Neptune trident
- Thread starter reefwiser
- Start date
- Tagged users None
VelocityTech
Well-Known Member
I Agree! 2 months for $40. At 4x daily for Alk. 2x Ca, and 2x mag. Is a great deal!
That is;
(4+2+2) 30(days)x2(Months)=480 tests for $40! 8 cent per test.
If you tested 480 tests, (Please thisnis estimated off top of my head) at $10 for 25 tests(Which is whst i pay roughly).
That's almost $200 a month. $1200 a year. Compared to Neptunes $240 per year.
It pays for itself after 1 year.
After all, we are after DATA! to have the best reef. This will give us LOTS of data to crunch.
BroadBno615
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2016
- Messages
- 138
- Reaction score
- 30
I agree with that logic. I wonder could u set the frequency on when you test. Let's say alk once a day, cal once a week, and mag once a month. You could make th reagent last for a couple of months. If not the whole year
Daniel@R2R
Living the Reef Life
Per previous comments, that can be done, but stretching the reagent out too far will likely impact the accuracy of the test. I'd likely be comfortable trying to stretch them out to half the normal/recommended testing frequency (so alk 2x / day, cal and mag 1x / day), but that's as far as I'd probably go. Even then, it would be a matter of watching to see if the tests begin to reflect inaccuracies.
BroadBno615
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2016
- Messages
- 138
- Reaction score
- 30
True. I also assume it would have a exp date like other test kits
MnFish1
10K Club member
Your point is illogical- i.e. the unit does not 'pay for itself'. Forgetting the cost of the trident itself , testing in this manner will cost far more than the testing done by most people in practice. There is no proven benefit to the testing schedule proposed by Neptune (*that I have seen - from the standpoint of animal health). There may be a benefit to more frequent testing to assure the accuracy of the measurements (from the Trident) - for example if you test one time/week alkalinity - an 'off value' will be more difficult to spot than if you had a daily or more than daily trend of alkalinity.
Since there is no rationale for testing even alkalinity 4x/day (and certainly no rationale for testing ca/mg 2/day) the 'cost per test' is higher. So lets say you tested alk 1/day, Ca and Mg 1/week. You have 30 alk tests/month and 4 ca and 1 mg tests/month = 70 tests/2 months for $40 - which is 57 cents/test for the data you will likely 'act' on. The reagents last at most 2 months per Terrence (if I understood correctly) so just because you can do 480 tests - 4/5 of those tests are useless 'data' (especially concerning Ca and Mg. ( I guess one could write a program to try to ultra fine tune alkalinity using a dosing pump - that adjust 4 times/day - but I would think the potential errors problems with doing that would make that unworkable in many cases)
MnFish1
10K Club member
I don't understand your point, The 49 $ you spend on Salifert tests will last for several months. The 20$ you spend on Trident tests will last 1 month. I was disappointed (unless I misunderstood Terrence's post) that the reagent shelf life for the Trident tests is 'up to 2 months or so'.
MnFish1
10K Club member
Just because someone sells you something for a low-price, doesn't mean its a bargain or a good value if you don't need the item being sold. If you don't need alkalinity data 4times/day, lets say you 'need' it 1 time (some say thats too much). The cost is really 60 tests for $40 or 67 cents test - as compared to other testing methods (Per Terrence, the reagents last 2 months). This does not take in the cost of the Trident itself).
For many here - just the 'fun'/'experience'/'data'/'new toy' aspect of the Trident justifies the price. I myself am intrigued by the possibilities. To argue that it is a good value for a reef-keeper from a 'money' perspective at this point seems premature.
Broadfield
Red Sea Reefer Consultant... Non Affiliated
I don't think the shelf life of the reagent has been determined yet... only how long the quantity will last at the suggested number of tests. Terence noted that "once unsealed, the reagents will have a more shortened lifespan. That said we are fairly confident that you should be able to run less tests and get two months out of one set of reagents". What we don't know is what "one set of reagents" means!?! Is the 2 months worth of reagents divided into 2 bottles of each test... so 6 bottles total in the 2 month supply. If so, then according to his statement, you could do half as many tests and make the 2 month reagents last for 4 months. Time will tell I guess. For me, I don't really care if it's more expensive or not that standard testing. I absolutely despise testing... hate it. So the Trident is right up my alley!
Potatohead
Valuable Member
It's only a bargain if it's on something you actually want. If the overall net cost is higher (which it is) because I need to test more and I don't particularly need to, that's not a bargain no matter how you want to swing it.
Broadfield
Red Sea Reefer Consultant... Non Affiliated
Yep, and I want it!
Potatohead
Valuable Member
You want to test that often?
It's like if someone said you can buy a jar of mayonnaise for half price but you need to buy eight of them. What good is that?
MnFish1
10K Club member
I agree with you - I don't care either about the monthly cost as compared to testing if it is convenient. If however, maintenance issues outweigh the testing convenience, the hating of testing might become the hate of maintaining the Trident, i.e., if you have to do a teardown of the unit monthly to clean it, etc etc (we don't know the maintenance schedule), in addition to changing the reagents and in addition to the maintenance Neptune has already suggested (needing to periodically change the tubing, calibration of the unit). Again most of these things we don't know.
As to the second issue, I take what Terrence said to mean that the shelf life of each bottle of reagents is '2 months' - meaning that after 2 months of being open, hooked up to the machine whatever bottle you're using needs to be changed. Meaning at best the lowest cost for reagents would be $10/month.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2016
- Messages
- 5,348
- Reaction score
- 6,710
U have never wanted to know what ur alk consumption does thru out the day?
