Doser to Calcium Reactor: Was it worth it?

[Rakie]

Wondering what your thoughts are going from a standard doser to a calcium reactor. Did you notice a big difference, was it pretty minor, would you recommend/not recommend?

I often see people who use calcium reactors kind of being long time converts, and haven't seen as many newer people switch and have much to say about it.

Any thoughts, opinions, and experiences very welcome!

 

[scuzy]

I'm lazy so a reactor is for me. I hate missing solution to refill containers.

 

[Bpb]

Worth every penny. It’s a more complete supplementing method and and if done correctly it is 100% hands off. Not as many new people use them because Neptune markets their stuff so aggressively and dosing just seems “more fun” and more tech advanced than a calcium reactor does. Reactors appear large and intimidating to even some advanced hobbyists. Also hard to justify it as a new hobbyist when you can get a Jebao doser for the cost of a dinner and movie date

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

It's not a transition that I'd recommend as an improvement, except perhaps based on cost in a large tank.

 

[lbacha]

It's not a transition that I'd recommend as an improvement, except perhaps based on cost in a large tank.

I've used kalk, a reactor and 2 part. By far 2 part is the easiest for smaller to mid sized tanks. If you have a really large tank that is consuming a lot of calcium and Alk (I had my calcium reactor on a 180 with a 100g sump) then a reactor works good, it takes more tinkering to setup but once it is it's pretty straight forward. Kalk was my firsts source of calcium and Alk and I'm actually going back to it with an avast kalk stirrer since I want to raise my ph at night.

By the way my post was in agreement of Randy

 

[Bpb]

I’ll add, everyone is also different in what they deem as valuable to their time and money as far as supplementing goes. As with most gear people will recommend what they’ve settled on most often it seems. Always keep that in mind when asking these kinds of questions.

 

[Abhishek]

Everyone has their own perspective . For me it was worth every penny moving from ATI essentials to calcium reactor . Sure it took to tune it but the consistency is unbelievable . Makes life simpler and easier .

Regards,
Abhishek

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Everyone has their own perspective . For me it was worth every penny moving from ATI essentials to calcium reactor . Sure it took to tune it but the consistency is unbelievable . Makes life simpler and easier .

Regards,
Abhishek

What sort of consistency problems did you encounter with dosing?

 

[Bpb]

Can’t answer for him but for me, a reactor just fits with my life better. The one thing on my tank I get lax about is refilling my topoff. I often top off manually. Is it perfect? No but it basically means I cannot rely on kalkwasser as my number one form of supplementing. My evaporation rate is too Inconsistent as well.

I also just didn’t like the regular maintenance involved in 2 part dosing and I seemed to have batch variation in chemicals, or the solutions wouldn’t hold their strength or something. I always had alkalinity fluctuations when I would change out the fluids. Either way the regular work involved became tiresome.

My reactor requires I tend to it annually maybe.

 

[ca1ore]

long time converts

Certainly true in my case. I bought my CaRx in 1998, and it was the point at which my ability to keep SPS really turned the corner. I wasn't doing much dosing back then though, so maybe more correlation than causation. Memories fade, but I think the CaRx actually pre-dates the widespread use of 2-part. Does anyone recall when ESV first started selling their 2-part solutions? CaRx is just a more 'elegant' approach (dissolving dead coral skeletons with the proper ratio of minerals) versus adding 'chemicals' in my view.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Certainly true in my case. I bought my CaRx in 1998, and it was the point at which my ability to keep SPS really turned the corner. I wasn't doing much dosing back then though, so maybe more correlation than causation. Memories fade, but I think the CaRx actually pre-dates the widespread use of 2-part. Does anyone recall when ESV first started selling their 2-part solutions? CaRx is just a more 'elegant' approach (dissolving dead coral skeletons with the proper ratio of minerals) versus adding 'chemicals' in my view.

Bob Stark came up with ESV B-ionic in the early to mid 1990's.

 

[Hammer100]

I do continuous water change...changing about 2.5 gallons a day on a around 180 gallon system. I also have been doing some larger water changes to try an lower my nutrients (had some problems a few months back). I also dose alkalinity as needed but my calcium and mag. remain pretty stable at this point. I have alot frags that are growing but no what i would call colonies yet except a large porites. How would one go about using a reactor in the set up or would I just stick to dosing 2 part?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I do continuous water change...changing about 2.5 gallons a day on a around 180 gallon system. I also have been doing some larger water changes to try an lower my nutrients (had some problems a few months back). I also dose alkalinity as needed but my calcium and mag. remain pretty stable at this point. I have alot frags that are growing but no what i would call colonies yet except a large porites. How would one go about using a reactor in the set up or would I just stick to dosing 2 part?

Using a reactor or a two part with equal parts dosing to maintain alkalinity will keep calcium about where it is.

Each water change with a high calcium mix will tend to tug the calcium in the direction of the level the mix has, but it should not drive the calcium higher (or lower) than is present in the salt mix, at least in the short term, unless some unusual things are happening in the tank (such as a sulfur denitrator depleting alkalinity and not calcium).

 

[Hammer100]

Using a reactor or a two part with equal parts dosing to maintain alkalinity will keep calcium about where it is.

Each water change with a high calcium mix will tend to tug the calcium in the direction of the level the mix has, but it should not drive the calcium higher (or lower) than is present in the salt mix, at least in the short term, unless some unusual things are happening in the tank (such as a sulfur denitrator depleting alkalinity and not calcium).

