brad
Active member
It is well known the old Tunze advertised numbers were misleading:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2011/7/aafeature
Are the new numbers on Tunze's website any more accurate? The new 6105 is advertised at 3,400 GPH versus the 2358.2 GPH measured in the article. I know the 6105 got improvements, but is it really 44% better?
I care less about the absolute accuracy, and more about whether numbers are comparable between your pumps. For example, in the article, the Tunze 6305 was advertised as having well over twice the output of the 6105, but actually had 50% more output. Even though they are both great pumps, these numbers did a disservice to anyone who used them to buy a 6305 instead of 2 6105s.
Specifically, I'd like to buy several 6105s for a large tank, but would buy larger pumps if I got more GPH / $. Electrical efficiency is not a factor, as I am paying to heat the water.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2011/7/aafeature
Are the new numbers on Tunze's website any more accurate? The new 6105 is advertised at 3,400 GPH versus the 2358.2 GPH measured in the article. I know the 6105 got improvements, but is it really 44% better?
I care less about the absolute accuracy, and more about whether numbers are comparable between your pumps. For example, in the article, the Tunze 6305 was advertised as having well over twice the output of the 6105, but actually had 50% more output. Even though they are both great pumps, these numbers did a disservice to anyone who used them to buy a 6305 instead of 2 6105s.
Specifically, I'd like to buy several 6105s for a large tank, but would buy larger pumps if I got more GPH / $. Electrical efficiency is not a factor, as I am paying to heat the water.
