2 part dosing vs. Reactors

wow, that was a lot of good reading (first time reading this thread). one thing that hasnt come up that i am curious about is space. How do the 2 compare as far as how much space required to use them. would both a 2 part with 1 gallon jugs, or Ca and Kalk reactor fit under a stand for a 90 gallon with a 30 gallon sump???

 

Bringing this thread back to say this was a great read.
also
How do reactors make up for all the elements 2 part provides? Do you still drip it in/mix it in to ATO?
little rant follows below:
I like my GHL auto doser and it took 5 min to setup and have it installed. I test cal,mg,alk every 4 weeks to make sure dosing is still accurate (it is). If i was going through huge quantities of 2 part i would think about a reactor for the long term cost but the few ml a day i dose does not break the bank. The fewer the wires and additional space is also nice. I assume, however, that if i ever dive into a larger tank w/sps ill do more looking into reactors. Im at the point right now where its like do i buy a "green" house (car, whatever) and spend the upfront $$$$$$$$$ on the item where i would then feel the burden of the huge cost pay off 15-20 years down the line or do i stay with my current house and not spend money building a new one and spend that money else where. IMO It has really only come down to cost in this topic as i have seen equally amazing tank using both methods and more importantly equally NORMAL tanks using both methods. so its more of a cost thing from all that i have read.

 

I just went through this trade and concluded the two are "space wise" fairly equivalent. I really think this is a 6 vs half dozen discussion.

M

 

Im sticking with my 2 part for now..... Actually have gona back to B-Ionic. I was using bulk reef supply. Was dosing twic the amount of chemicals of BRS compared to B-Ionic's two part.

Also the mess of mixing powders and measuring cups isnt my forte. I felt like I was baking a cake with BRS.

Even though B-ionic cost more I feel more comfortable using it. Pretty dummy proof too. Take the concentration gallon and fill it with ro water to the line and shake. no more pulling out measuring cups, funnels, and towels( to clean up mess).

The $$$$ is the main advantages reactors have is the money "savings" over a length of time.

If you have a bulk of $$$ laying around to go with the upfront cost then go for it.

MY lfs has a 265 crammed with sps that is beautiful and is using two part dosing. I will say his coral tanks that are 500 and 1000 gallons for selling coral he is using reactors on.

 

What reactor did you use?
Some reactors need a second chamber if they are not as efficient in using CO2. My GEO has no issues in keeping the ph where I want it.

IME, it's too easy to mess up balance with dosing. Reactors are simple once set up, and I would never recommend running a reactor without a ph controller.

 

Only if you like mixing up batches of 3 part, and never plan on leaving the house. LOL

Seriously, 2(3) part dosing works fine, but for ease of use and less time wasted, a reactor is the way to go.

As far as fishkid's question about reactors and adding the 3 parts that dosing does, actually a reactor will add even more than dosing because you are dissolving old coral skeletons in the reactor with CO2. So anything the corals used to make the calcified parts, will be released back into your tank with a reactor. With 3 part, you are relying more on water changes and other supplements to get those trace elements.

 

Just to clarify....lets compare apples to apples.

If you want to compare hand dosing 2 part, then at least lets compare it to hand running a reactor. It's the same as opening the CO2, counting bubbles, run your effluent, turn it off.... and then do that every time it needs it.... daily. I assure you you would not be going anywhere and you would need a fellow reefer to run your tank when you go on vacation.

But then we all know nobody runs there reactor manually.... they run it automatically with a controller. Same as running 2 part with a controller. Automated. I go on vacation just fine. I leave my house on a regular basis. For those hand dosing 2 part, they either like manual labor, or they don't dose enough to care.

Automating two part and automating reactors requires very little daily maintenance. I would not loose a wink of sleep going on vacation for two weeks with my buddy feeding mt fish every day or two.... and my levels would be the same as when I left.

 

Agree. I check my 3-part once a month and my parameters are very stable. I really think the two methods are equivalent and just a matter of choice.

M

 

I see your point about apples to apples with auto dosers versus reactors, but I still don't believe they are 100% equal.

With reactors, the old corals (media) are liquefied, adding every trace element that the coral needed to grow in the first place. 2(3) part only adds alk, calcium and magnesium if you dose the 3rd.

Also, there are more timers and peristaltic tubing to replace and repair, or just simply not work how it is supposed to on a doser.

A reactor does need ph probe replacement, co2 refill, and media. Other than that basic pump cleaning from time to time is probably less than 2(3) part maintenance.

I used to "dump and dose" a while back.
I debated for months which way to go autodosing, or a reactor. I ended up getting a reactor for ease of use, plus I got a great deal on a barely used GEO 618 with reef fanatic regulator and 5 lb tank.

 

Not really sure why folks are saying auto dosing has more maintenance than a reactor - maybe they haven't actually done it...

I set my autodoser up in July of 2009. Since then I have remixed jugs for each of the three (separately) ONCE.

Beyond that I have not touched it. My 'big 3' don't budge.


When was the last time you had to mess with your reactor, replace Co2, media, whatever? cause i'm going on 8 months and have only had to mix jugs once...

Frankly, I don't see how it can get any easier than that.

EDIT: I mean mix jugs once not counting the original setup