Genx PCX 55 + bullet 2?

[Graham]

Bacterial flock = detritus...pretty much.
Anything, no matter how small, that contains anything a bacteria can utilize as a nutrient will be covered in it (bacteria). In that respect, you are indeed skimming loads of bacteria all the time.

John, bacteria are good, you're right. But that's a gross overgeneralization. They're also what makes lots of nutrients available to the system in the first place. When you skim, a large non-liquid portion of what you are removing is indeed bacterial biomass. Perhaps we need to do up some cultures on a bit of skimmate? The bacteria in our tanks grow there because they can "feed" on something that's there....and there are many many different kinds in any tank at any time. They're not removed when they're growing on a surface, but the water column and just about everything suspended in it is covered in them, too. They rule the tank.

[redwinger]

G, I am not doubting that one bit. The idea is to get the crap out in which the bacteria are feasting upon, right? Yes, the skimmer is pulling bacteria but it is pulling the detritus which is covered in bacteria. My point is that the skimmers main job is getting the nasties out not the bacteria that is associated with it. I completelly agree they rule the tank that is what we are striving for. At least that is how I understand it.

[Graham]

But John, I think you are doubting it. On the previous page, you said something about skimmers and pulling out bacteria poop and how you couldn't believe they could. Well, lots of your nutrients are either bacteria "poop" (rather, metabolic byproducts) or bacterial biomass. Where do you think nitrate comes from? Nitrite? Phosphate? It's all because of bacteria. You can't separate detritus from bacteria and you can't separate bacteria from nutrients. Plus, with all the nutrients that get locked up/generated in bacterial biomass/flock/biofilms, they are as much a direct contributor/component to your nutrient load as the food on which they feast. They can't and don't exist without each other - and you just can't consider them independently. If you do, you're missing the whole picture.

[elephen]

Originally Posted by ereefic

Wow, making a claim like that, I hope you have something to back that up and this isn't just a chip on your shoulder.

Please elaborate on your comments with specifics.

Nope not a chip on my shoulder at all, just stating facts.

If you have been around in this hobby/industry for a while you'll know this already... PM has been around for quite some time, although Mike was not the first one to use a beckett foam head on a skimmer, he was in fact the first person to use a beckett foam head on a skimmer with a box. He was the one who basically poineered the design of the 'bottom-box' skimmer that we all (well maybe not you NW guys hehehe) love today.

I'm not sure on a exact timeline but the Bullet has been out longer then Andy @ MRC has known how to fabricate acrylic. No pun intended there. He took the design of the Bullet, added a union, changed the color and put a different air valve on there and called it a MR-1/2/etc...

Now personally I like the color options and the quick disconnect, I think its a good idea. So I have no dirt on either PM nor MRC, I simply just stated the MR-1/2/3 are knock-offs of the Bullet.

MRC doesn't have some of the nice machines like PM does either (I have spoken both with Andy and Mike about their machinery...) I like the PM because any tapped hole is 110% perfectly straight due to a $3,000 hole tapper they have. MRC is done by hand so it doesn't get tapped perfectly straight and there is always a change it may leak just a little bit of air. Not that it'll affect anything. MRC also flame polishes their acrylic, now if you know anything about acrylic fabrication or have a friend who does, ask them what they think about flame polishing. Its basically a way to cover up for a 'not-so-nice' fabricating job. Now this is coming from 2 very reputablee acrylic fabricators that I personally know and neither have any problems/issues/etc with MRC or PM.

Alright I'm done rambling.

[redwinger]

Originally Posted by Graham

But John, I think you are doubting it. On the previous page, you said something about skimmers and pulling out bacteria poop and how you couldn't believe they could. Well, lots of your nutrients are either bacteria "poop" (rather, metabolic byproducts) or bacterial biomass. Where do you think nitrate comes from? Nitrite? Phosphate? It's all because of bacteria. You can't separate detritus from bacteria and you can't separate bacteria from nutrients. Plus, with all the nutrients that get locked up/generated in bacterial biomass/flock/biofilms, they are as much a direct contributor/component to your nutrient load as the food on which they feast. They can't and don't exist without each other - and you just can't consider them independently. If you do, you're missing the whole picture.

Graham, I am not doubting you or others for that matter and completelly agree that yes it is pulling out bacteria, however the orignial statement was that it is "pulling out bacteria". That sounds discriminatory to me . If that was the case you could just protein skim and never do a water change. I took the statement as it is stripping bacteria out of the water collumn. That being said if that was the case you could protein skim your ro water to get it to 0 TDS(heavy exageration). Yes detritus is covered in bacteria and all other solids that are being removed but it is not stripping the bactteria out of the water column competelly. IMO

[Wiskey]

I didn't say the skimmer removed all of your bacteria, just that it does remove bacteria. You had said that a skimmer does not remove phospate, I was simply explaining one of the many ways that it does.

Whiskey

[Graham]

If bacteria is in the water column and it goes through your skimmer, it is susceptible to being skimmed. How well depends on your skimmer's efficiency. This is not in question and bacteria is being pulled out in every drop of water. Not only baceteria, but always bacteria.

