I dont care what people say but an undergravel filter with a power head is the best filteration out there. I have power filters from whisper, pengiun, and aquaclear which I do not use. I even have a bio wheel type power filter that I do not use which someone gave me. In fact, many of the fish stores that I go to use the under gravel filter with the power head for their tanks!
Undergravel Filters are the best filters!
- Thread starter Red_Belly_Pacu
- Start date
RTR would disaggre with the planted tank thing. He dose very well. If you like UGF though look up RUGF. It is even better.
I do like RFUG, and conventional is decent. I do also have plants on all of my RFUG's and would agree they do very well.
Saying that one filter format is better than onother is like saying oranges are better than baseballs. It all depends on what you like and what you will be using it for.
There are uses for all types of filters, all have their advantages and dissadvantages, I run RFUG on everything because I love them. That still doesn't make the the best or the worst or anything in between.
Dave
Saying that one filter format is better than onother is like saying oranges are better than baseballs. It all depends on what you like and what you will be using it for.
There are uses for all types of filters, all have their advantages and dissadvantages, I run RFUG on everything because I love them. That still doesn't make the the best or the worst or anything in between.
Dave
I use RFUG planted and unplanted and do quite well with it. I have not run conventional flow UG in years/decades and doubt that I will again, as the prefiltered reverse flow opion is far surerior IME.
But I do strongly agee that there is no "best" filter format. For chronic use I operate internal and external canisters, RFUG, W/D, fluidized beds, veggie filters and other refugia, and each has its appropriate use. For temporary use I have 2 different diatom filters as well. Personally I would feel foolish resticting myself to a single technique or format for filtration. Each format has its advantages and disadvantages. I use what I think fits the particular setup best, or in some cases, I use what I want to experiment with.
But I do strongly agee that there is no "best" filter format. For chronic use I operate internal and external canisters, RFUG, W/D, fluidized beds, veggie filters and other refugia, and each has its appropriate use. For temporary use I have 2 different diatom filters as well. Personally I would feel foolish resticting myself to a single technique or format for filtration. Each format has its advantages and disadvantages. I use what I think fits the particular setup best, or in some cases, I use what I want to experiment with.
undergravel filter
I just use the regular method with the undergravel filtr and a powerhead. From my experience, you can really overstock a tank and have the undergravel filter and powerhead take care of the work. I do not think the bio wheel or power filter type of filter can do such work if you overstock your tank.
I just use the regular method with the undergravel filtr and a powerhead. From my experience, you can really overstock a tank and have the undergravel filter and powerhead take care of the work. I do not think the bio wheel or power filter type of filter can do such work if you overstock your tank.
patoloco
De seguro no sabes lo que dice aqu
I prefer power filters over UGF for the reason they are easier to clean. Also, I use sand in my tanks, so an UGF or a RUGF will be no good there.
I agree with RTR and Daveddka, it all depends on your personal preference and needs.
I run a canister in my 50 gallon tank, and it works really good. It has gravel in the botttom, but only 1 single 1/2" layer, so I have more space for water
In my 250, I use a wet dry, with an overflow. I have messy fishes (rays) in there, so there was always a flim that formed on top of the water (protein wastes), and I was affraid for my gouramies. Reading some books, I found that overflow systems would take care of the proteous film that was being developed by my pooping machines. (This is common in salwater systems, abd it's solved by the protein skimmer).
So, in my case that's the best system, but that doesn't mean other systems are inferior. Just different.
I agree with RTR and Daveddka, it all depends on your personal preference and needs.
I run a canister in my 50 gallon tank, and it works really good. It has gravel in the botttom, but only 1 single 1/2" layer, so I have more space for water
In my 250, I use a wet dry, with an overflow. I have messy fishes (rays) in there, so there was always a flim that formed on top of the water (protein wastes), and I was affraid for my gouramies. Reading some books, I found that overflow systems would take care of the proteous film that was being developed by my pooping machines. (This is common in salwater systems, abd it's solved by the protein skimmer).
So, in my case that's the best system, but that doesn't mean other systems are inferior. Just different.
As a general rule I wouldn't reccomend overstocking any tank. But of course overstocking is a pretty general term.
Conventional UGF (I ran mine with powerheads not airstones) require some very serious maintenance in the form of vaccuming. It does not technically provide mechanical filtration and thus leaves something to be desired. I say technically because the substrate generally provides machanical filtration, and thus the need for routine deep vaccuming. If it is not vaccumed well eventually it will plug and create problems. This is not the fault of the filter, but is a reality of using conventional UGF, and we must compensate for reality. I would put an Emporer 400 against a conventional UGF any day. Either would do well enough on a tank. I doubt either could be said to be better than the other overall. The emp will shine when it comes to easy maintenance and mechanical filtration, the UGF will shine when it comes to polished water. Neither is without it's advantages and disadvantages. And I have run both with everything from Tetra's to Oscars.
Dave
Let me rephrase myself here. IMO the RFUG is a superior bio filter due to the fact that for the most part it's fool proof. Not only does it provide a large colony of undisturbed benificial bacteria it aids in mechanical filtration by pushing waste up through the substrate into the water columm to be removed by a power/ or canister filter. I'm unaware of a method of filteration that is as efficient as this. Granted this might not be the best in large aquaria but for medium sized tanks up to 4' I feel this is just as good as any and better than most. Also I wouldn't reccomend RFUG on a reef tank but then again this is the freshwater forum. Fluidized bed filters are great at what they do, but I feel that modular fitration is a little too involved for some folks. On the large tanks I like wet/dry's. They're generally aimed for large aquariums and again another great method of complete filteration. I understand everyone has a preferance and as always my reply reflects only my opinion. RTR said it best, it depends on the tank size and set-up. Basically differant strokes for differant folks, and I couldn't agree more. Public forums would be pretty lame if we were all the same
Last edited: