SPS keeping without CA reactor?

[Laakmann]

How nececary is it to have a calcium reactor when keeping SPS corals?

I only wanted to keep a few in with an LPS tank that is going to be dosed with kalkwasser.

 

[Laakmann]

I jsut thought of a better question which is can you keep SPS corals convienently without a CA reactor?

 

[J4Life]

IMO it isn't necessary but more of a matter of convenience. A CA reactor would keep you from having to dose calcium supplements, but personally I think using a dosing pump and Randy Holmes-Farley's two part additive method is just as effective and cheaper also.

HTH's,
Bill

 

[scyphozoa]

I don't use a Ca Reactor and have been using two-part only to keep Alk & Ca levels in check since 2003 or so. You can take a look at my SPS growth rates in this thread if interested

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=802215

In my case thus far the two-part has not been cost prohibative and I don't trust the CO2 tank of a reactor around my pets and for other reasons. Any automated Ca delivery system chosen can malfunction though so make sure to safeguard for this.

 

[Ralph ATL]

I do not use a Ca Reactor, I use a 2-part (C-balance).

 

[SALT WATER CRAZ]

You dont have to have a ca reactor to keep sps. I dont have a ca reactor.I dose with seachem products never had a problem.Thought I wish I had a ca reactor for convenience of not having to hand dose all the time.Pluse most of the tanks I see with them seam to have better growth.I would amagin it is becuse there is less fluctuation in there paramiters.

 

[reefdood]

As long as you keep the Ca. and alk. up, it shouldn't matter what means you use.

My old tank was supplemented with only kalkwasser topoff and B-Ionic.

 

[Laakmann]

i am going to start a new thread with some new questions that I have, thanks for the help