Thanks for the input...I'll stick with what seems to be working for me now. hopefully someday I'll have to worry about adding a lot more supplements.

 

[ca1ore]

Bob Stark came up with ESV B-ionic in the early to mid 1990's.

Interesting ..... longer than I thought.

 

[rob G]

Jury is still sort of out for me, but thought it might be worth me posting on the topic. I just down graded to two 120 gallon tanks from a 360 gallon that I dosed three part in. I do like three part, but I did have fluctuations, I would forget to fill the alk container when it ran dry for a few days and my alk would plummet, I know this is user error and not an issue with two part itself, but for me it was an issue. I also had a hard time keeping up with the elements, seemed I had to make adjustments to the dosage often, again, could be me and not the method. So when moving to these two new tanks I wanted one LPS tank and one SPS focused tank. I already own the Archon controller and dosing pumps, so that would be what I am using on the LPS tank (still need to set those dosers up, been doing it manually) but for the SPS tank I figured I would take the plunge. I also brew beer so I had an extra CO2 tank around so all I needed was an extra two pH probes, the reactor, feed pump, solenoid valve, regulator and media, okay, that still seems like a lot..... but I have always been curious and based on so many mixed reviews I had to try myself. I am not yet at set it and forget it, but its only been running for about a month. I still tinker with the effluent rate and the bubble count but these are simply turns of two knobs, not mixing salts in water and letting it settle out and setting it back up under the doser and then adjusting the time of each dose daily until dialed in. I simply make subtle adjustments, check the next few days with the Hanna checker, as you do with three part, and that's it. I did have great growth with three part and am not knocking it, but will say it is a little more involved than a reactor.

Three things I like more about the reactor are changes are made much more slowly, there isn't the risk of adding too much Alk solution in a day and coral bleaching from it. I guess in extreme cases this could happen with a reactor but it would take a significant change in chamber pH and effluent rate but with pH probes, solenoid and a controller you can reduce the risk. Also, I cant help but think there is more dissolving into the water than just Alk and Calcium, its everything that made that skeleton a skeleton. And the media is way more cost effective after the initial set up cost, maybe refill it annually and that's it.

I will say my coral has responded well to the reactor and the coralline algae seems more healthy, seems to be growing in thicker layers and deeper purples and pinks. I am still early in the process but set the two tanks up differently so I can get a feel for how they really compare. Hopefully after 6 months to a year I will be able to form a solid opinion, three part works for sure, especially if you address the other elements like potassium, strontium et cetra, but I am pretty optimistically excited about the reactor so far.

 

[Ley3198]

IMO Calcium reactors add stability and remove human error out of the equation. Definitely not a must have for all tanks, but for an SPS dominated tank, it is definitely something to consider. Beside refilling the media and gas, there isn't much more to it. No more buying elements, mixing them and having to keep up a dosing schedule or worry about missing a dose. It may come at a high price point, but it eliminates so many variables that could cause instability. That to me is worth it regardless of tank size, again, for SPS dominated mostly.

I put one on my 40B because there's lots of SPS and also a Derasa clam that sucks up calcium. I got tired of dosing and testing constantly trying to monitor accurate consumption rates.

The key IMO is having enough livestock that will utilize the available elements on a daily basis, otherwise its might not be worth the effort and would there would be minimal differences and potentially even causing an overdosing problem.

 

[Potatohead]

I’ll preface this by saying I do not use a reactor for the following reasons, nor have I ever owned one - However I am familiar with their use.

The whole “set of and forget it thing” doesn’t hold water to me. The demand in the tank changes over time. The amount of media in the reactor changes over time. If you haven’t touched your reactor for three months and things are going well, your corals are growing, your demand is increasing, and the amount of media in the reactor is decreasing. I fail to see how this can work for a period of 6-12 months without intervention.

Personally I am the type of person to not do things halfway, and as such I would never use a reactor without a controller (or at the very least a ph controller controlling the internal ph), an electronic regulator, and a quality peristaltic feed pump. Some guys say they just wing it by bubble count and a maxi-jet with a valve on it and it stays stable for months on end... I just don’t buy it.

If you don’t like mixing salts, I get that, but just mix larger batches. Mix a few gallons at a time, seal it up and when you need to, pour it into your smaller dosing containers once or twice a month. Put a tape line on the large container at the fluid level when you’re putting it in storage so when you come back in a few weeks and a little bit has evaporated you can add a bit of water back in to keep the concentration consistent.

With quality salts like ESV, Triton, Fauna Marin, Aquaforest, ATI etc the concern over lack of trace elements is unfounded.

At the end of the day they both have pluses and minuses, they both do the job... Kind of a Ford vs Chevy thing I guess.

 

[Hans-Werner]

For me one of the big differences between reactor and two or three part methods is a frequently ignored "trace element" (according to the concentration in reef waters it is while its biological importance says it is a major element), it is phosphorus or phosphate. Most of the phosphate a SPS takes up is incorporated into the skeleton. A reactor provides a continuous flow of phosphate, normally in fact more than is needed by coral growth. However phosphate guarantees a continuous and fast growth. Two and three part methods do not supply phosphate and phosphate easily becomes the minimum factor in SPS tanks with two or three part dosing. If you keep that in mind you know much about the main difference between reactor and two or three part dosing.

 

[futureinterest]

Make sure you get a good regulator and you'll be happy about moving forward with a CaR. Those that regret moving from dosing to a CaR are often those that went cheap and got a regulator that didn't make it ez for them.