Aquaforest vs. zeovite

[LeslieS88]

Ok, so I'm going to completely strip my 65 and start over. New lights, sump...everything. I'll be adding a ghl doser as well.

My question is, which us better zeo or aquaforest?

Looking forward to opinions!

 

[Bpb]

Zeovit has a much longer running and significant review base. AF is fairly new.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ClownNut]

i run zeovit a few years ago and run AF now.(everything from np pro, bio pro s, comp 1,2&3 and ABEV)
i feels AF just a water down version of zeovit.
i like AF you dont need a reactor and dont need to shake the reactor 2x daily, but zeovit is more aggressive/effective. AF works great for nutrient control, but i am just not getting the pastel look from AF, even thought my NO3 is at 0(redsea) po4 at 0(hanna PPB), high par. AF energy claim it contains cuso4 that similar to zeovit spur2, but you can see much better result from the spur 2. after i am done with what i have for ABEV. i will switch back to zeovit for that. i think the zeovit will give me better result.

 

[tamama]

It's such an obvious choice. Zeovit.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Piper27]

I could not get much of a pastel look from aquaforest either. I was using a lot of the energy and had no luck. I think with larger and bigger fish loads aquaforest won't be as effective as zeovit. For smaller tanks aquaforest would be my choice because it's easier to use and easier to not stress out corals. Assuming it's your first time using a zeolite program. I would definitely shake the zeolite, I don't see why letting them sit and get dirty would help them preform. I always thought things did better when I was shaking the reactor daily, nutrients stayed low better as well.

 

[StarF]

If you are running AF and dont get teh pastel colors you want, why not just use some of the zeovit products then? like zeospur?

 

[ClownNut]

If you are running AF and dont get teh pastel colors you want, why not just use some of the zeovit products then? like zeospur?

i have also the same result with AF or redsea as far as nutrient control goes.
the AF will run me about $32/month for my dosage. Redsea is about $26 at full recommended dosage(before i switch i think i was only use about 50% of the recommended dosage). money is not the biggest issue here. but the advantage ifor redsea is redsea doesnt need bacteria added daily which mean i can be on vacation and not have to worry about that task. the reason i switch from redsea to AF was the alk/ca/mg cost for redsea especially the Ca @ $42/g stock solution is outrageously high compare to other brands.

 

[jda]

What are you looking to get out of this? Neither might be able to achieve it... or both. What do you mean by "better?"

I would caution you not to do either if you like to tinker, or hate to tinker. If you like to think too much and mess with stuff, then you can get too tempted to experiment. Both of these systems are better for folks who are disciplined enough to just follow directions without thinking.

You might be able to get the same results with just a berlin-style tank and maybe a bit of organic carbon dosing down the road. Neither one of these are even remotely necessary for an awesome tank.

 

[shih87]

I choose KZ and Af mixed. Af give me better cost down I need and KZ bacteria work better. Shake or not shake zeolite more like commercial language to me and I believe shake give better result.

You can refer to my thread to see some results. Before June 2016, I was completely Zeovit, and after was the mix I mentioned above.