2 part dosing vs. Reactors

So in three years your peristaltic tubing has not needed to be changed? That stuff erodes quickly.


I get 6 months or so out of a 5 lb VO2 tank. If I had a 10 lb one, I could go a year on my 250g of water. That is about 5x the size of what you are dosing for.

I have not yet needed to refill my media yet, but I suspect I will get at least 6 months if not 8-9 out of a single container of ARM.

edit, I don't want to sound condescending about the 55g to a 200+ g tank, but you would go through 2(3) part supplies 5x faster with a tank of that size.

 

8 months, not 3 years

I don't think water volume is relevant. coral stocking is. you could have more coral in a 55 than in a billion gallon system... just depends on what you've put in.

you're dosing (or reacting) for elements used up. that is strictly dependent on what coral (and coralline) you have to use it up.

I'm by no means heavily stocked. But I do have 4 SPS frags. a dozen or so LPS and a crocea clam.

EDIT: and copious amounts of coralline

 

Because on a couple of ocasions you have stated if you dose 2 part you can't leave the house or go on vacation. That's just silly. Dosing 2 part by hand needs to be done daily, just like running a reactor by hand would need to be done daily. Yet most dose automatically just like reactors, and if you do not need to automate your dosing, you certainly don't need a reactor.

And you are really spliting hairs on maintenance. I have two dosing pumps. End of story. That fragile vinyle tubing is still holding up after a year. Pumps are fine too. With a reactor, any mechanical part can fail.You have tubing, selenoids, regulators, probes, pumps, vessels, flowmeters... yet I should ignore dosing because of some vinyl tubing?

There are no timers involved, I have a controller as do most automated dosers. You could automate dosing with some digital timers though, you have to have a controller to properly control a reactor. So I could have an automated doser for $200 for pumps and timers. Yet you are in it for around $600 for a reactor and you need a controller. Reactor media is cheaper, but what is the pay back time for a $400 difference between 2 part and media/co2?

Any automated chemical routine is the bomb. Dosers or reactors. The differences in maitenance is negligeble. The initial investment in a reactor is more, but it is cheaper to run it. The potential for failure is much higher with a reactor due to the many more complicated parts. Getting the initial set up down is demanding on both types for the same reasons. Balancing chemicals and gussing where to start. After that....what? Coral skeletons versus core ingredients that made those skeletons? OK

I have never tried to argue that 2 part is superior to reactors.... but you have a long way to go to prove the superiority of reactors over a 2 part dosing system. Especially when both methods have plenty of sucsessful systems to show for themselves.

The only true edge I will give to reactors is the fact that demand is controlled, so the reactor will adjust to increased demand..... but the edge 2 part is is to adjust levels independent of each other. Some want adjustment, some want independent levels. To each his own.

 

Take a look at my pictures and you will see I have quite a bit of SPS, plus 4 clams. Water volume is relevant when the amount of corals can be much greater with a bigger system.

 

water volume is not relevant at all. not even a little bit. it only comes down to how much element sucking creatures you have.

take your same tank (i forget the exact size, so let's just say) of 200 gallons with its exact same load.

stick that in a 600 gallon tank. your corals are going to use the exact same amount of elements in both systems.

there is a lot more calcium, for example, in a 600 gallon tank, but the ratio is the same and the absorption rate is the same.

Not knocking reactors at all, but I don't see them having anything over auto dosing.

 

Notice I mentioned that I have a lot of SPS and clams.


You couldn't even jam all the corals and clams I have in my 200g DT in a 55g. When I had my same reactor on my 90g, it barely used any media and CO2, now that my tank is pretty packed, it uses a lot more. That makes sense as the reactor I have is made for a 350g tank. Not to mention my derasa sucks up the calcium and alk. It's well over 2x as big as when I got it only a few months back.

I also don't get the 3 years thing you mentioned. That is maintenance. That has nothing to do with how much alk calcium and mag you use.

let's see. 1 tank of CO2 costs 4.50 to refill
a 8 lb jug of ARM is around 20 bucks.

What does all the dosing material cost per refill? Then times that by 5 for a system like mine with more corals and clams for the same amount of time.

When I used to dose, even using BRS stuff, it was more money than what I spend per equal amount of time on a tank that is well over 2x the size of what I had before.

Both methods do work, obviously, but over time the reactor is less $$, and it certainly is less work.

 

horkn, I have no idea where you got 3 years from. I haven't mentioned anything about 3 years. This is the second time you bring this up, please quote what you're referring to bc I can't find it... So I can't really respond to it.

