Hannah checkers

[Emerson]

I find the Alk and PO4 testers very simple to use. The results have been accurate for me when compared to Salifert; and my tank is thriving. These are all hobby grade test kits after all. I test fit alkalinity every couple days with the Hanna tester. I know I wouldn't do this if I were using a titration-type kit

 

[pagoda1958]

I have 200 dollars worth of hannah checkets of varios types. Never been accurate and never been stable even after several replacement resgents and checkers. In my opinion. Not worth the money. Red sea and salifert are my 2 picks in my 51 yrs exp.

 

[olecaptainj]

EVERY test kit has a margin of error.

However with Hanna, they actually provide the numerical value of what the error margin is for each test kit.

 

[75pxatr]

I've been told by a store worker that the Hanna results are not even compared to their lab test they do on their facility. He consider them a waste of time. I also have read an article a while ago where they had issues with a batch of reagents for some specific testing, I believe they have addresed the issue. Even so I got to purchase some testers but I wasn't able to compare my results with another brand. I'm not discrediting the tester, I've been only sharing my experience, anyone could find more info or ask a real lab person to make them a test and find if they're accurate.

I would tend to agree with you. I used the Hanna Alk tester with a batch of reagent that they latter admitted was bad. Never again. I use one for PO4 and get conflicting readings but I do not care as much about PO4 as alkalinity.

 

[Bdrake]

I would tend to agree with you. I used the Hanna Alk tester with a batch of reagent that they latter admitted was bad. Never again. I use one for PO4 and get conflicting readings but I do not care as much about PO4 as alkalinity.

Every test kit has the potential to do the same. I know Red Sea issued a recall for a bad calcium reagent, and Salifert had issues with Alk test kits at one point. I was using each at the time of the issues. That doesn't lead me to lose any trust for either brand. I'm sure both improved quality control since their respective issues. If a reading is questionable or if I believe I need to make adjustments based on those numbers I always verify the results against a secondary test kit. I've made enough mistakes in this hobby to appreciate redundancy, especially when it comes to water quality.

 

[VR28man]

I'm fond of the alk test- very easy/quick, I need to use it often, and the results are generally consistent*.

Not a huge fan of the low range PO4 test (low range, not ultra low range) - sometimes the results are consistent across multiple measurements (with the same procedures), but sometimes not (with the same procedures). It's also much more of a nuisance compared to the alk test. It's nice to get a digital number, BUT when your PO4 is at around 0.1 the way mine is now it's not so helpful (nor does it advertise itself to be so accurate in that range - that's what the ULR is for).

* the first measurement I do per the instructions, but subsequently I use an unmixed curvette of tank water with the mixed curvette. I know you're not supposed to, but the alk tests don't really show a range of different data by that method, in my experience.

PO4 again is different. Sometimes the results are consistent among tests - e.g. Saturday where i had 0.08 (done right), 0.11, 0.08, 0.09, 0.11 - that's the kind of consistency I've usually gotten over the past few months. But sometimes it's way off - like today where i had 0.06 (done right), 0.12, 0.13, 0.34, 0.08, 0.24, 0.11, 0.03, 0.12, 0.07, 0.04, 0.27. And finally a Salifert measurement of "lighter than 0.1" (next time I'm going to do the ULR salifert method, per the instructions).

 

[mdrobc13]

I like the hanna checkers for Alk & Po4 . I have the regular hanna po4 not the ulr . There's a BRS video comparing the two.

Like them and have one for Alk, Pho, and also Nitrite as well as Calcium. Would love one for Nitrate but haven't seen one from Hanna yet. I use Red Sea Nitrate/Phos for backup and Sailfish for other ones like Alk, PH, Ammonia. Cost for Hanna depends on how often you test for stuff. Since moving to Triton I test a lot less and thus all the above last much longer. Hanna can't beat for ease of use and quickness. API historically gives most mixed results. Seachem is the most involved/longest IMHO.

 

[ccerone]

Hanna Alk and phosphorus are a must. Not a fan of my Hanna Ca. I switched back to Red Sea pro for Ca. I also have used Salifert but prefer Red Sea Pro.

 

[slayerhellfire]

Are the hannah checkers worth the money? I've read they are pretty accurate but have to buy the reagent packets as well?
I'm looking to buy a decent phosphate test kit but cant bring myself to spend so much on a tester

yes they are very accurate, the ALK and ULR phosphate are the top 2 imo

 

[VR28man]

Hanna Alk and phosphorus are a must. Not a fan of my Hanna Ca. I switched back to Red Sea pro for Ca. I also have used Salifert but prefer Red Sea Pro.

Why do u like the RS Ca kit better? (Salifert is admittedly a bit cumbersome. I’ve never used Red Sea)

 

[JonJ]

I have tried almost every brand of phosphate test available and the problem for me is that they are all terrible in the low “recommended” range. It is impossible for me to tell the difference in the color of the sample until you get into a very high range. I recently bought the Hanna ULR phosphate kit and even when being meticulous in sample testing, I can get drastically different readings back to back. As an example I have tested .03 and .1 one after the other. So for me it’s a catch 22. Either I don’t know what my P04 levels are or I have a number that I have zero confidence in. I use salifert tests for all other parameters and they can’t be beat for ease of use or accuracy in my opinion. Hopefully a manufacturer will come up with a new, accurate p04 test!