|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Sadly, I think this goes back to the early 90's and the birth of Reef Crystals. At the time, most of the "experts" recommended a specific gravity slightly below NSW, to avoid the possibility of dangerously high salinity due to evaporation. Many of the gadgets available to us today to maintain constant water levels in our displays and/or sumps did not exist, or at the least were not readily available to the hobbyist back then. I believe this standard goes back to the creation of Reef Crystals at that time, and has been mimicked by the newer salts through the years. For one thing, it allows them to make apples to apples comparisons, and for another, it allows the manufacturers to sell a 200 gallon pail that only makes say 185 gallons at NSW versus 200 at 1.024. In other words, it is more profitable. Anyhow, that is just a guess. Happy New Year, all!
__________________
"Baseball is 90% mental...The other half is physical."- Yogi Berra |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
-Eric- CORA Member |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
i use red sea pro,which tests out about the same as your results on regular red sea.i will check it again and post my findings with salifert kits.thanks billy for the info,it is interesting
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Just wanted to say thankx for doing this test, its nice to see an outside source giving the #'s for once and at a normal salinity level, and using the same equipment I have access to!!
__________________
For my birthday i got a humidifier and a de-humidifier... I put them in the same room and let them fight it out. (Steven Wright) |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
billy this is what i come up with using salifert on red sea pro.its actually lower than your readings for the regular red sea.alk 7.8--cal 380--mg 1180.i think i may look into a different mix or just go back to regular red sea.thanks Dan
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
I have one question for you ( author) the salts you tested were they the "reef" salts or "marine" salts. Most companies carry one for each of those catergories( Seachem's Marine Salt , or Reef salt
Thank you
__________________
"........like table salt?!?!" |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Last edited by Jimbob; 01/01/2008 at 04:16 PM. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
They supposedly changed their formula to fix the borate issue so I suspect it's going to do the job for a lot of reefers. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
I use RC and my calcium is always very low and my alk high. Maybe I have to change
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
i just switched to RC from Oceanpure pro and it does seem to be low in Cal.
__________________
happy fish swim around. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
I remember reading a year or more ago about people mixing a high Ca salt like Oceanic with a lower Ca salt like IO or Reef Crystals.
Has anyone tried this and what did you think?
__________________
180 w/ 400W Coralvue dimmable ballast / mini lumenarc reflectors / Reeflux 10K bulbs |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
(Disclaimer: I’m new at this.)
I just switched one month ago from Oceanic to IO because of some crazy high CA numbers in my tank. I also seemed to always have low Alk numbers. I did this after reading another thread that claimed strange things happen with Oceanic at higher SG levels. After seeing Billy’s test numbers, I now see why. Guess what. Now I am trying to bring up my CA numbers because they are low. Last night I had SG = 1.0245, Temp = 78, CA = 365, Alk = 7.7. Just F.Y.I., do not run a skimmer yet. So starting with my next WC, I am going to use 1/3 Oceanic and 2/3 IO and see how that goes. I’m changing 10% every week. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
i retested red sea pro after my first readings and calibated my refractometer.it came in a little better.please let me know if these numbers coinside with others that are testing.sg 1.026--cal440 alk 9.0 mg 1140.i ran each test 3 times and aged the mix 48 hours before testing.all tests were done with salifert kits.thanks Dan
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Kent Sea Salt
This is a great post. Thanks for putting in your time for the rest of us!
I use Kent, and my Calcium is much lower than your findings of: Kent 540 11 1200 I have a 180g which I'm setting up. Before even placing any coral in the system, my calcium was much lower. I dose B-Ionic daily, about 100ml (approximately 240g total tank volume), and my numbers are: Ca 386 Alk 11 Mg 1280 NH4,NO2, NO3, PO4 = 0 pH =8.4 temp = 78-79 salinity = 1.025 via refractometer calibrated with pinpoint soln All values tested with Tropic marin test kits Is there a reason why I dose so much B-ionic, yet my Ca is so much lower than Billy's findings? Last edited by tbone28; 01/06/2008 at 03:56 PM. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Right off, the first two things I would guess are either you are using more calcium than you are adding ( coralline growth maybe...) or perhaps your salinity is lower than NSW. How are you measuring salinity?
__________________
"Baseball is 90% mental...The other half is physical."- Yogi Berra |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
SPStoner - Perhaps that (coralline growth) is the reason! My tank has been running now for a little over 4 months now and coralline is still growing.
I didn't dose B-ionic from the start. I started perhaps 1 month into my cyle. Following the bottles directions, I added 1ml per 4g of water, so I was adding 60ml of each component daily. My Calcium levels at that time were 350 (Red Sea kit, so it could be higher or lower than that - but that was my titration point). So I bumped it up to 100ml of each component daily and my values are as mentioned in my previous post. I measure salinity via a marine depot refractometer. It's calibrated with the pinpoint 53ms calibration solution |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
tbone, with a tank your size, I would consider a calcium reactor. Your tank is consuming lots of Ca++ and you'll either need to supplement alot or my first choice.
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Many reefers mix too low without realizing it. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I agree that the reactor is the way to go for my sized tank. I'm spending $40 every 6 weeks on B-ionic right now, and I have to do this daily, which is getting tiring. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Hey TBOne. A reactor is probably a good idea. There are probably several things utilizing calcium besides just coralline. Growing snails, for instance. A healthy amount of coralline can rapidly deplete calcium levels though, IME. I have actually just somewhat proven this in reverse. I did a complete re-scape of my 120 and removed 3 walls worth of thick coralline. I had to readjust my reactor and my dosing regime as without the coralline, the old adjustments were too much causing calcium to rise over 500ppm.
__________________
"Baseball is 90% mental...The other half is physical."- Yogi Berra |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
SPStoner, I do have a lot of snails, and they blend in quite nicely with the rock . Well, I'm glad to hear that my low-normal calcium levels are not due to my salt, but rather due to setting up a new tank.
|
|
|