As for water changes...and I'm not trying to be argumentative, but there are lots of people that rarely change their water and there are some that haven't changed it in years (though I don't advocate that extreme). Those that do are not likely doing it with the intent of removing bacteria (as I would infer from your statement above). If you aren't vaccuuming detritus, you aren't really reducing your nutrient load that much. Along with that, if you have an efficient (BB) setup, there shouldn't be that much detritus settling that needs to be siphoned anyway. With that, one could certainly debate the need for water changes in a well-engineered BB tank. One could also debate the merits of water changes in a tank with a sandbed if the sand is not vaccuumed. Trace elements may be more than adequately replenished by feeding, Ca reactor media and its associated impurities as well as any kind of commercial additives that are dosed. Not to mention that salt mixes have several times higher concentrations of trace minerals and metals than NSW. Why do you change water?
Why is it necessary? Is it really?

[ereefic]

Originally Posted by elephen

Nope not a chip on my shoulder at all, just stating facts.

If you have been around in this hobby/industry for a while you'll know this already... PM has been around for quite some time, although Mike was not the first one to use a beckett foam head on a skimmer, he was in fact the first person to use a beckett foam head on a skimmer with a box. He was the one who basically poineered the design of the 'bottom-box' skimmer that we all (well maybe not you NW guys hehehe) love today.

I'm not sure on a exact timeline but the Bullet has been out longer then Andy @ MRC has known how to fabricate acrylic. No pun intended there. He took the design of the Bullet, added a union, changed the color and put a different air valve on there and called it a MR-1/2/etc...

Now personally I like the color options and the quick disconnect, I think its a good idea. So I have no dirt on either PM nor MRC, I simply just stated the MR-1/2/3 are knock-offs of the Bullet.

MRC doesn't have some of the nice machines like PM does either (I have spoken both with Andy and Mike about their machinery...) I like the PM because any tapped hole is 110% perfectly straight due to a $3,000 hole tapper they have. MRC is done by hand so it doesn't get tapped perfectly straight and there is always a change it may leak just a little bit of air. Not that it'll affect anything. MRC also flame polishes their acrylic, now if you know anything about acrylic fabrication or have a friend who does, ask them what they think about flame polishing. Its basically a way to cover up for a 'not-so-nice' fabricating job. Now this is coming from 2 very reputablee acrylic fabricators that I personally know and neither have any problems/issues/etc with MRC or PM.

Alright I'm done rambling.

Ok, this is far different than your first statement about the quality being 'night and day' between the two skimmers.

Besides the $3,000 dollar machine to drill a hole (which seems the only hole this would drill if for the air intake valve) and the flame polishing, I was expecting some big differences mentioned by you.

I don't know alot about acrylic fabrication, but I thought flame polishing was basically to make the edges of acrylic nice and smooth. I can't see this as a quality issue. Don't most acrylic tank builders flame polish there tanks?

Knock off or not, I could care less. It's a quality product at a cheaper price. I don't mind not paying the manufactures cost of a $3,000 piece of equipment to drill a hole. The hole might not be perfectly straight, but it works just the same. But I guess I can see how some people might have a problem with that.

Either way, don't think you can go wrong with a PM or MRC skimmer, both will get the job done, one will just save you a little cash.

[REEF-DADDY]

Originally Posted by redwinger

Graham, I am not doubting you or others for that matter and completelly agree that yes it is pulling out bacteria, however the orignial statement was that it is "pulling out bacteria". That sounds discriminatory to me . If that was the case you could just protein skim and never do a water change. I took the statement as it is stripping bacteria out of the water collumn. That being said if that was the case you could protein skim your ro water to get it to 0 TDS(heavy exageration). Yes detritus is covered in bacteria and all other solids that are being removed but it is not stripping the bactteria out of the water column competelly. IMO

Your right assuming your skimmer is 100% efficient and you can get 100% of your waste to your skimmer.

[NoSchwag]

again, I dont do water changes. But I do skim wet and siphon.

Tell me if I have this right..

My big UV removes pathogens and breaks P bonds which is taken up by phyto/creates bacterial flock (aka bacterial ditritus). Then my skimmer removes phyto + bacterial flock (assuming is is correctly running wet).

Also since my skimmate is green I am doing somthing right.

Sound good?

[Wiskey]

I ORDERED MY SKIMMER!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am so excited, I can't wait! I e-mailed Andy, and he e-mailed me right back and answered my questions about submerging the skimmer, what it comes with and my ozone port questions. I will keep you all informed.

Whiskey

[ereefic]

Originally Posted by Wiskey

I ORDERED MY SKIMMER!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am so excited, I can't wait! I e-mailed Andy, and he e-mailed me right back and answered my questions about submerging the skimmer, what it comes with and my ozone port questions. I will keep you all informed.

Whiskey

Lost another one to MRC.

[Wiskey]

What do you mean "lost another one", I joined you

Whiskey

[redwinger]

He was referring to Reef daddy I believe. I think he lives by my motto "good things aren't cheap and cheap things aren't good." Congrats on the skimmer.

[ereefic]

Ever see those 'Ditech' commercials about home loans?