I think the FX6 is what ill go for. It will allow much more flexibility in the future.
Despite the protestations of some, I agree that you should get the biggest baddest filter you can afford. If that means you mount a Formula 1 engine in a Toyota Prius, then so be it. You can always easily reduce the flow rate if need be. You certainly need to distribute the flow well but there is never a fault with having more flow than you need.
People are quick to bash the 10X rule because Mr. So and So uses low flow and his tanks are fine. The problem is; Wulfen is
not Mr. So and So. When you gain the experience that George Farmer and Mark Evans then you will be able to get away with low flow because you will understand all the nuances.
For the record, it's important to clarify the philosophy and history of George Farmer's and Mark Evans with respect to their experience regarding flow.
Here are a few posts and quotes from George Farmer;
https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/rio-nanay-fish.17747/page-2#post-213524
We often talk about a 10x guideline for [CO2 enriched] planted tanks. This is to minimise dead spots that can result in algae. It's also to ensure that sufficient CO2/nutrients are delivered effectively throughout the water column.
Folk succeed with far less and far more, but 10x is a good rule of thumb. So a 240 litre aquarium has 2400lph claimed flow rate from the filter manufacturers.
It's actually more important to consider how the circulation works throughout the aquarium, and not just rely on numbers. This is where the type of filter outlet is important i.e. spray bars, lily pipes etc. Many folk also add powerheads to their aquariums. I personally find these hugely unsightly and would rather add another filter to get the required flow.
However, if your aquarium is a biotope with no plants then flow rate is not so important. You will just need a filter that is capable of dealing with the fish waste and to provide some circulation for oxygen exchange etc. A 2260 would be fine, especially in combination with appropriate maintenance practices.
https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/filter-advice-from-shop-is-it-correct.16223/#post-168659
I realise the 10x 'rule' is commonplace - it's a nice round figure for planted tank beginners that will likely have more lighting and spend less time maintaining, so it's a good starting point.
https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/flow-rates-for-dummies.11781/#post-124660
The 10x guideline assumes you have a regular external filter that do not produce their max flow rate.
So you have a 120 litre tank and filter it with a 1200lph external filter. In reality you're only get around 600lph perhaps. So in reality your getting 5x.
Powerheads produce much nearer their claimed flow rate, so you can take this into account when working out what filter/powerhead combo you require.
It's not an exact science, of course. Trial and error is often the only way to determine the best circulation rates and patterns for your individual set up.
There's so many other factors at work too.
How much decor and planting is there 'blocking' circulation? A typical Iwagumi layout will require less circulation output than a dense jungle, for instance.
What type of filter outlet do you have? A lily pipe has a different circulation pattern than a spray bar.
The size of the aquarium is a big factor too, of course. High energy large aquariums are much much tougher to achieve decent circulation.
All these factors combine to make the 10x rule nothing more than a rough, but good starting point guide.
https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads...-with-circulation-and-flow.11056/#post-117526
I first discussed it in a 2006 PFK article, I think. I wondered if anyone else would remember!
Here are some quotes from Mark Evans, who produced some amazing scapes and whose skill as a photographer is beyond reproach:
https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/dont-give-up-hope-a-6-month-window.15772/
With a lot of help from the UKAPS forums, there's all the answers people need.
Great guys to get help and feedback from, i for sure wouldn't be doing what i'm doing if it wasn't for many folk on here.
Yes, that's right. In early 2007 Mark Evans did not have a clue but we gave him
exactly the same advice as we are giving Wulfen and everyone else.
We do not advocate "other ways" used by Mr. So and So on a You Tube video. Does that seem autocratic? "My way or the Highway" kind of approach?
Yes it does, because we know that our way works just like it did for Mark Evans. So if someone chooses the route of Mr. So and So, and if things go wrong, well, the hobbyist will have to contact Mr. So and So. for advice. We know this way, and we know it quite well. So we will advocate this way every time.
Here is another Mark Evans tidbit:
Explaining the finer points of low flow versus high flow in this thread
https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/would-i-be-right-in-saying.13986/
Another stunning tank produce by Mark, using...wait for it....
https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/saintlys-240l-savannah-dreaming-scape-finished.9937/page-14
i'm using a number 2 rated @ 2300L/PH
and a number 3 rated @ 3200 L/PH
and an eheim rated @ 1500 L/PH
so totalling 7000 L/PH. extreme as it sounds, the flow is just right reaching even the parts of the tank directly underneath the outlets. Co2 distribution on this tank is spot on.
So please, people, can protestors get over the fact that we at UKAPS collectively choose to advocate high flow, and that high flow is more forgiving and is more conducive to GOOD flow?
Also, Is it possible to attempt a method seen on a You Tube video and then to fail at it?
The method is not usually the problem, the hobbyist's execution of the method is usually the problem.
So because we are familiar with our method it is much easier for us to troubleshoot problems if the member is using our method.
We do not deny that other methods work, we are however, convinced that the surest path is to use high flow and to use moderate light and to use large water changes while dosing nutrition eutrophically. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of threads here (if protestors would only search objectively) demonstrating that high flow can equate to GOOD flow more easily than can low flow, and that tanks improve dramatically when focus is given to flow/distribution.
Here is an example of my favorite poster child for using our way and not the highway:
https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/having-another-bash.11779/
we really had to bully this member in order for him to get going and to do things our way. Beginners really need to study that thread because it illustrate in no uncertain terms that our way works. Were folks upset that the OP was bullied into submission? Yes, most certainly, but I don't care. What I care about is that troubleshooting and adherence to Barr's principles were advocated and followed.
Hope this clarifies and hope protestors will curtail their harassment of our methods based on the above clarification.
Cheers,