Undergravel versus Powered filter discussion

[LondonGman]

I presume this issue has been discussed here before but I cannot see anywhere recent. I accept it is controversial but I (and I presume others) would like to see a nice discussion on the issue that can resolve opposing views and personal experiences. NO pillow fights please.

The main article that everyone links to argue against using the UGF is
http://www.bestfish.com/ug.html

while those that use UGF it will relate to the article linked here
http://www.petlibrary.com/fw_trops_ugfilter.htm

further searching on the internet will reveal opposing views on the issue. I suppose if your fish tank is a miniature section of the Great Barrier Reef or a jamjar then specialised power filters may be needed but in the 12” to 48 “ tank, which most newbies would get, I would think the argument for specialised equipment is diminished.

Note I am new to this hobby and only a 20 post “Apprentice” but I do love my twin uplifts in my tank with long air stone in the gravel.

 

[tkos]

UGF's do not allow for planted tanks as they will eventually get clogged with roots. Plus eventually with a UGF you will have to tear the tank apart to clean it out.

A HOB or canister filter is the best option as it allows you to clean the filter every week without disturbing the tank.

 

[Terry]

I am a great lover of power filters, my favourite make is Eheim, but thats me. In my shop all my tanks are UGF, this is not through choice but cost. with regular water changes and gravel cleans i have not had any trouble. i can stock my tanks the same as any other shop in my area and some of them have multi systems that are linked together and cost them a packet.
There are so many filters out there now and the choice is mind boggling, everybody has there own favourites.
I agree with tkos that UGF are not very good with plants and they are a nightmare with cichlids keep moving the gravel around, but apart from that there OK.

 

[shawmutt]

One of the first things I did when I inherited my fish tank was remove the ugf. I decided I didn't want to re-cycle a well established tank, so I attempted to take the filter out without emptying the tank (no fish were in it at the time, just the water that I saved and put back in the tank after I moved it). It was probably the single most disgusting thing I have ever done in my life--any fish in the tank would have died instantly--I almost died!!! Although the tank was well maintained, the ugf had not been moved in 5 years. Think fish septic tank. For this reason alone, I will never have an ugf in any tank I will own.

 

[Terry]

Shawmutt,
i think after 5yrs it must of smelt like a septic tank hahahah. people don't realise that you don't have to remove a UGF to clean underneath it. All you do is get a peace of tubing 12mm and pass it down the uplift tube of the undergravel until you reach the bottom of the tank. Then syphon, it draws all the crap from underneath the filter plate without disturbing the gravel etc.etc.

 

[tkos]

I think the real problem with a UGF is that if you choose one you limit what can be done with the tank. No plants, no cichlids, only larger rocks for a substrate (ie no sand or flourite). A canister is pretty much the best choice, but the HOB are generally a close second, especially for smaller tanks.