Eheim Classic media container: 2213 only, or others also?

[ColeMan]

Ha! I was wondering where you were - I guessing your quick appearance is the result of you "sensing" there was an eheim user in distress somewhere?

[lescarpentier]

Originally Posted by ColeMan

Ha! I was wondering where you were - I guessing your quick appearance is the result of you "sensing" there was an eheim user in distress somewhere?

Yeah,tis true,but I see that fsh is already holding the fort and doing a remarkable job at it.

I love Eheim threads!

[turdb0]

To the Bat Cave!

EDIT: Replace Bat with Eheim

[ron521]

Originally Posted by turdb0

I got a Eheim Classic 2213 that must be at least 5 years old. Not sure if the designed has changed. This was thrown in with the used fishtank I bought so I decided to see if it works. It looks like the impeller still works when I plug in the power. The only thing that appears to be missing is the "media basket". Do I need this media basket for the filter to work properly? I know the 2215 or 2217 DONT have these media baskets. If I don't get a replacement media basket, can I just use one of the lattice screens from a 2217, or not using any screens at all? Or would that defeat the purpose of the filter.

Thanks.

If you look carefully at the green lower housing of your 2213, you will notice that on the inside, near the securing clips, there is a narrow ridge or "shelf" about 1/8" wide, which runs around the circumference of the inner wall.

The media container (which you don't yet have) has a corresponding lip running around the top edge which, when the media container is inserted in the lower housing, rests on top of this "shelf".

When the motor housing is inserted into the green lower housing, the lip on the media container is sandwiched between the lower surface of the motor housing and the ridge on the green lower housing, which effectively seals water from bypassing the container.

With the securing clips fastened, you can shake the whole assembly vertically, and the media container will not move, as there is no vertical room for it to move. This also means that there is no easy path for water to get around the container. The easiest path is through the media in the container as Eheim intended.

To be sure, there is a small space for water around the media container below the lip, but that water cannot easily find a way above the lip, the seal is simply too good.

Anyone with a 2213 and a media container can test this statement by putting a plastic sandwich bag over the lower part of the media container and securing it with a rubber band. You can also perform the test using a couple of layers of saran wrap or an equivalent plastic film.

If you do this, you will find that you have extreme difficulty drawing in enough water to even prime the filter, thus proving that the lip at the top of the media container seals sufficiently well to allow no significant bypass.

A similar design has been used for years as a cylinder head gasket for many motorcycles as well as the EMD engines in diesel locomotives.
It is a beautifully simple and effective design.

To answer your question, you CAN use larger lattice screens if you wish, cut down appropriately. You can also purchase lattice screens to fit the 2213 although I've heard they are not easy to find.

If you do operate without the media container, you will have to also cut down any filter pads or sponges you use from a larger size, as the ones for the 2213 are intended to fit the inside of the media container, so are a loose fit inside the green lower housing.

Using the media container circumvents all these issues, allowing you to buy pads off the shelf. It also greatly simplifies periodic maintainence. I use mine and like it. Some people don't like them.

The only way to know for sure if it suits you is to try one and see for yourself.

[ColeMan]

I simply can't believe that the media basket allows for zero bypass...it doesn't make any sense. As a matter of fact, I would go out on a limb and speculate the eheim wouldn't make this type of claim either...however, I will grant you the fact that this statement:

Originally Posted by ron521

The only way to know for sure if it suits you is to try one and see for yourself.

leaves no room for disagreement...

[lescarpentier]

Originally Posted by ColeMan

I simply can't believe that the media basket allows for zero bypass...it doesn't make any sense. As a matter of fact, I would go out on a limb and speculate the eheim wouldn't make this type of claim either...however, I will grant you the fact that this statement:

leaves no room for disagreement...

You're absolutely right.
That basket wasn't made to very tight tolerances,and the pump head does not fit firmly against that lip.In addition,there is plenty of room between the basket and the canister to allow pond snails to take up residence there.What a waste of valuable media space!

Significant bypass? For a filter that barely pumps 100 gallons an hour even a few of gallons per hour is significant.This coupled with the roughly 20% gain in media capacity leaves little room for debate.

[ron521]

I actually performed the test as I described, so I can authoritatively state that there is not enough water available flowing around that lip to even prime the filter. This should qualify in any reasonable persons mind as "negligible" or "insignificant" bypass.

However, I am hardly surprised the Les would gainsay my statements, even though he has NOT performed the test as I did, but is merely offering his armchair speculation

Sorry Les, but you are simply WRONG in this matter. Your opinion is based on nothing but conjecture, and is not backed up by any actual measurement or test, so is therefore worthless. Deal with it.

Go ahead, perform the test as I described, and post your results on this thread. In fact, why don't we open it up for everyone who owns a 2213 to perform the same test, and post their results as well.

