The Puffer Forum

i was told by the lady at the LFS about a really cool filter coming out by fluval(she told me this after she rang up my fx5) ne ways she said it was gonna be super simple to do maintenance, i just said nah im good with this. Wow only to find out this fluval g series looks amazing! i really want it now, i looked it up at fluvals web site http://www.fluval-g.com/english/index.php and it seems to have features i need! (doesnt everybody) lol so u guys go check it out if u havent already and let me know what everyone thinks , and if anyone plans on buying one

SenOr PuffPuff wrote:i was told by the lady at the LFS about a really cool filter coming out by fluval(she told me this after she rang up my fx5) ne ways she said it was gonna be super simple to do maintenance, i just said nah im good with this. Wow only to find out this fluval g series looks amazing! i really want it now, i looked it up at fluvals web site http://www.fluval-g.com/english/index.php and it seems to have features i need! (doesnt everybody) lol so u guys go check it out if u havent already and let me know what everyone thinks , and if anyone plans on buying one

I was given a Rena Filstar 4/5. Can't even get the thing working properly without water pouring from the top. Canister filters make me nervous now

I've been very disappointed with Fluval. I bought one of the U-series and wasn't happy with it at all, in fact, I think one of their older models works better. I used to have 3 Fluval external filters, but now just have the one, and I will replace that one when I can afford to.

I'm switching to Eheim, I think they are better and more reliable. I recently got one of those Aquaball types and I was very surprised by how well it works. Fluval seems to be getting more expensive, but I'm not sure anything is getting better. Obviously just my opinion.

I had my Fluval 103 for 10 years & now my boss has it for his tank. Its been faultless apart from I snapped a little part of the impeller off, but parts are readily available. I now have a Fluval 305 & so far so good - really easy to use & clean. Not that I have anything to compare with as I have never used any other make!

any body check out link

SenOr PuffPuff wrote:any body check out link

I've seen the trailers of it. It looks pretty insane and its functionality is probably on par with its insanity. Makes me wonder how much each of those suckers will be going for... Also looks a bit complicated for someone like me.

I asked about this in an earlier thread and someone found this for me:
http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/p ... ?news=2219
Seems awfully pricey for some extra bells and whistles and really doesn't have that large of a filtering capacity IMHO. I use Fluval and Marineland on my tanks and really enjoy the ease of the Fluvals.

Don't bother. In fact, don't bother with ANY canister filters. Except for DIY builds they are not worth the cost.

Stick with your favorite HOB filter (mine is Aquaclear...well built, extremely quiet, great design, etc), sump filter, sponge filter, or box filter.

Getting the latest and fanciest technology is not the answer to have a well running aquarium.

~Ed

emartin wrote:Don't bother. In fact, don't bother with ANY canister filters. Except for DIY builds they are not worth the cost.

Stick with your favorite HOB filter (mine is Aquaclear...well built, extremely quiet, great design, etc), sump filter, sponge filter, or box filter.

Getting the latest and fanciest technology is not the answer to have a well running aquarium.

~Ed

Isn't it because of the latest and fanciest technology that we're able to have reef tanks when in the past, people struggled to simply maintain freshwater tanks? Technology might not be the answer to everything, but it sure does make things convenient.

convenient & expensive. and, as usual, it's all a matter of what one is willing to spend.........
i have 4 Fluval canisters running right now. no problems at all, for years.
i'd buy another, and probably will soon.
but at a gallon per hour rate of 264 for a Fluval G6 vs a gph rate of 260 for a Fluval 305, i don't see the logic in spending 3 times more money
and a Fluval 405 @ 340 gph is marginally more than a Fluval 305!
granted, there is more to this than gph, however, given the tank capacity that we might maintain, especially with our little "Gross Polluters" is the G6's 264 gph even sufficient?
the recommended filter for a 70 gallon aquarium (in Fluvals manual) is the 305 @ 260 gph!
can the filters' efficiency ever make up for a relatively low gph?
i hope so, but it won't be an experiment on my dime.
"there is no substitute for displacement"

eieio wrote:
convenient & expensive. and, as usual, it's all a matter of what one is willing to spend.........
i have 4 Fluval canisters running right now. no problems at all, for years.
i'd buy another, and probably will soon.
but at a gallon per hour rate of 264 for a Fluval G6 vs a gph rate of 260 for a Fluval 305, i don't see the logic in spending 3 times more money
and a Fluval 405 @ 340 gph is marginally more than a Fluval 305!
granted, there is more to this than gph, however, given the tank capacity that we might maintain, especially with our little "Gross Polluters" is the G6's 264 gph even sufficient?
the recommended filter for a 70 gallon aquarium (in Fluvals manual) is the 305 @ 260 gph!
can the filters' efficiency ever make up for a relatively low gph?
i hope so, but it won't be an experiment on my dime.
"there is no substitute for displacement"

