At the end of the day, both get the job done. If you get this, invest in a pair of quick release taps to prevent priming headache whenever you maintain the filter.Īll in all, the Eheim 2260 is brute force while the FX5 has more finesse. It's just a powerhouse filter pure and simple. Not having electronic features also means there's less parts that can malfunction. V akva 1200 l mame Fluval FX5 a cim dal vic premyslime, ze ho nahradime prave tim tretim Eheimem, ktery se nam zda lepsi nez Fluval. Jeden filtruje akva 900 l a druhy je v akva 680 l. The fluval compared the ehiem I had just performed better. Ahoj Jirko, filtry Eheim 2260 mame 3, z toho zatim dva v provozu. Being a classic, its simple design does have it advantages such as having no bypass. (I have no issues with my fx5) The ehiem was not bad but it had a much shorter life span and I did have issues with the plastic inlet pipe breaking and I had re-rig my own (its not the same model you were looking at but just my expeience with one of their canisters). However, the 2260 being an Eheim is reliable and solid. However, one thing i don't like about the FX5 is its proprietary ribbed hosing that is huge, making running inline stuff like CO2 reactors and chillers a hassle. My FX5 has been running for almost 2 years without issue. A more accurate comparison would be with the Eheim Pro3 or Pro3e series, though neither of them are as powerful as the FX5. I don't think the 2260 is a good comparison with it, as the fx5 comes with more features such as auto priming via electronics and media baskets.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |