I would like everybodys views on UGF's

[Tiger15]

I am not shooting UGF down becasue of my unfamiliarity with it. I grew up with UGF and used it as my first and excluisive filtration for many years in my childhood. It was initially designed to run on air lift. Contempory outside filtration at that time was a lot more expensive and didn't work that well. My first outside filter was a Superking HOB that run on 45 watt electiricty and sounded like flushing the toilet. Worst of all, the siphon tubes needed to be restarted from time to time. The early magnetic drive HOB were highly unreliable because the magnetic couple slip easily and could overflow and wet the floor.

Modern outside filters are far different. In comparison with modern outside filters, UGF isn't the cheapest or easiest to maintain. I can replace the media in an HOB in minutes without even unplugging the unit. Cleaning an UGF isn't easy. One needs to vacuum 2 inch of substrate above the UGF plate and beneath it, which is much more time consuming than vacuuming a 1/2 inch substrate in a bare bottom. In term of maintenance, I would place HOB, sponge filter, wet-and-dry, canister and UGF in the order of increasing complexity. In term of performance, there is no difference and all will perform well provided one cleans them regularly.

 

[Darkangel]

Perhaps shoot down was too strong a word. I also was not reffering to any one in particular just a general observation on things new and old. This is not the only site I read and I see the same on those other sites as well. No offense was meant so I hope non was taken.

 

[RTR]

I absolutely love it when newcomers to the hobby damn UG/RFUG as being "old" and "outdated". Anyone who has been around for a while or has studied the history of the hobby should be well aware that UGs, canisters, and hang-on filters are all about the same age. The early W/Ds are close to the same age. The only relatively new filtration format is fluidized bed filters.

For my thoughts on the subject (including cichlid-proofing):

http://www.aaquaria.com/aquasource/rtrrfug.shtml

 

[slipknottin]

that was pretty rude IMO.

anyways... UGFs have been around longer. became pretty popular in the early to mid 50s. Wet/dry filters didnt start becoming popular till the 80s.

canisters and HOB powerfilters became popular late 60s early 70s. eheim invented the canister filter in 1962.

You might want to go yell at Bob Fenner at www.wetwebmedia.com because he called UGFs "obsolete" in an article in TFH.

 

[Tiger15]

Even though canister and HOB have been around for a long time, they were very different and were never popular until their reliability, design and price improved in the 80's. At that historical point of time, UGF was more popular, reliable and affordable. Reading my old TFH magazine, the old Dynaflow HOB had that huge motor underneath the box. The design of the magnetic drive was not perfected until the mid 80's and now every HOB and power head use the same basic motor/pump design. It's an engineering marvel that a 9 watt motor can push 300 gph with no noise, heat or maintenance around the clock for a decade and beyond. It outperfoms even the heart of many small animal.

 

[Serrateeth_2002]

One if the worst filters i ever used,i'll need alot of gravel,i can't put plants,not suitable for digging fishes,not for kuhlies and crayfishes.

 

[Fisher Price]

UGF's and Disco are two things from the seventies I do not miss. Why would you want all that crap decaying in your gravel? Other than providing nutrients and aeriation for plant roots I see no other benefits.

 

[Richer]

You'll only have decaying crude in your UGF if your tank is overstocked/your overfeeding/your not maintaining the UGF well enough/or a combination of these things.
There's a store in this city that have 2-3 asian arowanas that range from 15000 dollars to 25000dollars. They are all housed in tanks with UGFs, and an internal filter. They seem pretty darn healthy to me.

-Richer

 

[Skippy]

I have kept both on tanks and seen both do well.

My longest running tank for yearas had a UGF and a hob emp400 on a 50 gallon acrylic.

And on top of that it was planted. My amazon swords in it thrived in that environment. Someone in one of the first responses on this thread mentioned the high nitrate levels they saw with a UGF. This is not a horrible thing in my opinion, just an opportunity to have plants thriving by consuming that. I would be willing to bet that person didn't have a single living plant in that tank. Then again, I al also one of those radicals who support the use of plants to control nitrate levels.

Eventually I removed it only because I started keeping specific types of fish that wouldnt work well with them. (Khulis for instance, and amanno algae eating shrimp).

I don't see anything inherently wrong or bad with them, like anything else in this hobby. they require certain and specific maintenance.

 

[Vision]

I have been using UGF for the last 10 years and I don't think much of them. Truth is I recently switched to a canister (Eheim Classic 2213) and I think it was the best thing I ever did. UGF need constant maintenance and the powerhead sometimes get clogged by the debrids that go underneath the plates. Not to mention the fact that when you take out the powerhead the gravel might accidently go under the plates and then you have to take out all the gravel lift the plates and put the gravel back in place. This is too much hasle for me the canister is much more convenient. There is also the matter of the debris accumulating under the filter plates you have to clean it from time to time and it is more work. There are also some people that claim that plants don't apreciate the flow of water through their roots so for all these reasons I would avoid an UGF. I think I will never use one again. But other people might think otherwise this is just my opinion.
Vision