Hanna a reagents are horrible

[92Miata]

Been tracking my checker across the last two bottles of reagent now.

Roughly .6dkH high on a brand new bottle - roughly 1dKH low by the end of the bottle. I shake the bottles and then let them settle. Both the bottles I've been through in the last month have expiration dates in 2022

Its easier to use than the Red Sea Pro kit, but this thing doesn't seem all that useful if its going to drift like that.

 

[robbyg]

Been tracking my checker across the last two bottles of reagent now.

Roughly .6dkH high on a brand new bottle - roughly 1dKH low by the end of the bottle. I shake the bottles and then let them settle. Both the bottles I've been through in the last month have expiration dates in 2022

Its easier to use than the Red Sea Pro kit, but this thing doesn't seem all that useful if its going to drift like that.

As I said in another post I have only had this problem when I have not completely removed the foil cover from the bottle. if the top edge is not just smooth plastic it will leak when you turn it upside down and squeeze a bit on the bottle.

 

[92Miata]

As I said in another post I have only had this problem when I have not completely removed the foil cover from the bottle. if the top edge is not just smooth plastic it will leak when you turn it upside down and squeeze a bit on the bottle.

Foil was completely removed on first bottle, and the two where I've tracked every test in the entire bottle.

Just turned current upside down, and squeezed. No leaks.

How are you verifying that you results are correct?

I'm comparing mine to a red sea kit - which has tracked my dosing and what I expect my tank to be.

 

[45ZoaGarden]

They claim a .5 dkh margin of error. That adds up to 1dkh. I’d say .4 is either user error possibly from not rinsing out the vials good enough, leaving bubbles (or fingerprints on the tube), or different amounts of water (or reagent).

It's a pretty simple procedure. Please explain user error. From one reagent to another there's a 1.4 difference? Might be you need to start checking your results with a more reliable test kit.

 

[Scdell]

They claim a .5 dkh margin of error. That adds up to 1dkh. I’d say .4 is either user error possibly from not rinsing out the vials good enough, leaving bubbles (or fingerprints on the tube), or different amounts of water (or reagent).

.5 margin of error plus or minus. Not one way. From an old bottle to a new one was 1.4 .....one way. Yep, keep blaming user error. It's just easier that way.

 

[45ZoaGarden]

.5 margin of error plus or minus. Not one way. From an old bottle to a new one was 1.4 .....one way. Yep, keep blaming user error. It's just easier that way.

Calm down. They can most definitely be -.5. This is not lab grade equipment, it is HOBBY grade equipment. It is very close to the margin of error and little things can shift these test kits. I personally have seen changes due to little things (user error). It’s is purely an error. Don’t be so hostile to members trying to help. If you’re going to bash the gold standard of aquarium test kits, do more than one test and give us repeated results that support your theory.

 

[92Miata]

.5 margin of error plus or minus. Not one way. From an old bottle to a new one was 1.4 .....one way. Yep, keep blaming user error. It's just easier that way.

1.4 was about what I saw.

Last bottle started at at 8.4 (Red Sea Pro was 7.7) , drifted down to 6.9 by the end of the bottle. New bottle is reading 8.3.

I need to do side-to-side tests again tonight - but I'm pretty sure its going to be 8.3 on the Hanna and 7.6-7.9 on the Red Sea.

And I clean the outside of the cuvettes with alchohol and microfiber. Then handle them with the microfiber - no finger contact. And I use medical syringes to measure out sample.

 

[92Miata]

Calm down. They can most definitely be -.5. This is not lab grade equipment, it is HOBBY grade equipment. It is very close to the margin of error and little things can shift these test kits. I personally have seen changes due to little things (user error). It’s is purely an error. Don’t be so hostile to members trying to help. If you’re going to bash the gold standard of aquarium test kits, do more than one test and give us repeated results that support your theory.

That's literally what we're doing - and you'd know that if you stopped "trying to help"


The kit consistently drifting down over the course of a bottle of reagent isn't "margin of error"

 

[45ZoaGarden]

I forgot to mention that these things do evaporate as well.

1.4 was about what I saw.

Last bottle started at at 8.4 (Red Sea Pro was 7.7) , drifted down to 6.9 by the end of the bottle. New bottle is reading 8.3.

I need to do side-to-side tests again tonight - but I'm pretty sure its going to be 8.3 on the Hanna and 7.6-7.9 on the Red Sea.

And I clean the outside of the cuvettes with alchohol and microfiber. Then handle them with the microfiber - no finger contact. And I use medical syringes to measure out sample.

 

[45ZoaGarden]

That's literally what we're doing - and you'd know that if you stopped "trying to help"


The kit consistently drifting down over the course of a bottle of reagent isn't "margin of error"

.5 each direction is margin of error. It literally says it on the packaging. An opened reagent bottle will evaporate and cause a shift in results. How about buying two new bottles and compare results other than comparing an opened bottle that sat for who knows how long. There’s also an expiration date on the bottle. I’d suggest you check that out all wise one

 

[92Miata]

.5 each direction is margin of error. It literally says it on the packaging. An opened reagent bottle will evaporate and cause a shift in results. How about buying two new bottles and compare results other than comparing an opened bottle that sat for who knows how long. There’s also an expiration date on the bottle. I’d suggest you check that out all wise one

Stop gaslighting people and actually read the posts.

The bottle of reagent I just threw out:

Was open less than 20 days, and was kept sealed, and foil wrapper was removed properly.
Had an Expiration Date of 01/2022.
Batch 8966
Drifted from testing 8.3 to 6.9 over the course of those 20 days, despite tank being a solid 8.0.

The current bottle, which I opened yesterday:
Batch 8876
Exp Date: 11/2021
Currently reading a predictable .3 dkH high, at 8.3.

