Phosban and ROWAphos, which is better?
- Thread starter tonggao
- Start date
xinumaster
reef addict
I think one advantage of rowaphos can last for more than 3mo while phosban is only good for a month.
thereefgeek
New member
Should have come up for the WMC this weekend and asked the ROWA guy in person.
sfsuphysics
Active member
Yeah because you wouldn't get any bias from him
orientalexpress
New member
The only way to settle this is use both.I use both at one point.I find rowa do better job of removing phosphate by doing less cleaning the front glass.Even tho phosban does the good job but it's seem i clean the glass sooner .That from neutral opinion.gl 
lapsan
lapsan
I bought a jar of phosban...researched it, and immediatly whent out and got a container of RowaPhos. The rowa is iron based and the phosban is aluminum based. From my reading the aluminum can cause irritation in some corals, mostly soft. However you should be careful with either of these products. You do not want to lowwer you phosphates too fast, start of slow with these filter medias.
sfsuphysics
Active member
I used the Kent version too (PowerPhos?? Or something) which looked like a rip-off of the Rowa stuff, seemed to work ok, but the phosphate test kit I had was extremely difficult to read so I honest don't know how effective it was.
orientalexpress
New member
I'm pretty sure phosban is iron based also.i think u got it mix up phosguard which is aluminum based.gl
lapsan
lapsan
Paladin
New member
orientalexpress is correct, phosban and rowa are both iron based: http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/june2004/review.htm
otterpop510
New member
same question for me around which is more efficient, lasts longer, etc.. seems like elsewhere on RC threads seem to conclude rowaphos is better.. but don't really seem to have reasons why..
Ottopop -
I haven't used Rowaphos, but a lot of people equate more expensive = better product. While this is often the case, it's not always true. Also remember, that when you get phosban, it's by the dry weight. I believe that Rowaphos is by the wet weight. So a 100 gram of Phosban may be more than 100 gram of Rowaphos.
Richard Harker's article at least tries to do a objective testing on both products. I tend to trust his results more than someone say "Brand X is better than brand Y because...." without any empirical data to back up their statement.
Minh
I haven't used Rowaphos, but a lot of people equate more expensive = better product. While this is often the case, it's not always true. Also remember, that when you get phosban, it's by the dry weight. I believe that Rowaphos is by the wet weight. So a 100 gram of Phosban may be more than 100 gram of Rowaphos.
Richard Harker's article at least tries to do a objective testing on both products. I tend to trust his results more than someone say "Brand X is better than brand Y because...." without any empirical data to back up their statement.
Minh
otterpop510
New member
minh, i agree with you.. seems like there is a general sentiment that expensive=better, which actually is generally not the case (or at least more often than not..). the article seemed solid and right now i'm using phosban and it seems to work for me.. yeah, just wondering if folks who are using rowaphos know something i don't..
I've found that the removal of phosphates has been about equal from both (testing comes out the same...algae cleaning about the same), but I estimate that rowaphos lasts a bit longer- maybe 20% or so.
As others have mentioned though, the true cost per gram is tough to nain down because rowaphos is sold wet/damp unlike phosban. I didn't feel like rowaphos necessarily worked better, but just a bit longer...I use phosban now because I couldn't tell a real difference in my tank parameters or out-of-pocket cost....just needed to change it out a bit more often.
I spoke with the rowaphos guy at WMC and surprisingly he was not overly biased about Rowaphos. He actually said that Phosban was a good product and did the job well (and better than many others)...he told me the main benefits of using rowaphos was being 30% more effective (lasts 30% longer) than phosban, and because it did not have as many clumping issues (primarily if you don't use a reactor and only use it in a bag.) HTH
As others have mentioned though, the true cost per gram is tough to nain down because rowaphos is sold wet/damp unlike phosban. I didn't feel like rowaphos necessarily worked better, but just a bit longer...I use phosban now because I couldn't tell a real difference in my tank parameters or out-of-pocket cost....just needed to change it out a bit more often.
I spoke with the rowaphos guy at WMC and surprisingly he was not overly biased about Rowaphos. He actually said that Phosban was a good product and did the job well (and better than many others)...he told me the main benefits of using rowaphos was being 30% more effective (lasts 30% longer) than phosban, and because it did not have as many clumping issues (primarily if you don't use a reactor and only use it in a bag.) HTH