The thing is to try and catch a problem before it happens so if u test everyday at the same time u would be able to adjust before a problem happens and if u test four times at the same time every day it will be easier to catch a problem before it happens
say ur on vacation no one is in ur house ur ph Rises In ur tank corals grow faster using more alk and every day at ten am ur at 8 dkh but now ur at 7.8 dkh u can correct the problem then but instead you have it only set up to test at 10 pm and the whole day ur corals would be consuming that alk and at 10 pm ur dkh is at 7.4 instead of 8 u could have possibly just saved some extra stress on ur corals. Because ur not going to dose ur tank back up to eight right then and there u will slowly raise it back to eight over a course of a day or two. Where as if u were testing four times a day you would have found out sooner and kept the stability
To me I'm ok with the testing apex recommends more data the better my beef is with the new apex but it is what it is.
Something that has to do with nothing go to brs and look into the last ten reviews of the new apex compared to the last ten reviews of the apex classic. That is the reason I went with the classic but now I'm forced to upgrade that's what I'm p ed off about.
VelocityTech
Well-Known Member
Logical VS illogical; My point is very logical. If you tested side by side with a Hannah Checker 'per test'. You will spend ALOT more money. I am far, on how that is not logical?
There is no "Proven" Benefit in not testing in this manner. Which is why, people who stand at the edge of technology; in this hobby, are at higher ration for this to release. How many times do top coral company test there waters, such as Battle Coral, Or World Wide Corals. That number will surprise you.
Would it not be nice, to learn how and why ALK gets used up on X day, rather than Y day? Or X time? For me. that is wonderful data to have, at a per home
I am not following where you got the shelf life is specifically 2 months?? Neptune, rather than releasing, a Week or a month of reagent. They find it better for there benefit, to sell 2 months worth, There is no specific data on shelf life released yet.
I am not following where you got the shelf life is specifically 2 months?? Neptune, rather than releasing, a Week or a month of reagent. They find it better for there benefit, to sell 2 months worth, There is no specific data on shelf life released yet.
VelocityTech
Well-Known Member
I am completely baffled where you came up with every 5 tests there will be one bad test?? They released the accuracy to; Let me quote this.. "how accurate is it?
The Trident produces amazingly consistent results. Alkalinity is +/- 0.05 dKH and both Calcium and Magnesium are +/- 10ppm"
There is not a every 5 tests will be 1 bad data point.
I am not following where you got the shelf life is specifically 2 months?? Neptune, rather than releasing, a Week or a month of reagent. They find it better for there benefit, to sell 2 months worth, There is no specific data on shelf life released yet.
This is a year away from release. We have not yet learned of how long the regent will last. ONLY that they are selling 2 month kits. BASED ON USING 4x/2x/2x Per day.
VelocityTech
Well-Known Member
THANK YOU.
This may not be the "Buy" For you then.
Me personally, would love to see EXACTLY how my tank is using elements. Rather than Having CONSTANT Swings. How much coral growth will we receive, If we completely take away from the swings? Having Constant set levels ok ALK, MAG, CA?
You can't answer that question, because we just don't know.
Yes. I do. If i have a tank with 5k worth of coral. Absolutely.
As Terrence said. This buy is for Hobbyist that Take Coral Care serious
MnFish1
10K Club member
The Unit does not pay for itself. That was the point. If there are data (perhaps Neptune has it and hasn't shared it) that suggests that testing in the ratios they recommend is better than testing per the standards (thousands/millions?) of people in the world use and keep great reef aquaria, you would have a point. Likewise, if you pay .01 dollars for 1000 useless tests it doesn't mean its better than spending $1 on one critical test. Using your 'logic' paying .01 dollars per test is better than $1/test.
MnFish1
10K Club member
[QUOTE="There is no "Proven" Benefit in not testing in this manner. Which is why, people who stand at the edge of technology; in this hobby, are at higher ration for this to release. How many times do top coral company test there waters, such as Battle Coral, Or World Wide Corals. That number will surprise you.
Would it not be nice, to learn how and why ALK gets used up on X day, rather than Y day? Or X time? For me. that is wonderful data to have, at a per home
.[/QUOTE]
Since is impossible to 'prove a negative', Jordan, you are right there is no proven benefit in 'not testing in this manner'. That said, it is up to the firm recommending a testing frequency to justify that frequency. If you can tell me why it makes sense to test Ca and Mg 2 times daily from a scientific standpoint/animal husbandry standpoint (even theoretically) - go for it.
I have no clue how many times top coral companies test their water. Do you? Im sure top coral companies do lots of other things that at home hobbyists do not need to do. Again, Im not sure what your point is from a logical standpoint.
Would it not be nice, to learn how and why ALK gets used up on X day, rather than Y day? Or X time? For me. that is wonderful data to have, at a per home
.[/QUOTE]
Since is impossible to 'prove a negative', Jordan, you are right there is no proven benefit in 'not testing in this manner'. That said, it is up to the firm recommending a testing frequency to justify that frequency. If you can tell me why it makes sense to test Ca and Mg 2 times daily from a scientific standpoint/animal husbandry standpoint (even theoretically) - go for it.
I have no clue how many times top coral companies test their water. Do you? Im sure top coral companies do lots of other things that at home hobbyists do not need to do. Again, Im not sure what your point is from a logical standpoint.
Daniel@R2R
Living the Reef Life
I think it ultimately comes down to whether YOU as a hobbyist prefer or do not prefer to test that often. THAT will determine whether or not the more frequent testing actually "pays for itself" or not. For you, these tests are "useless," but many hobbyists apparently do not share that sentiment (as evidenced by those excited about the equipment's capabilities for more frequent testing).
