# Filtration for a 125 gal



## PSmithAZ (Aug 12, 2007)

Going to start a 125 gal cichlid tank next week. Going to put a fluval fx5 or wet / dry system that flows 900 gph. There will be about 150 lbs of rock in it so there will be quite a bit of displacement. I am not sure what the final vol of water will be but it will certainly be less than 125 gal. Is it overkill? Could I use more?


----------



## emc7 (Jul 23, 2005)

No 900/125 = 7.2 turnover. For cichlids up to 10X and more is fine.


----------



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

Psa:

Please refer to:
http://www.fishforums.com/forum/equipment-technologies/17363-pro-aquatics-wet-dry.html

TR


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2007)

You can't really over-filter a system. More filtration is _always_ better than under filtration. If your wallet allows it, I'd go for the FX5 especially since cichlids tend to be high-bioload and messy fish.


----------



## PSmithAZ (Aug 12, 2007)

I have decided to go with 2x Rena Filstar xp3 for this tank. Picked up the tank and the stand today... both from lee-mar. My LFS has ordered 350 lbs of rock. Can't wait to get this thing off the ground.


----------



## Danh (Feb 19, 2007)

Try and pack your xp3's with as much media as possible. I have an xp4 on a 75g right now that's working wonderfully. It's a low load tank and I've only got pot scrubbers as extra media over what the filter came with. I am not completely amazed and wouldn't swear by the xp4, but it works.


----------



## lohachata (Jan 27, 2006)

i have an FX5 on a 55 gallon tank right now with 3 large sponge filters.while this may seem like overkill;it isn't.there are about 15 fish in the tank.smallest is a 4 inch myrnae.biggest is a 14-15 inch decorus.but most all of them are pretty big cats.


----------



## Gourami Swami (Jul 4, 2006)

No such thing as overkill bro 

More IS always better. I wouldnt worry about that.


----------



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

PSmithAZ said:


> I have decided to go with 2x Rena Filstar xp3 for this tank. Picked up the tank and the stand today... both from lee-mar. My LFS has ordered 350 lbs of rock. Can't wait to get this thing off the ground.


Psa:

IMHO cannister filters do not function very well with tanks sizes from 100G up.
(please note that experience with them is limited).

The 350GPH published by the manufacturer does probably not reflect "real world conditions". Based on my limited experience these published flows are determined from 0 static head, 0 dynamic head, and "brand new media" conditions. 

With the fittings, piping, bends, etc. the actual flow may be only 250GPH.

The above flow would result in a 4X turnover which is acceptable for minor stocking and minimal feeding.

Have you considered fabricating a wet/dry filter?

TR


----------



## PSmithAZ (Aug 12, 2007)

I have considered fabricating a wet / dry. I keep hearing that trickle filters are old technology and that I should go ahead and run 2 canister filters. I am considering putting 2 Rena Xp3 filters now and possibly 1 Emperror 400 on the 125.


----------



## redpaulhus (Jan 18, 2005)

Trickles are "old" in that they were really big in the 80's and 90's -- but then again so were canisters ! Both have actually been around longer than that, and both are good choices but for different reasons.

Canisters are good for holding lots of media (especially chemical), allowing limited bypass (usually), and being (mostly) leak- and flood-proof.

Wet-dry's are good for either high oxygen saturation bio-filtration, ammonia outgassing, or both. They generally have limited capacity for zero-bypass chemical filtration, and may not "process" solid waste as well as a canister since they pull surface water not water from a few inches away from the tank bottom. In a non-drilled tank, they also need to be monitored carefully to prevent flooding and/or keep the motor from burning out.

So basically - canisters grab more solid crud (usually) and process more non-metabolic waste (ie stuff them with carbon for odor, color, and chemical cleaning). "Trickle" filters are better at processing metabolic wastes - ammonia -> nitrite -> nitrate.
Canisters will also process ammonia - but not as quickly/efficiently. Trickle filters may have space for carbon, and they can filter mechanically - they just don't do either as well as a canister does.

I like both systems, but I use them in complementary roles. Just like I wouldn't just use a broom or just a mop on my floor - they do different jobs well.

