# [Wet Thumb Forum]-Fluval vs. Eheim vs Filstar?



## motifone (Apr 7, 2005)

Planning on setting up a planted tank 36l x 15x x 20h (that works out to about 47 gallons).
Close to buying, just need a little more advice:

THE FILTER

These have been recommended:

Fluval 304 

Eheim 2215

Filstar XP2

Thoughts? Favs?


----------



## motifone (Apr 7, 2005)

Planning on setting up a planted tank 36l x 15x x 20h (that works out to about 47 gallons).
Close to buying, just need a little more advice:

THE FILTER

These have been recommended:

Fluval 304 

Eheim 2215

Filstar XP2

Thoughts? Favs?


----------



## trenac (Jul 16, 2004)

I use the Fluvals and find them to be very good; they get the job done. The only draw back I have found is at times they are a little hard to get primed, other than that I have had no problems. I have thought about trying the Eheim but figure way spend the extra money if I'm satisfied with the my Fluvals.


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

I haven't used the 2215 specifically, but Eheims are generally worth a little extra money. Look for a good price.

I use the Fluval 304 on my 55. I found that the first stage sponge filter clogged rather quickly and needed cleaning more often then I wanted to get into a canister filter. I took the sponges out, filled the middle media basket with some added granular media then cut the sponges up to fill the top basket, That setup has worked without problems (and without cleaning) for months now.

Ditto the occasional priming problem that trenac mentioned.

I haven't tried the Filstar. I hear they're good for the money.


Roger Miller


----------



## Hawkeye (Aug 20, 2004)

I use Fluvals. So far I have four 304 and two 104. No reason why Fluval and not any other brands except that's what I started with and have never had any problems. I have to clean them about every three months. I add filter floss in one of the chambers just to give it that real clean water look. If your are going to use an external CO2 reactor on the out flow, I would go with the 404. When you add a external CO2 reactor it cuts the flow rate down a bit.

Hawk


----------



## imported_BSS (Apr 14, 2004)

I have a Rena XP3 on my 46g. I bought it because the price was close to the XP2 and it gave me an extra basket (which is currently empty







) and a little extra GPH. It does have a bit of a hum, as opposed to Eheim's which are supposed to be nearly silent. But, I felt it was a good filter for the money.


----------



## McKee (Feb 7, 2003)

Fluval versus Eheim versus Filstar versus Magnum: http://www.famamagazine.com/e/env/0001f06AaYSNpSohOA3l9U4/secure/login.html?link=/framepagesecure.html&item=jun2004:f-fe-head-062004-1

This is a measure of user-friendliness for the most part, but it spells it out. Granted they're the next size-up models, but the points are virtually the same.

If it requests that you log in, type "guest" into both the user and password.


----------



## Detox (Feb 26, 2004)

I use the Eheim 2215 on my 46 gallon and it works great. I have an external Co2 reactor inline on the filter outflow and there is virtually no noticeable reduction in flow. 

Very easy to use and I happy with the purchase. I do not have experience with filstar though. 

Cheers, 

Detox


----------



## Margolis (Sep 22, 2004)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by McKee:
> Fluval versus Eheim versus Filstar versus Magnum: http://www.famamagazine.com/e/env/0001f06AaYSNpSohOA3l9U4/secure/login.html?link=/framepagesecure.html&item=jun2004:f-fe-head-062004-1
> ...


well that article is a joke. The way they talk about how complicated it is to use a magnum and how it clogs up in a day is a joke.

I am not saying they are the best filters on the market. But imo, they are one of the easiest to use, not the most complicated filter ever made that requires six hands like the article says. And it takes quite a while for it to lose any significant flow rate. Since the author blew it so bad with regards to the magnum, how can I trust his opinions on the others?


----------



## nino (Oct 2, 2004)

Well, I use :
Eheim pros 2028 & 2026
Filstar XP1 and 3
Magnum 350 and HOT as diatom filter
FLuval (both old and new series)(threw them out already),

Best bang for the buck : Filstar
Best overall : Eheim
Easy to maintain : Eheim and Filstar
Durability : Eheim and Magnum (except the media container in the magnum).
Worst of all : Fluval (doesn't matter which model).

I and some of people in another forum constantly had problems with Fluval canisters. I admit I don't do the regualr maintanance and check up as suggested but who has time to do so if you have many tanks. Leak is the main issue here. I've never kept any spare parts until I started using Fluval. Those 2 fluvals I used cost me more than eheim pro if I take into account carpet cleanings and spare parts.