The previous bottle to 8966, I did not record the batch number, but it was not expired - and it again read 8.3, and drifted down to about 7 dkH by the end of the bottle. It also was only open about 2 and a half weeks.


I'm testing multiple tanks pretty much daily, and going through a lot of reagent here - and this effect is both predictable and consistent, across batches.

 

[Scdell]

User error or not. If you're testing the same way consistently then you should be getting pretty consistent readings.
Apparently there about 500 different ways to use a Hanna checker according to the posts here. And everyone thinks their way is the best. So....... User error is a cop out. I will say, I've been buying my reagents from a different lace the last two bottles and they seem to be way more consistent. Might have something to do with it.

 

[45ZoaGarden]

yes, I actually read the posts. I’m saying you did something wrong. And yes, you can absolutely get a considerable shift if it wasn’t stored properly which I can guarantee, most definitely happened. I have been using Hanna checkers for years. My buddy owns a lfs and uses them to test all of his tanks. Neither of us have EVER noticed a problem when properly storing the reagents and testing properly.

Stop gaslighting people and actually read the posts.

The bottle of reagent I just threw out:

Was open less than 20 days, and was kept sealed, and foil wrapper was removed properly.
Had an Expiration Date of 01/2022.
Batch 8966
Drifted from testing 8.3 to 6.9 over the course of those 20 days, despite tank being a solid 8.0.

The current bottle, which I opened yesterday:
Batch 8876
Exp Date: 11/2021
Currently reading a predictable .3 dkH high, at 8.3.

The previous bottle to 8966, I did not record the batch number, but it was not expired - and it again read 8.3, and drifted down to about 7 dkH by the end of the bottle. It also was only open about 2 and a half weeks.


I'm testing multiple tanks pretty much daily, and going through a lot of reagent here - and this effect is both predictable and consistent, across batches.

 

[45ZoaGarden]

Precisely. The way the lfs stores them could for sure change the life of the reagents. If they sat in a box outside while waiting to go onto the shelf, they won’t last.

User error or not. If you're testing the same way consistently then you should be getting pretty consistent readings.
Apparently there about 500 different ways to use a Hanna checker according to the posts here. And everyone thinks their way is the best. So....... User error is a cop out. I will say, I've been buying my reagents from a different lace the last two bottles and they seem to be way more consistent. Might have something to do with it.

 

[92Miata]

yes, I actually read the posts. I’m saying you did something wrong. And yes, you can absolutely get a considerable shift if it wasn’t stored properly which I can guarantee, most definitely happened. I have been using Hanna checkers for years. My buddy owns a lfs and uses them to test all of his tanks. Neither of us have EVER noticed a problem when properly storing the reagents and testing properly.

Keep gaslighting.

The bottles are being stored sealed, in the case, in the dark, in a temperature controlled room.
They are not exposed to sunlight. They are not exposed to heat. They are not open.

They are being used within days after receiving them from BRS - who probably moves more bottles of this stuff than anyone on earth.

If they're already ruined at that point - then they're junk.

Of course you've never noticed anything wrong.

 

[Scdell]

Precisely. The way the lfs stores them could for sure change the life of the reagents. If they sat in a box outside while waiting to go onto the shelf, they won’t last.

I'm quite sure they sit in a hot truck as they are being shipped. Or a cold truck. Depending on the season and location. Sitting outside waiting to be stocked shouldn't be of concern. It's not like it's fish or corals.

 

[45ZoaGarden]

I'm quite sure they sit in a hot truck as they are being shipped. Or a cold truck. Depending on the season and location. Sitting outside waiting to be stocked shouldn't be of concern. It's not like it's fish or corals.

No but some chemicals that when separated through heat don’t mix back together. Hence their instructions on storage temperatures.

 

[45ZoaGarden]

I’m flattered that you consider my reasoning “gaslighting”. It’s called shipping. When it ships, it sits in a hot truck under not ideal conditions. I’d suggest trying some bought from an lfs. And no, I’ve never noticed a difference. My alkatronic and trident are just as consistent as my Hanna checker

Keep gaslighting.

The bottles are being stored sealed, in the case, in the dark, in a temperature controlled room.
They are not exposed to sunlight. They are not exposed to heat. They are not open.

They are being used within days after receiving them from BRS - who probably moves more bottles of this stuff than anyone on earth.

If they're already ruined at that point - then they're junk.

Of course you've never noticed anything wrong.
[/QUOTE/]

 

[45ZoaGarden]

And before you ask “what’s the difference” between buying from an lfs and having it shipped direct (or call it gaslighting), most lfs buy direct from a large distributor which delivers fish and corals in the same truck as their reagents. The reagents are in transit much less buying from an lfs opposed to buying from brs where it gets sent from Hanna to brs, then sent from brs via economy shipping where the reagents sit in hot trucks and on the tarmac for hours on end day after day. It’s not gaslighting. This isn’t something that you can expect to be scientifically precise, it’s a $50 tester and the reagents are some mere $7. It will vary batch to batch if you like it or not. I think we can all agree that things, in not ideal conditions, don’t last as long as they should. If you expect a precise tester with lab grade results, buy a trident or an all Alkatronic.

 

[Potatohead]

User error or not. If you're testing the same way consistently then you should be getting pretty consistent readings.

I have probably used my Hanna alk checker at least 500 times. I usually buy 3-4 reagent bottles at a time. I have found it to be pretty darn reliable. I have had 3-4 instances where the result was off, to the point where it just can't be right, and I will usually double or triple check it and the results come back in line. Those instances are probably user error or some other anomaly. Looking at my records my last twelve tests have been 7.0 ten times and 7.1 twice.

The products are not perfect, they are hobby grade and I am sure some bad reagents get out. But for me the product is very reliable especially when price is considered.