# FLUVAL 106 vs. Eheim ECO 130



## ndrj1 (6 Dec 2015)

I'm planning a planted fishbowl and indecisive about choosing a filter. I've heard good and bad about both, so i thought I'de see what you good people had to say about it..

Although I've found a really good price on the 106 online, I must admit, I'm not thrilled with the idea of having 2 large pipes going anywhere NEAR my bowl. (according to info online, the tubes are 22/16, whereas the Eheim are narrower at 16/12).

I plan to use acrylic lily pipes and a heat gun to mold them to the shape of the bowl in order to make them as discreet as possible.. so this is another factor.. the acrylic tubes need to fit onto the inlet/outlet from the filter.
Again, I'd like to avoid chunky pipes wherever possible, and it seems I'd have more chance finding 13mm acrylic tubing which with a bit of heat and elbow grease should accommodate the standard 16/12mm ahem outlets.

Of course, if any has any experience reducing the size of pipes on the fluvial, I'd rather save a bit of money and go for that... in both cases, both models of filter are overkill. The volume of the bowl can't be more than 45 litres full. That said, I'll be adding an inline C02 diffusor, which I've heard is meant to cut back the flow rate considerably. I may also add an inline cheater, which might affect flow even further??

sorry this seems like a lot of info, but I'd be happy to hear your thoughts.

Best

John


----------



## MirandaB (6 Dec 2015)

I think you may have to compromise on something whichever you choose.
I run an Eccopro 130 on a 48lt tank and it's pretty much perfect for that size tank but then the fish I have in there don't appreciate a lot of flow so I've fitted an Eheim lily pipe on there too.
The pipework is less intrusive than the Fluval 106 but the flow rate is a lot lower in my opinion (I run a 106 on a 90lt tank) so if fitting an inline diffuser/heater is going to slow the flow rate down you'd be better off going for the Fluval.


----------



## PARAGUAY (6 Dec 2015)

Just purchased a Fluval 106 for a small tank and looking at the pipework etc its a lot of equipment for a bowl,you might find help on this by locating James Starr Marshalls planted bowl with CO2 but no filter just daily water changes online for Practical Fishkeeping Magazine


----------



## ndrj1 (7 Dec 2015)

PARAGUAY said:


> Just purchased a Fluval 106 for a small tank and looking at the pipework etc its a lot of equipment for a bowl,you might find help on this by locating James Starr Marshalls planted bowl with CO2 but no filter just daily water changes online for Practical Fishkeeping Magazine



Thanks for that... the planted bowl is stunning, and is actually the inspiration for this project... but there is just no chance that I will be doing daily water changes, hence the need for some good filtration.


----------



## ndrj1 (7 Dec 2015)

MirandaB said:


> I think you may have to compromise on something whichever you choose.
> I run an Eccopro 130 on a 48lt tank and it's pretty much perfect for that size tank but then the fish I have in there don't appreciate a lot of flow so I've fitted an Eheim lily pipe on there too.
> The pipework is less intrusive than the Fluval 106 but the flow rate is a lot lower in my opinion (I run a 106 on a 90lt tank) so if fitting an inline diffuser/heater is going to slow the flow rate down you'd be better off going for the Fluval.



Thanks Miranda, if only those pipes weren't so bulky and black on the fluvial


----------



## ndrj1 (7 Dec 2015)

Miranda,

could you please have at look at your fluvial pipes for me and maybe let me know what size I'd need to replace them with clear PVC pipework?

I've read conflicting opinions on line .. 20/16 or 16/12?


----------