----------



## trenac (Jul 16, 2004)

I don't know why so many people have problems with their Fluvals, I had mine for years now with no problems (getting ready to but another), but unlike Ninob I do regular cleaning/maintance of my Fluvals. No hard feelings Ninob









In the article I found the author put to much emphasis on the external looks of the filters. I don't care if the Fluval looks like a garbage can as long as it does the job and it dose. Anyway it is hidden under the tank stand/cabinate.


----------



## McKee (Feb 7, 2003)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Margolis:
> 
> ...


"They" would be me. I think you may have missed the point of the article as set in the beginning: reviewing the user-friendliness of those 4 canister filters, based on my experience. As with you, I did not find it to be the best filter on the market. Dealing with the 350's tiny and limited media basket was a pain in the butt, and the loss of flow in my experience was part due to the bad design of the new intake screen and part what I feel is the feeble "horsepower" of the pump itself. The older Magnum I owned had a better intake screen design and a better pump. The hose clamp system on the Magnum is terrible compared to the other three canister filters reviewed.

On the other hand, I loved that the canister came free of the motor housing. As pointed out in the article, I wish the other manufacturers would take the cue. Unfortunately, that's the only thing I really liked about the 350. I don't really see this as "blowing it."


----------



## nino (Oct 2, 2004)

The only fair way to compare between different canister brands if you have used them contiously for more than 4 years IMO. Then you accumulate how much troubles you face with each canisters along those years. I've managed to do this on 3 brands (Eheim, Magnum and Fluval). This is why I said Fluval is the worst. Magnum is rate on top on the durability. I've run 2 magnums for over 7 years 24/7 and the only things I replaced was the gaskets once. That canister will still run well with broken gaskets and O ring without leaking a single drop. I even use regular rubber band to replace the gaskets before until the parts I ordered arrived. They still ran without any leak. Try running Fluval with broken O ring.

Trenac, none taken







I don't service or clean my canisters regularly except the medias. So, my judgement is based on how strong those canisters hold under the worst scenario (broken parts, dirty impeller etc).


----------



## Margolis (Sep 22, 2004)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by McKee:
> This is a measure of user-friendliness for the most part, but it spells it out.
> ...


I didn't say it that I found it not to be the best, I said it "may not" be the best. I don't presume to know what the best is, but the magnum 350 is certainly one of the best from my point of view, if not the best. It is very simple and user friendly and does not take 4 or more hands to put together.

the "limited media basket" does not seem limited to me at all. It is more than big enough to hold all of the carbon that I need to filter any tank. And I have never had any problems with them "falling apart" either.

as far as clogging and reduced flow, never had any problem like that either except when not cleaning the filter on its monthly cycle.

I have been using magnum 330's and 350's for 20 years now and have never had any of the problems you claim they suffer from. The self priming claim of the magnums is 100% true in my opinion. I have never had to kick them, bang them or in any other way manipulate them to get the siphon started. Just turn the switch on and it works. I have had to replace impellers and o-rings over the years do to normal wear and tear, but no major failures ever.


----------



## McKee (Feb 7, 2003)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Margolis:
> I didn't say it that I found it not to be the best, I said it "may not" be the best. I don't presume to know what the best is, but the magnum 350 is certainly one of the best from my point of view, if not the best. It is very simple and user friendly and does not take 4 or more hands to put together.
> ...


This has not been my experience. As a consumer, I wouldn't buy another. I was more satisfied with the other products. Other people have voiced the same feelings about the Magnum. I don't feel I'm wrong for not liking them. The other filters had better features, and were more user-friendly, in my opinion.

Preferring other products isn't "blowing it," nor is it a joke. That is like saying that people who don't prefer Dodge minivans are wrong, simple because you own a Dodge minivan. I don't think you are blowing it by liking Magnums. I just wouldn't buy another one myself.


----------



## McKee (Feb 7, 2003)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by ninob:
> The only fair way to compare between different canister brands if you have used them contiously for more than 4 years IMO.


This was an out-of-the-box comparison, so 4 years down the road wasn't within the scope of the article. I would encourage that if you have accumulated information on your experience, put it into an article format and submit it for print. You might as well make a bit of cash for your efforts!


----------



## IZM (May 24, 2003)

Another chime in on Fluvals...

I use the Fluval 304 on my 45G planted. I have not had any problems with it at all. I agree that it was relatively hard to prime. I have used it continuously for 2+ years and haven't experienced any clogging or propellor wear at all. I admit I don't do regular maintenance of my filter either (I may have cleaned it twice in the time I've used it).


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

I've had a Magnum 350 "Pro" for years now. They serve a purpose, but I'm always surprised when someone says they are good filters. They are the bottom rung of the canister filter market.

