07-26-2011, 04:48 PM
| || | Ok, taken your concerns into consideration heres the side by side comparison: CLASSIC:
Model ##221122132215221722602262Aq. size up to USgal406692159396Pump output approx USgal/h60116164264635Del. head approx Hmaxft3'11"4'11"5'11"7'6"12'1"Power consumptionW58152065Canister Volume USgal.45.921.251.746.07Filter volume approx USgal.26.801.101.604.80Dimensions HxWxDin4.3x11.46.3x147.3x14.614.0x16.314.0x22.4
It looks like the ecco can hold more filter volume, has a larger canister volume, and its recommend for tanks around 35gal. This does seem like a smarter choice compared to the 2215 i was looking at. I plan i keeping fancy goldfish in this tank later on and the added filter volume with lower flow rate seems like a great choice. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. BTW: Do you think this can handle the heavy bioload of goldfish?
- Model ##223222342236Series#Easy35Easy60Easy80Aq. size up to USgal356080Pump output approx USgal/h106132159Del. head approx Hmaxft4'7"4'7"6'3"Power consumptionW9913Canister Volume USgal.791.051.32Filter volume approx USgal.42.63.85Dimensions HxWxDin8x11.78x13.98x16.3