Personally, I don't think it's worth it. I'd rather spend my money on refugiums. 300 euros is something like 350+ American dollars? I don't really know the conversion rate anymore, but even for the most complex aquariums, people still somehow manage. I think its nice if you got the money to spend on something like that, but it's probably unnecessary. There's just some people who live being up to date when it comes to advancements in technology. It's why I started building computers even though new technology becomes old in a relatively short period of time.

Jivenjune wrote:

eieio wrote:
convenient & expensive. and, as usual, it's all a matter of what one is willing to spend.........
i have 4 Fluval canisters running right now. no problems at all, for years.
i'd buy another, and probably will soon.
but at a gallon per hour rate of 264 for a Fluval G6 vs a gph rate of 260 for a Fluval 305, i don't see the logic in spending 3 times more money
and a Fluval 405 @ 340 gph is marginally more than a Fluval 305!
granted, there is more to this than gph, however, given the tank capacity that we might maintain, especially with our little "Gross Polluters" is the G6's 264 gph even sufficient?
the recommended filter for a 70 gallon aquarium (in Fluvals manual) is the 305 @ 260 gph!
can the filters' efficiency ever make up for a relatively low gph?
i hope so, but it won't be an experiment on my dime.
"there is no substitute for displacement"

Personally, I don't think it's worth it. I'd rather spend my money on refugiums. 300 euros is something like 350+ American dollars? I don't really know the conversion rate anymore, but even for the most complex aquariums, people still somehow manage. I think its nice if you got the money to spend on something like that, but it's probably unnecessary. There's just some people who live being up to date when it comes to advancements in technology. It's why I started building computers even though new technology becomes old in a relatively short period of time.

i'm spotting suggested retail prices that look like the equivalent of something close to $490.00/$575.00 for the G3 & G6 respectively!!!!!!

eieio wrote:

Jivenjune wrote:

eieio wrote:
convenient & expensive. and, as usual, it's all a matter of what one is willing to spend.........
i have 4 Fluval canisters running right now. no problems at all, for years.
i'd buy another, and probably will soon.
but at a gallon per hour rate of 264 for a Fluval G6 vs a gph rate of 260 for a Fluval 305, i don't see the logic in spending 3 times more money
and a Fluval 405 @ 340 gph is marginally more than a Fluval 305!
granted, there is more to this than gph, however, given the tank capacity that we might maintain, especially with our little "Gross Polluters" is the G6's 264 gph even sufficient?
the recommended filter for a 70 gallon aquarium (in Fluvals manual) is the 305 @ 260 gph!
can the filters' efficiency ever make up for a relatively low gph?
i hope so, but it won't be an experiment on my dime.
"there is no substitute for displacement"

Personally, I don't think it's worth it. I'd rather spend my money on refugiums. 300 euros is something like 350+ American dollars? I don't really know the conversion rate anymore, but even for the most complex aquariums, people still somehow manage. I think its nice if you got the money to spend on something like that, but it's probably unnecessary. There's just some people who live being up to date when it comes to advancements in technology. It's why I started building computers even though new technology becomes old in a relatively short period of time.

i'm spotting prices that look like the equivalent of something close to $490.00/$575.00 for the G3 & G6 respectively!!!!!!

haha, wowwww, that's a lot of cash. I generally don't mind spending this much on single purchases as long as I know they're useful and last me at least 10 years. That's probably questionable with any type of computer next to a water source.

Yeah, I honestly wouldn't put the money in to it. I have multiple canister filters and have modified everyone. It seems like these new filters are going to be less flexible, prettier, and crappier flow.....And I'll be darned if I'm going to pay that much for that type of filter. They don't even come close to the recommended flow rate for a puffer.

Just from skimming the thread i'm hearing that its not much better than the older series?