Every commercial design seems to have it's good points and its bad points. The Magnum 350's advantages are that it is simple and the pump-on-the-bottom design makes priming a breeze. The inherent downside of the pump-on-the-bottom design is that if you get any air in the chamber it stays there. That makes the filter very noisy.

There are other problems. The quick disconnects (if you even have them) are flimsy, break easily and are expensive to replace. The clamps that hold the top on the canister wear and in time they don't hold well under pressure -- the top of my filter often pops open when the motor is turned off and pressure in the filter chamber goes from negative to positive. I've had to replace the impeller and the new impeller is already showing wear -- despite the fact that the replacement impeller has barely had any use. The now worn new impeller will never be replaced because the retail price for the replacement part is a significant portion of the purchase price of the filter. It just isn't worth it.

When I was using my Magnum on a regular basis I found that it took at least monthly cleaning to keep it operating. Monthly cleaning is fine if you see that as acceptable maintenance. I didn't find that acceptable. My other canister filters don't require that regular cleaning.

No canister filter should leak in normal operation. That applies to every design I know of. The filter media is on the suction side of the pump and the canister seals are on the upstream side of the filter media. That means that the canister seals are always under relatively low pressure. Under normal operating conditions the pressure inside the canister is less than atmospheric pressure; if the seal is compromised that results in air leaking into the canister, not (at least initially) in water leaking out.

I know of two abnormal conditions that will allow a canister filter to leak. If the filter media gets clogged so there is a big pressure drop across the filter media then the pressure inside the canister will increase and the seals may leak water out. Also, if something shuts down the pump -- e.g. a power outage or air leaked into the impeller housing faster than it can be cleared -- then flow will stop, the pressure in the canister will go above atmospheric pressure and water can leak out.

Different people report vastly different experiences with the same filter. I think that bioload on the filter is one of the factors that influences people's impressions. A Fluval 304 (for instance) might be great on a 40 gallon, lightly populated tank, but terrible on a 60 gallon heavily populated or overfed tank. A filter that is overloaded builds up slime, clogs and requires frequent maintenance; parts wear quickly when the filter isn't working right and break downs are more frequent. A filter that is big enough for it's load seems to reach equilibrium so that it can be operated almost indefinitely without a big loss in performance and wear is reduced.


Roger Miller


----------



## Hawkeye (Aug 20, 2004)

I agree with Roger here. There is a purpose for the use of every brand and model canister filter. I use six Fluval canisters now. Four for over three years now with out any problems. However they are on medium size tanks. I use two 304's on a 75gal where one Eheim could do the job. 304's work great on my 30gal and 36bow tanks. The 104's I use on my two 20gals do a fine job. That said I would not use a Fluval on larger tanks. I would use Eheim from seeing how well they work in my friends larger tanks is the reason I say this.

As far as the Magnum, I have one that I use for a temp filter when I need to set up a quarantine tank or a extra filter when I stir up a tank while redoing it. Why would the size of the basket in the Magnum matter? I don't use carbon in any of my tanks.

I have been using filter floss witch make me have to clean the filters more often then I usually do but it really cleans the water well. I haven't ever had a problem priming or setting any filters up but I am mechanically minded. I think lot of the trouble people have is using the wrong filter for the job, plus not reading the directions and following them. I can say this because my wife doesn't read this forum, I just can't imagine her setting up and maintaining a canister filter. LOL For that matter some other people I meet at my LFS.

Hawk


----------



## imported_ThomE (Aug 24, 2004)

I have a fuval 304, filstar xp3, and 2126. I like the eheim 2126 because the heater out of the tank. But I like the fuval over the filstar because it's much quieter. But in truth, all three have been very good and I don't have a complaint over any of them. (I had them all for about 1-2yrs)

Anyway, that's my 2cents


----------



## Margolis (Sep 22, 2004)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Roger Miller:
> I've had a Magnum 350 "Pro" for years now. They serve a purpose, but I'm always surprised when someone says they are good filters. They are the bottom rung of the canister filter market.
> ...


oh well, we all have our opinions. I'm always surprised when somebody say's it isn't a good filter. It is simple, and effective. It filters the crap out of the water just like it is supposed to. Sure the eheims have extra capacity for biological media, but for my purposes, that is a waste. The canister is on the system for one purpose, and one purpose only, and that is mechanical filtration. The magnum fits that bill very well. Why should I spend all of the extra money on an eheim with it's extra internal capacity when the magnum is doing the job very reliably and is very cost effective at half the price. Never have had a problem with the metal clips failing and the lid popping off, nor have I had the quick disconnects break. Never has the reverse pressure from the power going off caused any of them to leak or force the top off in 20 years of use. Neither has air accumulation ever been a problem. As for bio load capacity, that is pointless in a canister filter for me. For biological filtration I use wet/dry filter, so all of the extra capacity of the eheim is wasted, as is the Ehfisubstrat. But that is just my opinion and experiences. I guess it all depends what you expect out of a filter. And the 350 gives me everything I expect with no extra bells and whistles.

