Should I run GFO or Carbon in my new reactor?

[STiTCH87]

Bought a Innovative Marine MiniMax Desktop Reactor for xmas and had originally bought it to run GFO as I had a cyano issue for a few weeks. But I fixed the cyano issue before the reactor came in, and it's been 2 weeks looking great. Now wondering if I should run GFO or Carbon? I have a Maxima clam and heard GFO can be a bad thing to run with a clam, but I've heard many say that's a load of bologna too. So I figured I'd ask the official BRS opinion since you guys are the ones I trust. =)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[wdebenedettojr]

I run gfo and carbon in the same reactor. Been doing it for about three months and the tank is noticeably better off for it. I use to get the normal slight brown algae growing on the sand after about a week. Since the gfo/carbon mix it takes about 3 weeks. Strongly suggest running both! Oh ya and I got one of the Maximas from Archit when he did that first group buy a month or two ago. He is doing fine! Never heard that running carbon/gfo with a maxima being bad in all my years in the hobby!

 

[STiTCH87]

Yeah that's where my clam is from too. And I'd prefer not to run both only because carbon should never tumble (can pulverize and damage corals ) and GFO isn't supposed to sit still. That and since GFO lasts nearly twice as long as carbon it just never seemed economically viable for me. But I'm definitely leaning more toward running carbon unless an algae issue comes back. I have a clam, various turkey wing clams, and 3 gorgonians so having some nutrients in my tank is certainly not a bad thing to me anyways. Idk I've never had detectable phosphates. Even when I had cyano (must be stuck in the rock/sand) In fact, I can't even keep macro algae alive in my sump. I've tried various lights and it just shrinks down to nothing with time. It will grow in the process, but shrinks faster than it grows. Never figured that out so I stripped my sump of everything but the skimmer, heater, and return pump.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[wdebenedettojr]

Yeah that's where my clam is from too. And I'd prefer not to run both only because carbon should never tumble (can pulverize and damage corals ) and GFO isn't supposed to sit still. That and since GFO lasts nearly twice as long as carbon it just never seemed economically viable for me. But I'm definitely leaning more toward running carbon unless an algae issue comes back. I have a clam, various turkey wing clams, and 3 gorgonians so having some nutrients in my tank is certainly not a bad thing to me anyways. Idk I've never had detectable phosphates. Even when I had cyano (must be stuck in the rock/sand) In fact, I can't even keep macro algae alive in my sump. I've tried various lights and it just shrinks down to nothing with time. It will grow in the process, but shrinks faster than it grows. Never figured that out so I stripped my sump of everything but the skimmer, heater, and return pump.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

Gfo is the one not suppose to tumble. Gfo is very fine and if it tumbles it grinds up and will end up back in the tank. I use half the dose of recommended gfo and carbon in the same reactor because I change it more often then needed.

 

[wdebenedettojr]

Gfo is the one not suppose to tumble. Gfo is very fine and if it tumbles it grinds up and will end up back in the tank. I use half the dose of recommended gfo and carbon in the same reactor because I change it more often then needed.

Or at least that's the way I have always run gfo. Some people say it should tumble a little bit so it doesn't clump together.

 

[STiTCH87]

It depends on an opinion of "tumble". It's not supposed to tumble heavy. More like a light gurgle. A "simmer" motion if you will. If it clumps it can be dangerous.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[Marshall O]

GFO is supposed to "tumble". Carbon is not since it will break it down as mentioned.

 

[STiTCH87]

I'm gonna run carbon in it I've decided unless I end up having an issue with algae again in the future.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[Ruge13]

Why run either if you have no current issues? I guess I err on the side of simplicity. If it aint broke, don't fix. And even if it is broke, chances are its cause I messed with something and there is no better solution than time with a reef tank.

 

[saltcrazy]

I run 2 Phosban 150's. I run 1/2 cup of GFO in one and the other is stuffed full (TIGHT) with carbon. I run separate reactors for 2 reasons. As stated above, I have my GFO @ a slow tumble. Also, I run my GFO longer than my carbon so to me it would be a waste to combine the two

 

[STiTCH87]

Why run either if you have no current issues? I guess I err on the side of simplicity. If it aint broke, don't fix. And even if it is broke, chances are its cause I messed with something and there is no better solution than time with a reef tank.

Because there's never a reason not to run carbon IMO. You ever see how clear your water gets with carbon? It's awesome lol. Plus at the very least, it reduces that aquarium smell that water tends to have when you get close.

Most of all reason, it because I bought a $100 reactor and don't feel like returning it now that my algae problem went away. Lol.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[maximo]

Can you mix bio pellets with carbon?

 

[STiTCH87]

I'm honestly not entirely sure on that. But I'm not personally a fan of pellets so I personally wouldn't. But that is a good question as iirc neither is supposed to tumble so I don't see why you couldn't.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[Spaceman]

bio pellets and carbon would be a terrible idea. probably crush the carbon. bio pellets are a tumblers too...

 

[STiTCH87]

Oooh yeah they do tumble.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[ReefKeeper1699]

Please read this link.

http://joejaworski.wordpress.com/2008/05/09/does-a-reef-tank-need-carbon/

Carbon is an amazing thing and you real can't use too much of it contrary to popular belief. It pulls the main food source for algaes and photosynthetic bacteria like cyano away from them and helps to starve it out. Get rid of the organics.

 

[STiTCH87]

Heck yeah couldn't agree more. I filled mine right up to the top of the reactor and am running it at medium flow and I've never ever ever seen my tank so clear and algae free. Glass, sand, water column. Crystal clear. I actually even skipped my weekly water change this week as my nitrates and PO4 were undetectable and everything looks great. And this is WITHOUT the skimmer running for the past 2 weeks! I have had it off because it kept overflowing due to detritus build up inside the body because I accidentally kicked up just in my refugium that got sucked into the skimmer and I haven't gotten around to cleaning it yet (which I'm kinda ashamed of not doing yet, but with work and holiday shopping time has been so tough lately) and you'd never know it was off. Lol.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[ReefKeeper1699]

lol it's a busy time stitch for sure. My fuge is due for a detritus cleaning. The return and drain side both have the bottle and sides Lined with detritus. I don't want to wipe it as I don't want to lose my sponges.... Hopefully low suction syphon will pull it up avoiding the sponges.

I don't even run my carbon in a reactor. I lay a 1 pound meshed bag of the stuff over the return of the sump pump

 

[pdd]

run gfo. if you don't seem to have a problem with algae etc you may not need either. if the the gfo goes from redish to brown quickly is it mopping up po4. either way if yur tank has no algae issues you don't need either if you keep doing what yur doing

 

[SteveDola]

Why run either if you have no current issues? I guess I err on the side of simplicity. If it aint broke, don't fix. And even if it is broke, chances are its cause I messed with something and there is no better solution than time with a reef tank.

ruge is right on. no need to run either continuously. just askign for trouble in my opinion.