# 2 filters for one 55 gallon tank?



## dough041 (Dec 23, 2006)

I currently have a 55 gallon planted tank running for about 4 months.So far the usual issues- some algae, but overall pretty good. Use EI dosing, have an Eheim 2026,turbo twist 6x UV, running co2, 2x65 lighting about 8 hrs. My question is would the addition of another smaller canister like an Eheim 2222 be a good addition or would it really be just overkill? My water is pretty good, but I get fanatical on things and was wanting some input. I do use a vortex d1 about once every 10 days and it really polishes the water nice, but after a few days it loses the extra clarity? I thought by adding the extra canister with mostly floss, it would maintain the shine. Any thoughts would be appreciated.


----------



## John N. (Dec 11, 2005)

I think it would be overkill, and not absolutely necessary. The water clarity should be already enhanced by the UV filter, current media, and plants. However, you can always try adding Seachem Purigen along side your media. It helps purify and adds that "shine" to the water. 

-John N.


----------



## furballi (Feb 2, 2007)

I have no idea how "polished" water should look. My 50 gal tank is 4' long with one Aquaclear 50 with only two sponges for biological and mechanical filtration (no carbon, no filter floss). I can easily read a newspaper thru 4' of water with only a TINY loss of clarity.


----------



## vic46 (Oct 20, 2006)

John N. said:


> I think it would be overkill, and not absolutely necessary. The water clarity should be already enhanced by the UV filter, current media, and plants. However, you can always try adding Seachem Purigen along side your media. It helps purify and adds that "shine" to the water.
> 
> -John N.


John:
This question should perhaps be addressed to Seachem however, is it not a concern the Purigen will effectively remove ammonia etc. and thereby endanger the nitrobacter colony(s) in the Tank? Perhaps this is over cautious but, if the bacteria colony is removed (starved) and the Purigen becomes ineffective (needing regeneration) the tank is , I believe, now in danger of a serious spike or perhaps even a re-cycle.
I would appreciate your thoughts.
Vic


----------



## John N. (Dec 11, 2005)

Great question Vic. This is a response by Seachem regarding the same question:

"Purigen will not hinder the ability of your bacteria populations to grow. Purigen absorbs organic waste before it is converted into ammonia/nitrite/nitrate and could help to avoid spikes. To avoid spikes in ammonia/nitrite, you want to make sure you have adequate biological filtration media to support bacteria and sufficient bacteria populations for the number of fish you have. While cycling the tank it would be a good idea to feed less and check for free ammonia and/or nitrite. Most systems contain enough organic matter to provide adequate nutrients for bacteria to begin to colonize bio media. Chemical filtration such as Purigen should not keep the tank from cycling or slow the cycling process."

There should be enough excess nutrients in the tank to keep both purigen and bacteria colonies happy.

-John N.


----------



## JERP (Feb 4, 2003)

The only real advantage of a second filter is enhanced circulation.

There are cheaper ways to increase circulation that are just as effective. Minor changes to your current filter outputs can accomplish almost the same thing.


----------



## vic46 (Oct 20, 2006)

JERP said:


> The only real advantage of a second filter is enhanced circulation.
> 
> There are cheaper ways to increase circulation that are just as effective. Minor changes to your current filter outputs can accomplish almost the same thing.


Well I unfortunately do not agree with you. The circulation issue may be dealt with without additional filtration. However, redundancy, the second filter, forestalls the disaster of a filter packing up and leaving a tank with no filtration whatsoever. The cleaning of the second filter can be time offset with the initial filter so that there is no possibility/risk of crashing the nitrobacter colony(s). No risk of killing off the bio filter. The need to replace worn or otherwise unsuitable media in a filter does not jeopardize the bio filtration in the tank as the redundant filter preserves the bio filter. With regard to circulation the second filter will permit the physical structuring of the filtration system in such a fashion as to enhance the circulation within the tank without creating unacceptable current levels. This has the advantage of enhancing the filtration process but also results in a much more constant overall water temperature. Furthermore, in the event that CO2 is being injected into the tank via an in-line diffuser in the return line of a cannister filter the diffusion of the CO2 throughout the tank is clearly enhanced. I have 2 xP3's on my 125 USG tank and, also for the comfort of redundancy, I have 2x300 watt heaters on the tank as well.
The concept of redundancy is philosophically similar to the concept of over filtration, it sure won't do any harm and is da* cheap insurance comparatively speaking.
Vic


----------



## JERP (Feb 4, 2003)

vic,
I don't dispute that two filters are better than one, as long as you don't blow your plants to bits with the extra circulation. I just think that most of the benefits of a second filter can be realized with a single filter and good planning.

FYI,
The 2026 has a "flow meter" on the filter to warn you when the filter is getting plugged. I never clean all the chambers in my ehiem at the same time. It's always only the first sponge that is plugged anyway. Usually, it's actually the filter inlet that is clogged. I have a "T" on my output with small output diffusers to increase current out of my single filter. I used to have both a 2126 and a Fluval 403 on my 50T. I did not replace my Fluval when it died after 15 years of loyal service. There was no appreciable difference in water quality after replumbing my tank for a single filter.

I think dough's real problem is that he's trying too hard. Water polishing can do more harm than good in a planted tank. His Vortex is removing all floating bacteria and algae on a regular basis, so that there is never an equilibrium. He is on a binge-purge cycle in his tank. He would be better off removing the Vortex, and adding a little patience. If the tank remains cloudy, check the NPK or feed the fish less.

He might be better off without the UV as well, but that's a religious flamewar I wont discuss further. I plumbed my system to easily add a UV inline for temporary use, but don't use it full-time. UV systems fill with gunk too fast for them to remain effective without regular maintence. I used to have the UV full time inline with the 403, the CO2 diffuser was inline with 2126. I removed the UV from the 403 and the only difference was a slight increase in circulation.


----------



## dough041 (Dec 23, 2006)

Jerp;
Thanks for the constructive, well spoken criticism. Yes, you're right- I need more patience and usually overdo things at first. Guess at my age I should have learned more lessons ( ha ha). But, I will take your advice on the feeding etc... I really enjoy planted tanks ( new to this) and am trying to get as much educated advice as I can from this forum. I really appreciate all the people giving their advice/experiences...


----------

