External Filter

[pix1]

Hi I have a 180L tank which I currently have a fluval u4 internal filter in and was thinking of getting a fluval 205 external filter but noticed that it was only rated at 680 lph but the u4 is 1000 lph, will the 205 be up to the job and keep the tank as good as the u4 or would I be better of going for the 305?

 

[Carlovel1]

Go for the Fluval 305, the 205 isn't powerful enough for your tank

 

[matt p]

Have a look at the aquaone range, I run a aquis 750 and a aquis 1250 on my vision 180 and the water is crystal clear and all levels are virtually 0

The 1250 does tanks unto 260ltrs ish

Regards

Matt

 

[JoshuaA]

Like someone previously said if you want one of the fluvals go for the 305. I think they still rate the 205 good enough for your tank however I was slightly disappointed with the flow rate of mine I think realistically it only does about 4litres a minute meaning my tank only turns over twice in an hour. However never had any problems with water quality since it was setup and there is a nice healthy sized media basket awaiting your addition of media.

Pricing on the 305 is varied I think most LFS will charge you £100~ my "trusted" store tried to charge me £110 for the Fluval 205 but then said "we'll do it for £90" I subsequently waked out and ordered it online".

From the two stores I usually order online the 305 is £72 and £75 and they do good delivery, one is free on anything over £50.

 

[Aqua Tom]

Go for the Fluval 305, the 205 isn't powerful enough for your tank

yes it is

 

[JoshuaA]

Go for the Fluval 305, the 205 isn't powerful enough for your tank

yes it is

I agree with Carlove1 on this one, the 205 on my 125 tank is quite woeful with media inserted however I believe it does it's job well purely because of the volume of media it can take. With the 205 he will be looking about around 1.5x turnover an hour which is a bit... a bit iffy to be honest, I wish I had got a 305 actually.

For the extra £10 and the much better flow rate and media the 305 would be far superior and functional for his tank.

 

[Aqua Tom]

Go for the Fluval 305, the 205 isn't powerful enough for your tank

yes it is

I agree with Carlove1 on this one, the 205 on my 125 tank is quite woeful with media inserted however I believe it does it's job well purely because of the volume of media it can take. With the 205 he will be looking about around 1.5x turnover an hour which is a bit... a bit iffy to be honest, I wish I had got a 305 actually.

For the extra £10 and the much better flow rate and media the 305 would be far superior and functional for his tank.

Obviously if you can afford it go with the bigger filter. I, like some of us, do not have that "extra £10" so I went with what I could afford. The 205 will easily filter a 200 litre tank so 180 litres is no problem.

 

[JoshuaA]

Go for the Fluval 305, the 205 isn't powerful enough for your tank

yes it is

I agree with Carlove1 on this one, the 205 on my 125 tank is quite woeful with media inserted however I believe it does it's job well purely because of the volume of media it can take. With the 205 he will be looking about around 1.5x turnover an hour which is a bit... a bit iffy to be honest, I wish I had got a 305 actually.

For the extra £10 and the much better flow rate and media the 305 would be far superior and functional for his tank.

Obviously if you can afford it go with the bigger filter. I, like some of us, do not have that "extra £10" so I went with what I could afford. The 205 will easily filter a 200 litre tank so 180 litres is no problem.

I still disagree, a 205 in my experience really wouldn't filter the tank efficiently. It would surprise me for someone who bought a 200/180 litre tank not to be able to spare the extra £10 the tank initially is a big expense.

You would seriously have to consider understocking with a 205 on a 200 litre tank, once my 205 wore in and the filter pads and ceramics started to irreversibly clog from mulm and the like even after cleaning the flow rate was around 4L/m which just turns out at 2x an hour on turn over with regular cleaning of the entire filter and pads. If you use that on a 200 litre tank you are only achieving 1.2x an hour which I would along with many other members consider under filtering the tank.

You can also look at APS filters.

 

[Aqua Tom]

ok, i have a 205 on my 180l tank, when it is stocked & if the filter goes belly up then i will eat my words.

oh, & btw, the 180l tank i bought was a second hand bargian.

I cant afford a new one.

 

[JoshuaA]

ok, i have a 205 on my 180l tank, when it is stocked & if the filter goes belly up then i will eat my words.

oh, & btw, the 180l tank i bought was a second hand bargian.

I cant afford a new one.

Then you should still consider understocking your tank to compensate for the likely 1.3 turn over rate you will get with a 205.

So lets imagine the OP can afford an extra £10 on a new filter, don't you think we should suggest they take the 305, rather than have them use a filter that can only turn their tank over 1.2x an hour which is pretty poor and not really fit for purpose on a tank that large. The 4L/M is based on a filter which has been used for about 3 months and was seeded from another filter of mine, it's cleaned regularly and thoroughly so imagine what it would be like after a year the flow rate will no doubt drop even more.

oh. & btw, all my tanks are second hand bar my nano, I refuse to pay the extortionate price on a brand new tank when all it is a few pieces of glass a £5 sealant.

Hi I have a 180L tank which I currently have a fluval u4 internal filter in and was thinking of getting a fluval 205 external filter but noticed that it was only rated at 680 lph but the u4 is 1000 lph, will the 205 be up to the job and keep the tank as good as the u4 or would I be better of going for the 305?

To put an end to this, the original question from the OP is would they be better off going for the 305? and I think with the evidence I have provided, yes they would. The increased flow rate would be much more beneficial and the increased potential surface area of biological media also makes the 305 much more attractive over the 205 in this case. I imagine the way the OP worded their post the extra £10 isn't a problem.