I agree that you can fit more coral in a bigger tank, but the volume still isn't relevant to how much you dose (or react). Regardless, it boils down to how much coral you have. Not how much coral potential you have.

There are several folks (some even chimed into this thread) with 300+ gallon tanks that prefer auto dosers over reactors (that have tried both). (there are also folks that prefer reactors too). Not saying one is superior, but I don't see what your point is for volume. Or how it's even relevant to how much effort/work one solution uses compared to the other.


I adamantly disagree that a reactor is less work. I see nothing to support that claim. I will admit I haven't used a reactor (sounds like you've never auto dosed either).

But I really don't get what about mixing gallon jugs of material (when you could just as easily mix it in 30 gallon batches or whatever) is equating to "more work" in your view...


Also, from the recent part of this thread, I am not clear what you are actually even driving at. Is your point one is easier or is your point one is cheaper? I'm not sure which you're trying to argue for. Are you arguing both points? well, maybe not "argue" but ya know what I mean

 

So for your tank, how long will that last? 6 months, 1 year. It cost me $60 for a years worth of BRS 2 part. So double that $120. So say yours is $30.... thats a $90 a year difference. At $400 that is a 4 year pay back. Only buying dosing pumps like I did that makes it a 5 year pay back. Then we have to figure in any failures in that time..... there is a bit of math to figure out payback. Reactors are cheaper to run, but that does not mean you will be saving anytime soon.

 

Naw, it's all good P.

To be honest, I think I saw a part of your thread that stated 3 of something, but unless it was edited, I have no clue now. I could have sworn you (maybe it was someone else) stated that in 3 years they have not had to replace their peristaltic tubing, or do any other maintenance. I do know the rubber peristaltic lines do crap in time. Whatever.

I have not auto dosed, I researched it when I was "dump and dosing" my smaller tanks. I weighed the pros and cons of auto dosing and a reactor. For me, the reactor won.

My point about more coral in bigger tanks is that each inch of coral and clam uses so much of the 3 major elements. More coral = more elements used. Obviously if I had a 55g tank, and transferred it to my 200g, at that pint it wouldn't use more of the elements than it would in the 55g. Now let those corals grow, and the demand goes up. If you have a packed SPS dominant 55g tank, versus a packed SPS dominant 200g tank, it will use about 4 times the elements as the packed 55g. I don't think anyone was trying to argue against that. Now if it took 5 dollars worth of dosing materials to dose that same 55g, it would take 20 dollars over the same amount of time (if not more due to how corals grow exponentially). That is my point regarding a reactor. I forget how much exactly it cost me to dose my 90g, when I did dose, but I know the reactor once set up on the 90g, took less money to operate materials wise than the dosing did. Yes, the up front cost was more, but I got my reactor for 250, the controller I got for a trade of a dog ramp or something (LOL), and the ph probe was 25 dollars from BRS.

A new reactor will cost more than a new 3 part auto doser. My used reactor with tank, and reef fanatic reg cost me 250, and add in the ph controller with a probe is 110, but I didn't pay for my used probe and the used controller. Throw in the refill and media for another 25 dollars. What I paid is less than what a new 3 peristaltic pump auto doser and associated equipment runs. Now new, the same reactor would be $415, +140 for the RF reg, like 80 for the tank, 20 for the media, and $4.50 for the gas refill. new to new, the reactor is more money, but I contend that a reactor is less work than a doser.

In my club we have a guy that has won TOTM on RC, and he autodoses. it clearly does work. But look at many other TOTM's on RC and you will see probably more using a reactor.

The fact that a reactor uses a controller to make use the supply of the elements meets the demand of the tank is a big plus. In my mind, it makes it get the win over the doser's. Plus, I still contend that 3 part dosing still does not give the same amount of ALL trace elements as dissolving old coral skeletons that you get when you use a media like ARM in a reactor. Sure, you get those trace elements from new saltwater batches, but having the reactor allows for those elements to be available at all times, not just when you do a water change.

 

I will recoup my costs back pretty quickly since I only paid 250 for my reactor, 20 for the media, and 5 for a fill up of gas. Oh, yeah, I had to buy a new 25 dollar ph probe, and there is electricity to run the eheim. But dosers use electricity too. So, that electrical cost is not even worth discussing because reef tanks are energy hogs, and we wouldn't be keeping reef tanks if that bothered us

I doubt many people on the fence would have passed up the deal I got on my reactor to go with an autodoser.

I know the reactor costs would typically be a longer term for payback versus a doser, but that isn't a big deal to me. It might to someone else though.