Triton method vs brs 2-part/balling hybrid

Colton.

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Apr 15, 2021
Messages
196
Reaction score
95
Location
Joplin
What state or country do you live in
Missouri
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Which of these two methods will provide the most growth and coloration with lps and a little if any sps? Brs 2-part/Balling hybrid, or
triton method?
 
The term Triton method is somewhat ambiguous, and IMO, the comparison is not really apples to apples.

The BRS 2 part/balling hybrid method does not supply trace elements in a way that offsets consumption.

If it is being compared to Triton that is using ICP and trace element dosing to maintain trace elements, then I think one would want to use a trace element method with the BRS/Balling as well, for comparison.

If the Triton method is just meaning to use their core alk and calcium and magnesium supplements, it is still claiming to add enough elements to offset consumption.

So IMO, it is not a fair comparison.
 
Red sea trace Elements w brs 2 part/balling hybrid?
 
Or brs 2 part/balling hybrid w tropic marin Trace Elements?
 
Have been using Fauna Marin balling light and other Fauna products here. I have to say I’m pretty impressed…
 
Interested, impressed how?

Please don’t take this as a form of criticizing my previous methods used, but since I’ve been using it:

- my LPS are incredibly “fluffy”
- my corals have been developing such nice colors that have never been there
- my sps are showing such a great polyp extension
- the tank is looking overall incredibly clean

Pics about these observations:
91078EDA-D506-4965-85CE-4A130B00D42E.jpeg


C57333BE-40F9-4F11-ACF7-2B63F93AC4C2.jpeg


4F6068AE-3679-4EB0-9A33-5FCF3E4088A1.jpeg

512E7263-0F43-4B42-AE0E-C83DCC41990E.jpeg
 
Please don’t take this as a form of criticizing my previous methods used, but since I’ve been using it:

- my LPS are incredibly “fluffy”
- my corals have been developing such nice colors that have never been there
- my sps are showing such a great polyp extension
- the tank is looking overall incredibly clean

Pics about these observations:
91078EDA-D506-4965-85CE-4A130B00D42E.jpeg


C57333BE-40F9-4F11-ACF7-2B63F93AC4C2.jpeg


4F6068AE-3679-4EB0-9A33-5FCF3E4088A1.jpeg

512E7263-0F43-4B42-AE0E-C83DCC41990E.jpeg
Can't argue with that, Nice results
 
One more note on Triton. The supplements for the “Core” method include traces aimed at supporting a large (10% size) refugium. They have “other method” supplements that don’t require a refugium, although I haven’t tested the two side by side. The concept is the core supposedly includes things like increased iodine, potassium, manganese etc that macroalgae use in abundance. I don’t know if triton has confirmed these elements specifically, but that’s their aim with the different products.
 
Last edited:
Similar to Triton is Reef Moonshiners Method. I was doing Triton Other Method and things were doing ok but not great. I researched Reef Moonshiners and converted about 7 weeks ago. I find the Moonshine MUCH more flexible. So far all corals and fish have responded well. My Alk consumption has increased. On Triton Other Alk consumption was about 1 Dkh a day. Shortly after starting the Shine Alk consumption is about 2.5 per day.
 
Or brs 2 part/balling hybrid w tropic marin Trace Elements?

I don't have an opinion on which trace element plan is best, but yes, that's what I meant.
 
I don't have an opinion to distinguish these choices.

Here's a thread on my "dream" method:

 
The term Triton method is somewhat ambiguous, and IMO, the comparison is not really apples to apples.

The BRS 2 part/balling hybrid method does not supply trace elements in a way that offsets consumption.

If it is being compared to Triton that is using ICP and trace element dosing to maintain trace elements, then I think one would want to use a trace element method with the BRS/Balling as well, for comparison.

If the Triton method is just meaning to use their core alk and calcium and magnesium supplements, it is still claiming to add enough elements to offset consumption.

So IMO, it is not a fair comparison.
Sorry to revive this post, but @Randy Holmes-Farley what do you mean by saying that BRS/TM hybrid method does not supply trace elements in a way that offsets consumption? I thought the whole point of A,K and C was to supply trace elements...
 
Sorry to revive this post, but @Randy Holmes-Farley what do you mean by saying that BRS/TM hybrid method does not supply trace elements in a way that offsets consumption? I thought the whole point of A,K and C was to supply trace elements...

Perhaps we mean different products by BRS TM hybrid.

The use of calcium chloride, sodium bicarbonate/carbonate/hydroxide (The BRS part of the hybrid, though it need not be bought from BRS) and Tropic Marin Balling Part C (the TM part of the hybrid) is the method I meant. Many people now use it and its a great choice. It is not intended to offset any element consumption except calcium and alkalinity.

If you add any sort of trace elements on top of that (such as the Tropic Marin ones you mentioned), then that can potentially offset consumption.
 
Perhaps we mean different products by BRS TM hybrid.

The use of calcium chloride, sodium bicarbonate/carbonate/hydroxide (The BRS part of the hybrid, though it need not be bought from BRS) and Tropic Marin Balling Part C (the TM part of the hybrid) is the method I meant. Many people now use it and its a great choice. It is not intended to offset any element consumption except calcium and alkalinity.

If you add any sort of trace elements on top of that (such as the Tropic Marin ones you mentioned), then that can potentially offset consumption.
Gotcha! I am still debating between this BRS/TM (with trace elements) and the ESV 2 parts + trace elements..
 
Gotcha! I am still debating between this BRS/TM (with trace elements) and the ESV 2 parts + trace elements..

Both good choices that, IMO, will give identical results. :)
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top