Ok this has got to have been discussed (just can't find it). Where is a "likely" point where CaRx plus trace dosing become more cost-effective than 2-Part (really 3-part with trace) dosing.
Currently running B-Ionic on frag system and CaRx on display (200dd). I'm not against either methodology though I have CaRx'ed for almost 15 years. Just thinking a good 2-Part with trace may be easier. I used B-Ionic on a previous 90gal display with good results. I have the doser pump space on the frag doser so moving to B-Ionic on the display is not much more than tubing and a couple of check valves for safety.
I understand the theory well-enough (ok maybe
) but looking at the alternate practices of others.
What sayeth the brain trust? So hit me back with your practice and why you like it (no flame wars please!).
Currently running B-Ionic on frag system and CaRx on display (200dd). I'm not against either methodology though I have CaRx'ed for almost 15 years. Just thinking a good 2-Part with trace may be easier. I used B-Ionic on a previous 90gal display with good results. I have the doser pump space on the frag doser so moving to B-Ionic on the display is not much more than tubing and a couple of check valves for safety.
I understand the theory well-enough (ok maybe
) but looking at the alternate practices of others.What sayeth the brain trust? So hit me back with your practice and why you like it (no flame wars please!).