But I generally limit my "trickle" filters to either 
a) predrilled tanks
b) drilled multi-tank rack systems
c) fishroom "over-tank" trickle filters - the filter is above the tank so it can't flood, ever - but its U G L Y ugly 

If you want to go with just canisters, I'd add a marineland bio-wheel 60 add-on (if you can find one, they're scarce when not included with a Magnum filter) or include a secondary biofilter - either a biowheel hang-on filter or maybe a pair of big ol Hydro-Sponge V filters.

Just for comparison, my pretty well stocked 125g has:
2 Aquaclear 500 filters (running 2 sponges each plus the new ceramic media)
1 Whisper 60 filter (it was like $10 at a club auction, and it filters finer than the big AC's do)
1 air driven Hydro-sponge "pond" filter - basiclly the same as the new HydroSponge V Pro
1 air driven corner box filter filled with crushed coral and floss

What's funny is the major amount of gunk the corner box filter collects - they are some of the "oldest technology" in fishkeeping, and they really are underappreciated. I put it in there to keep the water buffered (my water is cotton candy soft) but it's also a major mechanical filter.


----------



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

Psa:

rph: has provided you a ton of information based on experience which I do not have but several comments:



redpaulhus said:


> Wet-dry's are good for either high oxygen saturation bio-filtration, ammonia outgassing, or both.


This is true and the following is very qualitative but agitating the surface of the tank water with the return flow from the pump induces additional oxygnation into the tank water.



redpaulhus said:


> They generally have limited capacity for zero-bypass chemical filtration, and may not "process" solid waste as well as a canister since they pull surface water not water from a few inches away from the tank bottom


I believe this to absolutely true for, at least, the wet/drys which I have reviewed based on the manufacturer's literature when folks have asked me to do so but
with the proper fabrication I do not believe that this is an issue
this issue can be overcome by directing a substantial portion of the return flow from the pump toward the bottom of the tank.



redpaulhus said:


> ... In a non-drilled tank, they also need to be monitored carefully to prevent flooding and/or keep the motor from burning out.
> But I generally limit my "trickle" filters to either
> a) predrilled tanks
> b) drilled multi-tank rack systems
> c) fishroom "over-tank" trickle filters - the filter is above the tank so it can't flood, ever - but its U G L Y ugly


Please listen very, very closely to this one as it is "right smooth on"!
Based on my reviews, as set forth above as well as hydraulic theory, some manufactures market "siphon sump return systems" ;
Inevitably, and according to Murphy's laws of nature sooner than later, two catastrophic occurrences will be in you future:
1) The siphon will break, your pump will become a crispy critter and you may have puddle on your floor or
2) The pump will not function for whatever reason, ie. a power outage, blown fuse, broke pump, etc and
and you will be able to thoroughly enjoy
a) the 125G puddle on your carpet (naw will probably just be 100G) and
b) a bunch of dead or dying fish in your tank due to the 25G of water left in your tank with no aeration.



redpaulhus said:


> What's funny is the major amount of gunk the corner box filter collects - they are some of the "oldest technology" in fishkeeping, and they really are underappreciated. I put it in there to keep the water buffered (my water is cotton candy soft) but it's also a major mechanical filter.


rhp:

This is very good input.

I would have "never figured this one".

TR


----------



## PSmithAZ (Aug 12, 2007)

Thanks all for all the valuable info. I am not always around to monitor the tank on a day by day basis so I am going to stick with the two rena xp3's and two Biowheel 400's. I can't afford to have a wet / dry fail and go unnoticed for several days. I don't think I would appreciate a 100g puddle on the floor either.  Also, think of a Under Gravel Jet setup. Good possibility I may add that. I will post pictures as I get this tank started. It's going to be a good one.


----------



## PSmithAZ (Aug 12, 2007)

Ok, I am hoping that I am not the only one out there that can't seem to make up their mind when it comes to what equipment to use. There are sooo many choices. Thank you all for your advice!! I ended up going with two Cascade 1200's. And I had a Whisper 60 lying around so I threw that at it also. The money talked in this case. Sure isn't cheap to get a 125 gallon going the right way. So it's up and cycling right now. I'll post some pictures next week and start to share my progress with you all.


----------

