Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just tested again and what the heck. Dealing with their customer service now.
YupQuestion: Are the nozzles firmly attached to the syringes? I just got this kit myself, and mine aren't producing a tight seal. Some of them are falling off, and when they don't, they allow air to be sucked into the syringe as well, throwing the results from improper reagent ratios.
Can you do the math for 1610 and 1360? Don’t think that’s 5%You realize it is accurate to within +/- 5%?
Meaning if your magnesium is actually 1380 a reading between 1310 and 1450 is acceptable. That is assuming you performed the test exactly the same each time.
I hear you. I am sending it back for a replacement. Will keep the community updated once I get it back.I'm really not trying to be negative, but it has become my opinion that buying new Hanna testers is nothing more than playing beta testers for them. Almost all of them have major failures early on. This one is no exception as most reviews are coming in that it reads high. Like 2-300ppm high
Can you do the math for 1610 and 1360? Don’t think that’s 5%
Correct, they are not precision instruments and should be used as a general guideline tool.You realize it is accurate to within +/- 5%?
Meaning if your magnesium is actually 1380 a reading between 1310 and 1450 is acceptable. That is assuming you performed the test exactly the same each time.
Yeah that's about a 16% differential.
Too many steps with this one... doesn't look to be any more accurate, nor any easier to use than my current Red Sea MG test.
Glad I didn't jump the gun and pre-order this one. would not have been happy.
Hanna's good units are the ones that just takes a single reagent, mixed with tank water, a single step, then give me a number....
ALK, HR Nitrate, Phosphate, Copper, etc.. those are good ones. The others like the LR Nitrate, magnesium, etc have too many steps and just don't seem any easier or more accurate than what I'm already using.
Reproducibility should be better than that surely, even if the actual figure is off by 5%.Which is +/- 8%
Reproducibility should be better than that surely, even if the actual figure is off by 5%.
I am doing my test consistently.It probably is. But as discussed above I don't believe the people using it are doing the test the exact same way each time. This isn't a knock on the OP, it's just a reality that more steps and measurements leads to more errors.
1000?This is from my other tank that usually at 1350. Hopefully I will get a “working” one but I was told it’s on back ordered smh
Thanks for the review. Hopefully it gets straightened out. Digital testers may seem like a toy to a lot of reefers but they’re a quite a few of us out there that can’t perform titration tests with our eyes so these really become a necessity. I’ve been holding off getting one until more reviews come in. Man, if you think that’s inconsistent try having non-reefers try and perform titration tests for you….ha