In this manner, we can use the scientific method to reach a consensus as to whether there is any significant bypass around the media container.

[ColeMan]

Originally Posted by ron521

Sorry Les, but you are simply WRONG in this matter. Your opinion is based on nothing but conjecture, and is not backed up by any actual measurement or test, so is therefore worthless. Deal with it.

Well isn't his just the pot calling the kettle black! Perhaps you should do a bit more research before calling someone's thoughts "conjecture, not backed up by any actual measurement or test..."
http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/eq...-increase.html

[turdb0]

I just looked at it all in detail last night and Les, I did find the lattice screens in a box somewhere. I thought they were junk, hehe. It seems like the previous owner already did away with the media basket. Now I get to put it all together and try it out when I go dig up some media.

Thanks all.

[lauraleellbp]

Seems the ability to disagree without getting rude and personal is quite a challenge... it's a pretty good life skill IMO, however.

[lescarpentier]

Originally Posted by ron521

I actually performed the test as I described, so I can authoritatively state that there is not enough water available flowing around that lip to even prime the filter. This should qualify in any reasonable persons mind as "negligible" or "insignificant" bypass.

Any bypass is significant.With the Classics we expect 0% bypass,and people like me will not settle for any bypass whatsoever.The lack of rubber seals for prevention pretty much guarantees that there will be some bypass.

Originally Posted by ron521

However, I am hardly surprised the Les would gainsay my statements, even though he has NOT performed the test as I did, but is merely offering his armchair speculation

Test? What kind of testing have you done? Anybody with an inkling of sense knows that you will need full,or near full flow to prime this filter.Therefore your test is flawed from the beginning.I witnessed the movement of particles between the basket and the canister,which clearly indicates bypass to me.

Originally Posted by ron521

Sorry Les, but you are simply WRONG in this matter. Your opinion is based on nothing but conjecture, and is not backed up by any actual measurement or test, so is therefore worthless. Deal with it.

Is it your mission to attempt to prove me wrong and to discredit my work? Spend your time wisely instead,and post test results for the Penguin HOB filters that you so strongly advocate.

Originally Posted by ron521

Go ahead, perform the test as I described, and post your results on this thread. In fact, why don't we open it up for everyone who owns a 2213 to perform the same test, and post their results as well.

Sorry,but the testing on the 2213 has been concluded.I posted my findings and threw the slimy basket into the trash.I am convinced of my findings,and you are free to disagree with them.You have never owned a Classic that has no basket so you don't know what to expect.Maybe you can be happy with an aberration,but I can't.
If the baskets were so good,why are they conspicuously absent in the other Classics?

Originally Posted by turdb0

I just looked at it all in detail last night and Les, I did find the lattice screens in a box somewhere. I thought they were junk, hehe. It seems like the previous owner already did away with the media basket. Now I get to put it all together and try it out when I go dig up some media.

Thanks all.

I am glad that you found them,and you are fortunate that the previous owner saw fit to eliminate this basket.
Without the basket your 2213 is a TRUE Classic.

[Left C]

I found some 2213 lattices: http://www.petblvd.com/cgi-bin/pb/EH...?mv_pc=froogle

I got this info from Eheim:
"The EHEIM 2213 requires the use of two lattice screen item # 7273050. Unfortunately the coarse pads for the actual 2213 are too small to fit this setup therefore you will need to purchase EHEIM 2215 or EHEIM ECCO filter pads and cut them in order to fit this unit.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require further assistance.

Yours truly,

Ernesto Cedeno

Technical Support"

[ColeMan]

Hey LeftC - do you have anything to add about your own personal experiences with this particular filter (as far as the media basket/bypass are concerned)?

I've tried to email eheim and whenever I submit my message I'm redirected to an error page...when I call I'm on hold for a while, then transferred to an anonymous voice mailbox...am I missing something? Do you have a direct e-mail address for eheim customer support?

[ron521]

Originally Posted by ColeMan

Well isn't his just the pot calling the kettle black! Perhaps you should do a bit more research before calling someone's thoughts "conjecture, not backed up by any actual measurement or test..."
http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/eq...-increase.html

Thanks for the link ColeMan, but I had already read this thread, and there is no qualitative mention made of bypass, only that snails lived in the space between the canister housing and the media container.

Therefore, it is not relevant to the topic under discussion, specifically, how much water bypasses the media container.

However, I extend to you the same invitation which I extended to Les, namely, conduct the test as I did, and post YOUR results here.

[ColeMan]

Unfortunately I don't own a 2213...but maybe someday...And on that day, you;d better believe I'll be screwing around with it trying to answer the question for myself. I'd like to see what eheim has to say about this; I've got another question for them and figured I might as well ask...In this situation, since I don't own the filter in question, I can only speculate as to what makes sense to me. It still leaves one wondering: if they are so useful, as les asked earlier, why hasn't the design made its way into the rest of the classic line?