Should I start using a reactor or NO?

[deepseasurfer]

Ok so I have had a 75 gallon mostly sps dominated tank up and running for almost a year and have never ran carbon or GfO or a reactor for that matter I have pretty high end sps I get insane color and pretty good growth but not what I think others get I can get a frag to encrust like no other at least 2x2 but not much growth maybe a growth tip here and there but that's it I dose daily 2 part calcium and alk about 70 ml a day calcium 410 alk 7 mag 1240 phosphates 0.8 and nitrate 0.4 I have three bartlet anthias a blue tang a fox face two clowns and a royal gramma I do a 10 gallon water change weekly but and going to start moving by weekly so the question is should I start running a reactor I have a cy194 cpr sump which is rated for 200 gallon protein skimmer but I was thinking if I start running a reactor I might be able to get better growth from my sps than I am getting now oh yea I have a ATI 6x54w Sunpower 48 inch all 4 blue plus 1 giesemann super purple and 1 giesemann tropic 6500k for 10 hours a day dose amnio acids and feed rotifera and oyster and zoo and phyto so give me some input and let me know what you all think thanks

 

[sawdonkey]

First, nice tank. When you say reactor, are you referring to a calcium reactor? If so, I'd wait a bit until those frags grow up and alk/cal demand goes up. Although, it wouldn't hurt anything, just jumping the gun a bit.

Your mag is a little low btw.

 

[deepseasurfer]

No GFO and carbon but definitley looking into a calcium

 

[TUSI]

Beautyfull tank. If your corals are encrusting and keeping color you are on the right track and doing fine. It is always the encrusting part that take longer before a coral spurts upward, secondly growing fast most of the time is growing without color imo that's not always the best way. I would continue doing you are doing maybe raise the cal to 440, alk to 8 and mag to 1380, you will see a little faster difference but do it slowly.good luck

 

[deepseasurfer]

Thank you

 

[chefjpaul]

I would rather have slower growth and better color than trying to chase numbers.

Your on a roll, beautiful tank.
Sometimes less is more. I wouldn't mess with gfo if not necessary.

 

[printerrob]

beautiful tank i think i should hire someone from here to aqua scape my next tank (who knows when that will be)

 

[deepseasurfer]

Thanks again all my colors are great my pearly berry glows red dragon ice fire Orgeon tort everything just has great color.!

 

[deepseasurfer]

Upscale micro

 

[deepseasurfer]

Upscale

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I don't see how a CaCO3/CO2 reactor is an improvement over a two part, except by cost. It won't make the corals grow faster. They might grow slower at the same calcium and alkalinity due to the expected pH decrease.

 

[deepseasurfer]

Not a calcium reactor. A GFO and Carbon reactor

 

[GreatWhiteTang]

Gfo is relatively cheap and can drop those phos lower for you.. Carbon i wouldn't mess with, and running them in the same reactor is somewhat pointless since the carbons lifespan is much shorter than a gfo. If u were to do any I would say gfo but start slow and add as time goes on not full dosing at once. Realistically j don't think this will have as big if impact as you hope on growth.

 

[deepseasurfer]

I have no algae issues at all some when first starting up but than it went away I feed LRS reef frenzy In all honesty I don't think I need one or the other but people ask why don't you run GFO and carbon and I say well I never really had the need to

 

[Big B]

As they say, If it aint broke, don't fix it. Since your wanting to cut down on the water changes I would say be ready with the GFO just in case. With the results your getting I would wait and test frequently after you implement your water change routine, then go from there.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Gfo is relatively cheap and can drop those phos lower for you.. Carbon i wouldn't mess with, and running them in the same reactor is somewhat pointless since the carbons lifespan is much shorter than a gfo. If u were to do any I would say gfo but start slow and add as time goes on not full dosing at once. Realistically j don't think this will have as big if impact as you hope on growth.

In my tank, the lifetime of GFO (about a week to ten days) is a lot shorter than the GAC (about a month).

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

"No GFO and carbon but definitley looking into a calcium"

"Not a calcium reactor. A GFO and Carbon reactor"

Uh, OK.


If you do not have apparent nutrient issues (evidenced by algae or measured phosphate levels, I wouldn't opt for GFO at this time.

GAC (granular activated carbon, if that is really what you mean by carbon, as opposed to biopellets) is a fine method to keep the water clearer, but won't likely speed SPS growth.

Higher pH and higher alkalinity will likely speed growth, but if nutrients are too low, higher alkalinity may cause SPS issues.

 

[deepseasurfer]

What do you find is the easiest way to keep calcium alk and mag steady

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Me? I use limewater in my ATO, but many methods work similarly well with slight differences in things like the resulting pH of the tank.

This has more on comparing the different methods:

The Many Methods for Supplementing Calcium and Alkalinity - REEFEDITION