![]() |
|
Portal | PhotoPost Gallery | Register | Blogs | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
View Poll Results: All-in-one controller or multiple controllers? | |||
Profilux or Aqua Controller II etc |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
38 | 77.55% |
Ranco temp, Tunze 7095, Pinpoint Ph, light timers etc |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
11 | 22.45% |
Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() If money was no object I think I'd go single controller, so long as it had the flexibility I would want.
Things that would make or break the deal for me: - fewer timers for lights and able to stagger lighting. Dimmable is a "meh" feature for me but staggering is nice - monitor the state of electrical outlets and alarm or callout if a circuit fails. I can't count how many times a GFCI has tripped in the middle of the night or when I was at work. It kills me that it's hard to find a simple plugin device that squeals if the power goes out. So an aquarium controller that does this would be worth it to me. GFCI's may save our lives, so they're good, but I've lost livestock due to me not knowing in a timely manner that they went out. Heck, I lost livestock YESTERDAY due to this very issue, so I'm still a little steamed on this one... I wish I had the money for a controller ... I need to sell off some stuff I guess. As far as controllers for reactors or monitoring pH or ORP .. Meh, I dunno. I have yet to really be convinced that keeping track of my pH or ORP is an important thing to do. Ca and Alk and NO3 are the only numbers that I really care about, and there's no such thing as an Alk monitor and the NO3 monitors aren't meant for continuous monitoring (they aren't, they really aren't) so for that aspect, a controller doesn't make or break the deal for me. For me the controller is the remote monitoring and safety failback features that just don't seem to be there otherwise.
__________________
-- Tony My next hobby will be flooding my basement while repeatedly banging my head against a brick wall and tearing up $100 bills. Whee! |
#12
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() Wow I'm the only person that voted for redundancy?
I'm not sure if I'm surprised or not... really, having everything in one spot is very convenient... But I do believe that having a separate controller for everything reduces the risk that if something goes wrong you don't lose the whole system, and since I like to buy one thing at a time, I don't want to spend what an all in one controller is worth. EDIT: Further, I think that the remote monitoring feature is cool on the controllers, and the fact that if the controller fails things stay 'status quo' assuming that an 'event' such as top-off wasn't occurring or the heater was in the 'on' position... I'm all about redundancy, even if I had a controller, I would still have a temperature controller, separate pH monitor (to make sure the controller wasn't inaccurate), etc... I like the extra net of safety but for someone like me it's just not worth the hundreds of dollars for remote monitoring and knowing if a GFCI was tripped. Well, unless I one day have a system that contains like 200 gallons, or more... than it would definitely be worth it because I would have lots of expensive livestock, so then any extra level of safety would be worth it, right?
__________________
Calvin --- Planning a 29 gallon mixed reef... Last edited by BlueAbyss; 02-10-2009 at 07:03 PM. |
#13
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() Well ..he did say "vote as if money was no object."
I thus voted controller. But I don't have one in real life. I use individual timers and controllers and whatnot. I would want some level of redundancy in a single controller if money were no object. So really, you're not quite alone in your thinking .. just didn't quite know how to capture that in a vote for one or the other..
__________________
-- Tony My next hobby will be flooding my basement while repeatedly banging my head against a brick wall and tearing up $100 bills. Whee! |
#14
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() I am going to say my vote is for an all in one. I have had my Profilux for a few years now. The thing I have been most happy with is upgrades. I can continue to add features to the unit without having to buy another controller to run different things on my system. Like my tunze's, price out a controller for the tunze then price out an auto top up system. And you'll find your not far off the mark of what a Profilux costs. I paid 25 buck for a pump for my auto top off and it is controlled by the profilux. I have had the power go out a few times on me aswell and the computer doesn't loose it's settings. My tunze's are battery backed so thats never been an issue.
But like I said I am very happy with being able to add so many features and save on costs of extra controllers that only do one thing. |
#15
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() I prefer an all in one solution simply for the ease of use. Now I just have to figure out which one.
__________________
Robb |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
![]() $599 Profilux beginner pack and lots of room to upgrade if you want the led lights and such,
always a happy reefer profilux makes. http://progressivereef.com/proddetai...rod=prflxp2bgn |
#17
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() Thought I have a PLC that can basically do anything I can think of, I voted for separate devices.
Upstairs below the tank my T5's ballasts are on a plug-in type timer. In the basement fish room, have my MH ballasts tucked away connected to a hardwired timer and the PLC by the sump on the other side of the room for the heater and evap fans. Don't turn of my pumps for feeding, Ca reactors stable so see no reason to control, my ATO is working perfect with a simple mechanical float valve... So between how I have things spread out and simplicity of a couple of timers and heat/cool controller, don't see the need for a dedicated aquarium controller. Guess I won't be able able to monitor my tank from across the country but for me, see the novelty wearing off fast with that anyways. |
#19
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() Don't get me wrong, I think controllers are great... I just missed the 'vote as if money were no object'. For someone of my thinking though, the controller would still be sort of an expensive timer, with e-mail
![]()
__________________
Calvin --- Planning a 29 gallon mixed reef... |
#20
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() There was a thread about this on nano-reef.com (i'll look for the link) but the guy who originally started it, sort of the controller guru over there basically showed that every controller fails, Yes despite what SOME claim, they ALL fail. With that being said the consensus was a ranco (which fail as well but are cheaper to replace) or a high end system like was used in a recent rc totm (huge system, did everything, but was basically professional level, not hobby level like ALL the ones normally associated with reef keeping) I;m not against controllers personally, if i were to buy one i'd get a aquatronica, seems they along with the reefkeeper elite/lite and neptune have dropped prices..while some...raise them. I think it is like anything else, if YOU want it get it
__________________
I once had a Big tank...I now have two Huskies and a coyote |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|