Tunze nano mod
- Thread starter mr pink floyd
- Start date
mr pink floyd
New member
glx, i would to the normal mod, the super flow, but not the widening mod.
in other words, trim down the inner tube, cut slot in the bottom of the outer tube, and put them in the tank!
each one will blow the water pretty far, and cause lots of indirect flow along the way. let us know how it goes
in other words, trim down the inner tube, cut slot in the bottom of the outer tube, and put them in the tank!
each one will blow the water pretty far, and cause lots of indirect flow along the way. let us know how it goes
Craig Lambert
Premium Member
Why anyone would mod the best ph available and void the best warrenty in the business is beyond me............
mr pink floyd
New member
maybe cause it doesnt void the warranty...
that topic has been covered many times, and tunze reps said it is not voided.
why someone would take an old proverb and try to make it funny is beyond me.......
(kidding)
that topic has been covered many times, and tunze reps said it is not voided.
why someone would take an old proverb and try to make it funny is beyond me.......
(kidding)
mr pink floyd
New member
i never put one on an seio controller, but i dont see how it would be any different than any other AC pump. I know a guy who has been running a few MJ mods on an SEIO controller with no ill effects.
i would do it, but im happy with the way things are going now. so i would say its worth a try, but im not expert, i have no idea what would happen, but i wouldnt think there would be anything bad
i would do it, but im happy with the way things are going now. so i would say its worth a try, but im not expert, i have no idea what would happen, but i wouldnt think there would be anything bad
glxtrix
New member
there was a thread somewhere about someone doing something like that but it was chattering the pump....turns out he needed a line conditioner to get to a true 120V and things went smooth. I also heard someone had some and they burned out after 8mos...but I dont know the truth behind it. Just wondering if you guys knew of anyone. I did put one of my maxi mods on it and it did work. Hopefully they will work....I might not even use it, i have a wave box coming now. I'll still most likely get a pair of 6025's for the fun 
Thanks Mike for the help.
Thanks Mike for the help.
Craig Lambert
Premium Member
chrismhaase
Active member
okay after reading through all 30 pages, I want to know if there are any finalized directions/pictures for the 6045 mod? I want to make sure it is done correctly.
Additionally, was the belief that the 6045 is just a few hundred gallons per hour less for $30 actually validated by Roger or someone who has some cold hard facts? I don't mean this to be a question that questions anyone's interpretation of statistics, but I am hoping atleast for my own sake that there is a definite difference between the 6025 and 6045 besides 200 GPH and $30.
Thanks, Chris
Additionally, was the belief that the 6045 is just a few hundred gallons per hour less for $30 actually validated by Roger or someone who has some cold hard facts? I don't mean this to be a question that questions anyone's interpretation of statistics, but I am hoping atleast for my own sake that there is a definite difference between the 6025 and 6045 besides 200 GPH and $30.
Thanks, Chris
atvdave
Premium Member
Just mod it the same way as the 6025. In fact if you haven't purchased the pump I would just get the 6025 if you plan to mod it. The good pics start on about page 8.
The modded 6025 & the modded 6045 pump very close to the same amount, so if your going to mod it just get the 6025 and save a little money.
Only the stock 6045 will pump more, the modded 6025 & 6045 pump very close to the same.
mr pink floyd
New member
Roger has said that the 6045 is basically the 6025, with a shorter inner tube.
so basically its the mod, just with some of the inner tube remaining.
so basically its the mod, just with some of the inner tube remaining.
KMP
Wag More; Bark Less
how about the KMP mod
we all contemplate different flow ideas. i had collected 2 6025s and OM Squirt 2 way and a Wavy Sea. only problem; no way was i going to be able to pump enough water for the OM and Wavy Sea. when i found out you can mount a MJ to the Wavy Sea i was happy, but didnt' like the look - so, this is what i ended up with:
OM Squirt on the return (to hit the back side of the aquascape):
And a 6025 mounted on a Wavy Sea. Simply used the MJ attachment and superglued it to the top of the 6025. I have a 70g Oceanic Tech tank so I've drilled two holes in the front corners. I will have a Wavy Sea 6025 in each corner sweeping to hit the front side of the aquascape):
we all contemplate different flow ideas. i had collected 2 6025s and OM Squirt 2 way and a Wavy Sea. only problem; no way was i going to be able to pump enough water for the OM and Wavy Sea. when i found out you can mount a MJ to the Wavy Sea i was happy, but didnt' like the look - so, this is what i ended up with:
OM Squirt on the return (to hit the back side of the aquascape):
And a 6025 mounted on a Wavy Sea. Simply used the MJ attachment and superglued it to the top of the 6025. I have a 70g Oceanic Tech tank so I've drilled two holes in the front corners. I will have a Wavy Sea 6025 in each corner sweeping to hit the front side of the aquascape):
Justin74
New member
Well after seeing this thread was kinda bummed at first because I own the 6045's. And seeing the flow results only fueld my own suspicions. But rather than sit and comiserate, I attemtped to vinidcate my choice, and my pumps seemingly checkered background
I sanded the exhaust pipe down approx. 1/8" because I didnt want to depend on the cap as a stopper, and also after reading the post how one shortened to the point where the velocity didnt carry through. I also with the dremel, extended the grills in the front of the shroud down to a 1/4" from the exhaust, but just every other grill and not all the way to the pipe to avoid weakening the structural integrity basically. I also made 2 parallel grooves on the bottom near the edge of the shroud. I didnt put any more grooves than the two becuase I was concerned about possible 'stray' exhaust flow so I didnt cut along the bottom of the pipe. Along with cutting the inner tube(nearly 1/2" at apex of curve) but didnt grind it totally flush and left a slight ridge where it once had been.
