75 gal filtration

[Cermet]

Canister - all the way for efficent filtering, cleaner water and very, very quite operation; just can't be beat. This type of unit will cost somewhat more but well worth the extra dollars considering the cost of fish - also, these support in-line heaters which offer a few advantages (like always contain water even if you empty the tank.) Got a very nice canister unit with a UV system built in for under $100 - (someone here pointed out the unit) a bit over sized for my 75 but very nice unit. Would never go back to HOB or any other system. The amount of bio-chips these units can hold is amazing and since that is 125% of what you want/need for any filter, why use anything else? Just always fill with bio-media, never charcoal (except to remove meds but I have a stored HOB that I use for that purpose now.)

Now, if phosphates are an issue, then a HOB add-on unit would be worth the cost; such a unit could be a very low end since that is its only purpose - those phosphate absorbing additives get replaced fairly often and a canister would be a bear changing out; my unit needs a very minor cleaning every three months and even then, I get little debris.

I no longer bother with these additives now since I added an algae scrubber (or bubble falls unit as I call them.) These grow algae and this consumes phosphates nicely (as well nitrates! Even ammonia/nitrites and they only take a week to grow; but do need cleaning every week or two; otherwise, they lose their efficency.) Unless you build a large algae scrubber, this type of unit can't replace a real filtering system (I bought a fanastic small LED unit that fits in the tank by someone here who makes them - very nice price and good performance - send me a private e-mail if you want one - I hope I can still find their e-mail ... ugh. Also, I'll send you the site for the canister if you want one of those UV units.)

[Cermet]

I am totally and completely lost why some people here are suggesting two canisters? Maybe I'm missing something.

I have a single unit for my tank (yes, I have spares but I use to have more tanks) and it easily handled a massive bio-load for a 75 gal. Besides, a 75 is really the smallest possible tank that can handle a canister. I am lost why two would be needed? If cleaning is the issue, that has never been a problem for me since I use mostly bio-chips (and the supplied internal 'spongs'/filtering media for each tray) that are only rinised (pure water only.) I don't lose any bacteria efficency after cleaning so why would someone have two running? That is possibly true for a HOB if you change the bio-media and want to alternate units for cleaning but for a canister, that is not needed. These units are not cheap and the high end units are way up there.

[Honey Badger 1]

You know Cermet, there are a lot of right ways to do things in this hobby, and just because it isn't the way you do it or I do it, doesn't make it wrong or stupid. Personally, I prefer to have canisters with slower flow rates so the water is in contact with the media and bacteria longer, this sometimes means I put two filters on a tank to ensure there are no dead spots.
Other people prefer to get the highest GPH rate they can with their canisters and use only one and that works too.
I didn't realize a 75g was the smallest tank a canister would work on. I guess I will go pull the XP2's off my 65g and 29g.

[Cermet]

As for the smallest tank size for a canister, many here (and they must be mistaken) have made this exact claim and that is partly why I said that. In my own experience I have used a canister on a 55 and the flow was too much for my fish; of course, I've had large fish. That said, a reduced flow would solve that issue nicely and your point is correct. So, for a newbie, I'd just say that if the tank is smaller than a 75, than a reduced flow might be in order. Of course, that requires very careful testing of water parameters to insure enough and proper flow rate to allow proper bio-action. Not readily apparent for me to use this solution for high flow rates systems if the fish aren't tolerant of the flow.

For people with money, two canisters have advantages and not just for a spare.

That is what makes this forum so useful.

[SW Florida Kid]

I have an AC110 and a PennPlax 700 Canister. I have an overstocked African tank and only do 25% water changes. The params never get more than 0, 0, 20.

I'm sure a 75 gallon tank is very similar. This forum really likes the AC110. Throw on a good canister too and you'll be all set.

[Crispy]

having only one canister would not do enough mechanical filtration for my liking. they have a lower turnover rate usually than AC110s. canisters are always better for bio, but lack in mech IME. having 2 also ensures you always have a healthy bacteria colony going even when you clean out one of the filters.

I've ran an FX5 on a 55g tank and the flow was not too much for the fish.

[Goes to 11!]

having only one canister would not do enough mechanical filtration for my liking. they have a lower turnover rate usually than AC110s. canisters are always better for bio, but lack in mech IME.

I agree completely. I run my ACs primarily for mech.

I have not heard much talk about 'too small for a canister' but I do [or have] run canisters on 20s [Long and regular] and 29s with no issues but these are not monster FX5 type filters, Just little Fluval 205s or EHEIM 2222 or 2232s.

[gronlaura]

I apologize - I didn't realize this thread was still active and I posted a new thread re filtration to the beginning freshwater forum on Saturday. I have settled on 2 Rena XP3's but have a question. Please see my post "Getting my first tank in 2 weeks".

I am also considering 2 Via Aqua 200W Titanium heaters rather than the Jaegers.

Thanks for all your help.