KH Testing - Salifert vs Hanna Checker

[Leonard Sixt]

Background first: Redsea Max Nano - started cycle Dec 2018 - finished cycle on or about end of Jan 2019.... Life rock as my base. Never had much AM or Nitrite during cycle, but tank is doing very well. Mostly softies, three fish, all healthy. Three snails, 4-6 dwarf blue leg hermits. Only loss was my Duncan - which remains a mystery. No other losses. No GHA, only minor cyano.

Had a mild cyano issue back a few months - did chem clean (one treatment - ran large air pump during), since then only minor bits of cyano on rocks. Was shortly after the chem clean treatment that the Duncan went south. Everything else did well and is growing as I'd expect. Since the CC treatment, I added larger return pump to increase flow - have had one IM wave maker since startup.

I do dose 2 part (seachem) but will be switching to All-For-Reef soon.

About 20% water changes every two weeks. Mainly because I've had zero PH4 and zero Nitrate like forever. Trying to build up some nutrients. I run RS reef spec carbon, but don't change it but once every 10 weeks or so.

Been using Salifert KH test kit since Jan - but haven't really trusted the results....

The range of KH using the Salifert test kit readings have been between 8.9 to 11.5 since March.

Since July 1, the average has been 10.92 (that was five tests over that period that I have records for).

Today I just got a Hanna Checker - and I ran four tests - two with Hanna, two with Salifert.

Hanna read 9.6 and 9.7 for the two tests. The Salifert test yeilded 10.2 and 10.9.

So I'm going to stop using the Salifert KH test kit... I just never have had any consistent readings using it.

Since I'm using Salifert also for Calcium, I'm wondering if those readings are accurate? Once again the Salifert readings have been between 350 and 450 since January and the last five readings from July 1 averaged about 400, but that average is based on readings from 380 to 410.

I read the Hanna KH checker is very accurate, but I'm not familiar with their Calcium checker.

I use Salifert also for PO4 and never had anything other than Zero readings since Feb when the PO4 was .3

So I'm really not having a good feeling about the Salifert test kits.

Anyone having what you think are good results using Salifert? I'm just not feeling it anymore.

What would you suggest for CA and PO4 testing - I need to feel more confident in my water testing methods.

 

[jaxredsoxfan]

I use Hanna Calcium and PO4 Ultra low range testers and have been happy with them. they match up pretty closely with my redsea kits but I find them easier to use and eliminate me trying to decipher colors.

 

[cjpitt80]

API calcium test seems to work just fine for me. Matches up quite nicely with Triton ICP testing, so I assume it's accurate

 

[PatW]

Unless you calibrate your tests with known samples, the accuracy of the test is at best approximate.

Of the alkalinity tests I have used: Red Sea Pro, Salifert, API, and Hanna, Hanna gives the most reproducible results. So it is more precise. But I have no way of knowing which test of the four gives the closest to the actual value. But they all give similar results.

For example, say the test reads 8. But the actual value is 8.4. Either value is fine. If the next day I test again, it is more important to know if the DKH has changed and by how much. For API, I can be off by almost 1 DKH from one test to the next. For Salifert and Red Sea Pro, the wobble is about .2 DKH. For Hanna the wobble is about .1 DKH. That is just my impression from using the tests.

With most reef parameters, stability of your levels is more important than the actual value as long as they are within a certain range. I think all four of the tests will get you into the proper range. Of the four, Hanna is the most precise and precision is more important than accuracy.

 

[Leonard Sixt]

PatW,

That's part of my point. Today using Salifert not 10 minutes apart, I got 10.2 and 10.9 - quite a range. Where Hanna gave me 9.6 and 9.7....

I'm more about the test being consistent that accurate (within some level of reality), but I can't get there with Salifert. Maybe it's me, but the color change seems to vary from one test to the other even minutes apart from one another. I've tried to be as careful as possible measuring, counting drops, etc. but when the color goes from blue to pink or orange (whichever occurs first) I find very difficult to measure.

 

[Joedubyk]

I have accurate readings w/ Hanna -- at least consistent. They also are within .3 dkh of my trident. Salifert is 1 dkh higher than my hanna as well.

 

[Auto-pilot]

The Hannah calcium test works good, I feel like there is a long procedure to testing and sometimes that opens the door for error when testing. Especially the water sample device. It takes like 4 drops from the tank to test and sometimes I think I can mess it up a little and get wrong results

 

[BeejReef]

I get a little variance with any alkalinity test. Have used Hanna and RS.
I'm with most everyone. Hanna just gives piece of mind for alkalinity. I do sometimes get very screwy results with a very new or nearly empty reagent bottle though. I keep a RS refill as well for a redundancy.

I've not found a reason to switch from RS for calcium or magnesium. My calcium tracks closely to my alkalinity and I test it (and magnesium) at best once a week during wc.

For phosphate, I've found the LR checker to be more than adequate, but my target is .06 - .15. Since cost is the same, I'd go with the ULR if had it to do over again.

 

[Leonard Sixt]

From what everyone has said, seems Hanna is at least consistent and that (for me) is more important that accuracy. IE say Salifert IS more accurate, then in my example is the KH 10.2 or 10.9 ??? I actually ran three Salifert tests and aborted one of them because I knew I messed up on the drops. But the other two Salifert tests (minutes apart) yielded results .7 KH apart. Seems too broad to me. Same water, same time Hanna was 9.6 and 9.7 = consistent and more "believable" in my mind.

That said, in terms of hobby test kits, we know we're not SPOT ON, but being near on and consistent has to be a plus.

For sure will be going the ULR route next - may post similar results on this thread comparing Salifert to Hanna - just for giggles.

As far as calcium I'm not sure yet what I want to use. I just have lost any confidence in Salifert, IDK. Maybe I just got a bad KH Salifert kit - if there is such a thing. Expiration dates are fine, so I know they aren't expired kits.

Onward thru the fog!

 

[Cherie cook]

I have the Hanna calcium checker and I kept getting super high calcium readings that I finally just didn’t really trust. So I ordered the standard kit from Hanna (basically cuvettes that already have the water and reagents in there) that’s calibrated to a certain number, and of course it was way off what I was getting. Turned out to be user error on my part and once I figured out what I was doing wrong it’s been all good! You have to be super careful with measurements!!

 

[MTBake]

I never had a problem with Salifert test kits. I can replicate alk results over and over, within .3dkh test to test. Been using Salifert for over a decade and don't have a reason switch. I have a Hanna but haven't used it in over a year. The Salifert is quicker and easier for me.

 

[hart24601]

I have salifert and hanna and they both are close to each other and are consistent for me. I do like the hanna more since it’s easier. If you are getting varied results then yea, switch to the hanna. No reason not to. I shoot for an alk of 8, because who cares if the test is really 1dkh off either way as long as it’s consistent and I can keep things stable.