And um, WOW!! What a flippen difference! Before, I use to have slight hot spots you could say in terms of flow. Now it's pure surges and has transformed it from lagoonal to a reefcrest :lol:
Sweet find guys, and sweet thread. Thanks :thumbsup:
-Justin
I sanded the exhaust pipe down approx. 1/8" because I didnt want to depend on the cap as a stopper, and also after reading the post how one shortened to the point where the velocity didnt carry through. I also with the dremel, extended the grills in the front of the shroud down to a 1/4" from the exhaust, but just every other grill and not all the way to the pipe to avoid weakening the structural integrity basically. I also made 2 parallel grooves on the bottom near the edge of the shroud. I didnt put any more grooves than the two becuase I was concerned about possible 'stray' exhaust flow so I didnt cut along the bottom of the pipe. Along with cutting the inner tube(nearly 1/2" at apex of curve) but didnt grind it totally flush and left a slight ridge where it once had been.
And um, WOW!! What a flippen difference! Before, I use to have slight hot spots you could say in terms of flow. Now it's pure surges and has transformed it from lagoonal to a reefcrest :lol:
Sweet find guys, and sweet thread. Thanks :thumbsup:
-Justin
chrismhaase
Active member
Guys I know there have been many discussions on here about the 6025 and 6045 being very close in comparison and I without saying you are wrong maybe some info and design has been over looked. Check out this thread that talks about the difference and also talks about the conspiracy theory of the 6025 vs. 6045.
Look at my question--
I have been reading about modding the nanostreams on here. One thing I keep seeing is that people are accusing Tunze as falsely and incorrectly stating the flow of the 6025 vs. 6045. I know there are a lot of idiots out there so I figured I would ask your professional opinion. Here is a quote that started my question "
The fact remains as jacmyoung said earlier.
From day one, we stated that the 6025's flow outperformed the spec of 660GPH, and the 6045's flow performance grossly under performed the 1189 (1100 revised) GPH spec.
For those people that are not interested in modding pumps, the stock 6045 is only pumping ~200GPH more than the stock 6025.
THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL CLAIM AS OF A FEW MONTHS BACK, AND SADLY ENOUGH STILL HOLDS TRUE TODAY.
There are thousands of views of this thread and many hundreds of people own both models. NOT ONE HAS YET TO COME OUT AND DISPUTE jacmyoung's or my flow measurements on either pump.
As I have repeatedly said, the nanostream powerhead is the overall best powerhead in the market today, (based on form, fit, and function); But that doesn't negate the fact that the stock 6045 grossly underperforms the published flow spec even after it was revised to 1100gph.
My earlier $30 comment referred to the flow performance difference on the stock 6025 vs the stock 6045.
The Tunze spec never advertised modding activities, stopper reliability and cleaning frequency requirements to justify the $30 premium. All they said was, it looks the same and pumps 1189 vs 660. The other comments and "benefits" were made and /or "discovered" (if indeed they are true) by us the hobbyist community. So, it's now up to you, the educated consumer to decipher the true data from the marketing fluff.
Enjoy..."
Reference: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/s...5&pagenumber=25
And here is my answer:
Chris I received this from Roger.
"John,
The actual flow is 720 and 1100, this is true but it was not due to any deliberate attempt to deceive and I would simply ask the question of how accurate are most pump ratings, we are off by less than 10% which is within German legal requirements. Unfortunately some things change from prototype to final product and any flow calculation on a prop pump is a crude calculation as they don't have the pressure to work with flow meters and the only two methods you can use are dye dispersion or collecting the flow and trying to guestimate head losses (the method we used). That is a nearly 400gph difference and the guy that originally claimed 200gph difference (skydancer) did not take any head pressure into account, he put a pipe on the pump, pumped the water into a bag and calculated it out, the 6025 has a greater head pressure capacity so the flow will be more accurate, the 6045 is much lower pressure flow as the shorter internal tube greatly reduces pressure."
