GFO vs High Capacity GFO

[seth the wine guy]

I've used the regular before. I'm wondering who has used both and what are their thoughts between the two. The high capacity claims to remove twice the amount of PO4 as regular GFO but it's three times the price. (Not a good ROI by my calculations!) So, there has to be something more to it? Is it just for people where sump/reactor space is at a super premium? If so, that's not a concern for me. I'm about to reload on it and I'm just wondering if I should consider it over regular GFO.

As a side note, I actually use both GFO and Seachem Phosguard at the same time in different reactors. Phosguard seems to provide a slow consistent absorption rate while the GFO is a faster more extreme absorber with a shorter lifespan.

 

[merkywater]

I used both before and the High Capacity does a better job and last much longer. Just wish there wasn't such a bigger price difference. I will tell you I will not be going back to regular GFO. Once you use the high capacity there is no going back. JMHO

 

[djatl]

I think the other benefit is that you can recharge the High Capacity GFO. I can't remember the process, but it means you could get more use from the HC. I haven't tried it yet, but I am going to switch when I run out of the regular.

 

[reeferman]

in my experience,if you run a ulns and change gfo frequently,then there is no justification in the price of HC.the regular will keep the po4 low enough already if you dont have an abundance bound up in the sand and rocks.i only use the regular and change frequently and keep p04 in the 0.02 range with daily feedings of Herbivore and Reef Frenzy for 15 fish

 

[seth the wine guy]

I think one problem is the fact my rock is leaching a lot of PO4. I should have started will all virgin Marco rock but that's water under the bridge until I do the next build.

 

[reeferman]

then you may want to consider the HC,im sure Ralph will chime in,i think he uses HC all the time.

 

[seth the wine guy]

And I know Ralph changes weekly. So, it had me wondering if it lasted any longer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mrflameangel]

I use 3/4 cup in a regular reactor. Now it's running on a 180. I change this every 2 weeks. What amount and how often do you change in a high capacity reactor?

 

[reeferman]

i change the regular every two weeks.weekly changes with the HC would get expensive.

 

[thanhreef]

MrFlameangel;841205 wrote: I use 3/4 cup in a regular reactor. Now it's running on a 180. I change this every 2 weeks. What amount and how often do you change in a high capacity reactor?

I have used only HC for more than 3 year. I change it every 3 weeks or a month. I love it

BRS calculator:

 

[djatl]

djatl;841191 wrote: I think the other benefit is that you can recharge the High Capacity GFO. I can't remember the process, but it means you could get more use from the HC. I haven't tried it yet, but I am going to switch when I run out of the regular.

Found the link: http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/10/chemistry">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/10/chemistry</a>

I plan to give this a try in the future, but I haven't run out of the regular GFO yet. I'll probably upgrade to a Hanna Phosphate checker to make sure I can see the benefit.

 

[outdrsyguy1]

I checked into the hanna checker pretty hard after my debacle with read sea phosphate pro test kits. But i found the resolution on hanna to be unaceptable. I'm pretty new, but my understanding is that your looking for phosphates under .03. The precision of the hanna checker is +/- .04. I'm no scientist, but I think that means if my reading says .05, i could be realistically anywhere from .01 to .09. Which really doesn't help.

I'm still looking for an accurate solution for checking phosphates. My red sea test showed .06 from tank water, di/ro water in storage, and di/ro right out of the filter. I tried 3 different K lightbulbs when measuring it and even consulted my wife who's been a professional artist for 20 years. darn thing always read the same thing. I suspect it's just off and .06 is really baseline 0.

I even wrote the manufacturer but did not recieve a response

 

[atmercure]

As a side note, I actually use both GFO and Seachem Phosguard at the same time in different reactors. Phosguard seems to provide a slow consistent absorption rate while the GFO is a faster more extreme absorber with a shorter lifespan.[/QUOTE]

Seth, how often are u changing both of these out.