And as for monthly maintenance, I am shocked that someone would find that to be too often. I think even that is pushing things regardless of what kind of filter you are using. Not because of restricted waterflow or loss of filtering capacity, but because of all of the decomposing waste that accumulates in a mechanical filter in that amount of time. Filtering the water through that waste can't be the greatest thing in the world, so it needs to be cleaned out on a regular basis.

oh well, at least I am leaving a wonderful first impression here on these forums


----------



## McKee (Feb 7, 2003)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Margolis:
> oh well, we all have our opinions. I'm always surprised when somebody say's it isn't a good filter. It is simple, and effective. It filters the crap out of the water just like it is supposed to. Sure the eheims have extra capacity for biological media, but for my purposes, that is a waste. The canister is on the system for one purpose, and one purpose only, and that is mechanical filtration. The magnum fits that bill very well.


I think the point here is, people want to buy equipment that fits their needs. It's a personal thing, and personal things are the measure by which we choose what we like and don't. For example, we bought the Eheim originally with the desire to outfit an Oscar tank. Lots of biology, and an internal heater that these fish cannot reach to tear apart. Would the Magnum have fit the bill? Not nearly as well. 


> quote:
> 
> Why should I spend all of the extra money on an eheim with it's extra internal capacity when the magnum is doing the job very reliably and is very cost effective at half the price.


For your needs, you shouldn't.


> quote:
> 
> As for bio load capacity, that is pointless in a canister filter for me. For biological filtration I use wet/dry filter, so all of the extra capacity of the eheim is wasted, as is the Ehfisubstrat. But that is just my opinion and experiences. I guess it all depends what you expect out of a filter.


Bingo!


> quote:
> 
> And as for monthly maintenance, I am shocked that someone would find that to be too often. I think even that is pushing things regardless of what kind of filter you are using. Not because of restricted waterflow or loss of filtering capacity, but because of all of the decomposing waste that accumulates in a mechanical filter in that amount of time. Filtering the water through that waste can't be the greatest thing in the world, so it needs to be cleaned out on a regular basis.


I agree here. However I am also realistic. Because people get busy, it's easy to put things off. I'm rabid about cleaning things up every 3 weeks or so, since I really don't relish watching my investments get sick and die. Do I hit it every 3 weeks? Not all the time, but at least with the way I've scheduled it, it never goes past 4 weeks.










> quote:
> 
> oh well, at least I am leaving a wonderful first impression here on these forums


If people don't get to debate why they like or dislike equipment on a discussion forum, it's no longer interesting. The magic part of any hobby is that people do it for different reasons, different goals, and their equipment is as varied as their goals. Never apologize for liking a certain piece of equipment, but always remember that some people drive Chevys, some people drive Fords, and some people wouldn't own anything but a Toyota to drive. Everybody likes what they like.

I even hear that SOME people prefer those Aquaclear external backpack filter thingies!


----------



## Paul Higashikawa (Mar 18, 2004)

I think Roger said it the best when he said it's all about what kind of filter you use for what kind of tank. Namely, a tank's size and bio-load definitely are the two most important factors affecting a filter's operation. Give you guys one example. Currently I got a ZOO MED 501, the supposedly turtle canister filter. It is a small, nifty canister; the smallest canister I've ever seen, in fact! It is good for up to 30-gal, and I am JUST talking about planted tanks. Its box said its main use is for a turtle tank but it didn't say how many gallons. However, I am subjecting it to a somewhat rigorous test by using it for my turtle tank, which is ~40-gal with 6 turtles. Believe me, this tank will put out more excretion than all your plant and fish combined. In another scenario, though, if this filter was used on a planted tank with relatively little fish load, then maybe one can observe performance difference. I shall keep you all posted on the filter's performance in the coming months. Anyhow, this just proves what Roger has said; subjugating a filter to a particular tank situation will render its performance different and unique.


----------



## FISA (Feb 17, 2005)

I havent had experience with Fluvals or other canisters....but I gotta say Ehiem kicks butt..

Ive got an Eheim 2224 Professional II and an Eheim 2226 Professional II...they both are awesome...a little spendy but well worth the price.


----------