"The fact of the matter is that the mod will give virtually equal flow to a 6045 but it will usually result in more noise and a much longer time before rotation is corrected"
"Generally speaking the 6045 is more stoutly built with stronger tabs to lock on the front cover and more potting over the motor coil so there are differences in build quality outside just flow numbers. Yes, the 6025 and 6045 have the same motor coil and the same impeller, only the physical characteristics of the housing are changed."
Thread where 6025 vs 6045 is compared:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1035674&highlight=6025+6045
Just thought I would pass on my research I have found, now you have to draw your own conclusions.
Chris
Look at my question--
I have been reading about modding the nanostreams on here. One thing I keep seeing is that people are accusing Tunze as falsely and incorrectly stating the flow of the 6025 vs. 6045. I know there are a lot of idiots out there so I figured I would ask your professional opinion. Here is a quote that started my question "
The fact remains as jacmyoung said earlier.
From day one, we stated that the 6025's flow outperformed the spec of 660GPH, and the 6045's flow performance grossly under performed the 1189 (1100 revised) GPH spec.
For those people that are not interested in modding pumps, the stock 6045 is only pumping ~200GPH more than the stock 6025.
THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL CLAIM AS OF A FEW MONTHS BACK, AND SADLY ENOUGH STILL HOLDS TRUE TODAY.
There are thousands of views of this thread and many hundreds of people own both models. NOT ONE HAS YET TO COME OUT AND DISPUTE jacmyoung's or my flow measurements on either pump.
As I have repeatedly said, the nanostream powerhead is the overall best powerhead in the market today, (based on form, fit, and function); But that doesn't negate the fact that the stock 6045 grossly underperforms the published flow spec even after it was revised to 1100gph.
My earlier $30 comment referred to the flow performance difference on the stock 6025 vs the stock 6045.
The Tunze spec never advertised modding activities, stopper reliability and cleaning frequency requirements to justify the $30 premium. All they said was, it looks the same and pumps 1189 vs 660. The other comments and "benefits" were made and /or "discovered" (if indeed they are true) by us the hobbyist community. So, it's now up to you, the educated consumer to decipher the true data from the marketing fluff.
Enjoy..."
Reference: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/s...5&pagenumber=25
And here is my answer:
Chris I received this from Roger.
"John,
The actual flow is 720 and 1100, this is true but it was not due to any deliberate attempt to deceive and I would simply ask the question of how accurate are most pump ratings, we are off by less than 10% which is within German legal requirements. Unfortunately some things change from prototype to final product and any flow calculation on a prop pump is a crude calculation as they don't have the pressure to work with flow meters and the only two methods you can use are dye dispersion or collecting the flow and trying to guestimate head losses (the method we used). That is a nearly 400gph difference and the guy that originally claimed 200gph difference (skydancer) did not take any head pressure into account, he put a pipe on the pump, pumped the water into a bag and calculated it out, the 6025 has a greater head pressure capacity so the flow will be more accurate, the 6045 is much lower pressure flow as the shorter internal tube greatly reduces pressure."
"The fact of the matter is that the mod will give virtually equal flow to a 6045 but it will usually result in more noise and a much longer time before rotation is corrected"
"Generally speaking the 6045 is more stoutly built with stronger tabs to lock on the front cover and more potting over the motor coil so there are differences in build quality outside just flow numbers. Yes, the 6025 and 6045 have the same motor coil and the same impeller, only the physical characteristics of the housing are changed."
Thread where 6025 vs 6045 is compared:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1035674&highlight=6025+6045
Just thought I would pass on my research I have found, now you have to draw your own conclusions.
Chris
skydancer
New member
The statement above is FALSE. If you review the first few pages of this thread you'll see that I used the same method to test both pumps (6025 6045) and there was no pipe(s) involved. Just a plain 'ol home depot bucket. You're welcome to do the same test. It'll only cost you 5 bucks (the price of the bucket). The facts are the facts...
Or you can review the original thread when I first discovered the flow discrepancy.
The facts are the facts. The 6045 pumps about 920GPH (unmodded), not the advertised 1100.
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1044334
FOR THE RECORD.
I have absolutely nothing against TUNZE. I think they are a very good company and put out excellent products for our hobby. When I first discovered the flow discrepancy, Roger rubbed me the wrong way since he suggested that I was there to defame Tunze. That's water under the bridge...
I was one of the first people to buy 3 6025s. I still own them and I'm very happy with them.
Since then, I have purchased 2 6055s and I'm planning to buy 2 more 6055s. In all honesty right now I have "strategically" placed 5 nanostreams (3 6025s, 2 6055s) in my 300G and you can hardly notice them. They're putting out about 7000GPH flow and you don't even know they are there.
Even when I put the additional 2 6055s and get up to 10000GPH you're still not going to know they are there.
IMO, the nanostream powerhead is the best one on the market today (form, fit, function).
Mark my words... in 5 years the 610X will look like the nanostream. There is so much potential in this design and we all like small powerheads in our show tanks. Don't we?
.
