the water flow? No fine filter pad after/ or ?


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

B.Roberson said:


> would? or could seachem matrix be better in other canisters? Besides the fx5? Mine, xp3 have the ceramic rings> And they all say to put the bio at the end of filtration? So bio should always be at the back end of the water flow? No fine filter pad after/ or ?


Should go like this IF you want fine filtration with filter floss or the like:

Coarse sponge/filter----->finer media(floss, etc..)------>bio media


----------



## S2K_Alex (Jul 2, 2012)

I know what il do, il get an AC70 use up the carbon and toss it after its done and replace it with extra biomax and keep the sponge. Now my little debate since, i am getting this to use up the space i have in the back of the tank. should i go AC70 or Fluval C4. I would do the same thing with the C4 once the carbon is done just replace it with biomax, but my other concern is if i go with the C4 should i buy nodes or bio balls?? obviously the bio balls look like they would hold alot more BB than the nodes from the surface area compared to the other


----------



## S2K_Alex (Jul 2, 2012)

i know the fluvals only go up to the C4 similiar to its cousin the AC70 and i know a lot of people wish they had made a C5 to be similiar to the AC110. my question is, has anyone heard or seen anything of MAYBE C5 to come out or to be put into production later on???


----------



## Mschn99 (Dec 24, 2012)

S2K_Alex said:


> I know what il do, il get an AC70 use up the carbon and toss it after its done and replace it with extra biomax and keep the sponge. Now my little debate since, i am getting this to use up the space i have in the back of the tank. should i go AC70 or Fluval C4. I would do the same thing with the C4 once the carbon is done just replace it with biomax, but my other concern is if i go with the C4 should i buy nodes or bio balls?? obviously the bio balls look like they would hold alot more BB than the nodes from the surface area compared to the other


While bio balls do well in some filtration setups, IMO they arent an in-efficient use of space in an HOB filter. You can pack so much more surface area with smaller media into a HOB instead. In all honesty, bio balls are not more efficient than ceramic filtration even in a sump, but who can afford to buy enough biomax to fill a sump?? its about efficiency and cost combined. I wouild go with a HOB designed filtration.......or you could be a cheap SOB like me and use dollar store pot scrubbies...LOL They aren not as good as the commercial stuff, but as much as im over filtering it doesnt matter, i never see any chemical imbalances in my water.


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

Between the AC70 or the C4 the C4 is going to give you more mechnical and Bio. It has a large sponge in the back plus plenty of room for biomax in the front it also has a small trickle filter built in. So you have the sponge before the biomax and the front section can be all bio. I've also use a idea( I think i first read about from razor) add some two ply filter pad that comes in a large sheet(I think its from Marineland real cheap) just cut it out and you have extra mechnical on top of the Biomax. C4 is a neat little filter been waiting for the C5. I run two C4's


----------



## S2K_Alex (Jul 2, 2012)

Anyone else have any input on the Fluvals C4???
Another concern since I just want to use up the space I have in the back, Would the C4 even make a noticeable difference since its going on a 120 gallon??? I dont want to spend 50 bucks just because I can. I at least want it to make a differnce but the flow rate and the size of tank I got just doesnt justify it, or should I still go all out on the Fx5 lol


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

The C4 to me works equal or better than my AC70's I have for backup.Like any other HOB they will have a waterfall. The intake house is different a little more adjustable. The way the filter is designed it has to go through all the media. It's a recently new filter so there are not allot of them out there yet. The reason I push them is like the AC it is so simple to service you dont even have to shut it off. And like its cousin it filters nicely. C5 if hagen is smart probably put a end to the 06 line.


----------

