Which one to go with...Fleck 7000 or GE Pro Elite Analyzer


  #1  
Old 09-23-09, 11:28 AM
S
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Houston, tx
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Which one to go with...Fleck 7000 or GE Pro Elite Analyzer

Hello folks, this is my first time posting here and appreciate your reply. After much research (about 3 months) on the water softener, I finally narrowed the options to Fleck 7000 48 regeneration with a carbon/chlorine filter or GE Pro Elite Analyzer with carbon/chlorine filter. Chlorine concentration in my area is too high and is causing skin rash to my son who is 18 months.

Several good review on Fleck system but I don’t see any reviews on GE Pro Elite Analyzer. I have this lady who is absolutely wonderful unlike many other companies. She spend good amount of time on educating how the system works and all that good stuff. But I still can’t make my mind on which one should I pick. Here is break down of $ on both systems

Fleck 7000 48 grain level, $ 2162.00 (includes 7000 system, carbon filter system and the install cost).

GE Pro Elite Analyze, $ 3200.00 (includes Analyzer system, carbon filter system and the install cost)

I am leaning toward GE system, given their warranty and company reputation but I saw very good review on Fleck system also. Appreciate your comments, review…etc

More info:

Water hardness level is 220 to 240 in my area. Municipal water with high amounts of chlorine
 
  #2  
Old 09-23-09, 01:51 PM
B
Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PA
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You haven't provided some information necessary to provide fully informed comments:
1. Water analysis;
2. Quantity of daily water use or data that would allow a reasonable estimate;
3. Size of the carbon filters and size of the GE softener;
so it is not possible to comment on the sizing of the units being proposed.

Based on your post there are three significant differences between the two systems:
1. The GE system has some sort of continuous monitoring of the water (I would personally discount this as being of little benefit with municipal water);
2. The brand (manufacturer) of the head on the softener--GE or Fleck. (I lean toward the Fleck.)
3. Price.

Assuming that the carbon filter systems are comparable (SIZE of Media bed, MEDIA, MANUFACTURER of Head (assuming a backwashing filter)), that the softeners are both 1.5 cubic foot of resin with comparable resin, and that you have equal confidence that both suppliers will provide good after the sale support, I see it as an easy choice--the Fleck unit.
 
  #3  
Old 09-23-09, 05:43 PM
S
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Houston, tx
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks for the reply. It sounds bad but we never got our water tested fully except the water hardness level. I think I will ask the technician to test the water this weekend.

The size of the carbon filter is .5 cuft and 5 LB of KDF. Carbon head is made by Clack Corp, it doesn't back wash, it just straight in and out.

The GE Elite Analyzer is 50K grain level.
 
  #4  
Old 09-23-09, 07:18 PM
B
Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PA
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
With municipal water you can (usually) get complete information from your water supplier. Many times it is posted on a public web site.

My guess is that both suppliers are providing standard activated carbon (GAC) and KDF-55 to deal with the chlorine. If your water supply is clean--no silt, dirt, and no iron--then backwashing filters may not be necessary and the upflow being proposed is lower cost.

I suspect that both the GE and Fleck unit have 1.5 cubic feet of resin, also frequently referred to as 48,000 grain units. The actual capacity in use will depend on how much salt is used at each regeneration. Salt consumption is greatly reduced if a 1.5 cubic foot unit is operated at about 30,000 grains, regenerating with about 9 lbs of salt.

I also assume that both units use "standard high capacity" resin but the type of resin used could be different and you should know what is proposed to do a full comparison of the units.

With your hardness level, and assuming no iron, your compensated hardness level is about 14 grains per gallon. If you have 4 people in the household using 60 gallons per day each then you will use 3360 grains of capacity per day and the unit would regenerate every nine days--allowing for a reserve. With these assumptions a 1.5 cubic foot unit is reasonably sized unless you have peak usage that would exceed the "system flow capacity" of about 12 gallons per minute--flow rates greater than 12 gpm will result in some hardness leakage.
 
  #5  
Old 09-24-09, 11:11 AM
S
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Houston, tx
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank you very much Bob. I just called the water company and was able to get a report. Not sure if this is a red flag but i see Arsenic (ppb) level is *3.5 and is listed as NO violation. On the unregulated side Bromoform (ppb) 1.3 Chloroform (ppb) 0.5 Dibromochloromethane (ppb) 1.7 Lead and Copper Lead (ppb) 1.3 Copper (ppm) 0.654 Free Chlorine (ppm) 1.46 - Range of detected levels :0.57-2.19 I think i will go with GE Analyzer givent the warranty and company backing. Is the price $3200 reasonable? Thank you very much for your help.
 
  #6  
Old 09-24-09, 04:47 PM
A
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northwest Ohio
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by shas3 View Post
Thank you very much Bob. I just called the water company and was able to get a report. Not sure if this is a red flag but i see Arsenic (ppb) level is *3.5 and is listed as NO violation. On the unregulated side Bromoform (ppb) 1.3 Chloroform (ppb) 0.5 Dibromochloromethane (ppb) 1.7 Lead and Copper Lead (ppb) 1.3 Copper (ppm) 0.654 Free Chlorine (ppm) 1.46 - Range of detected levels :0.57-2.19 I think i will go with GE Analyzer givent the warranty and company backing. Is the price $3200 reasonable? Thank you very much for your help.
The new arsenic level is 10ppb as MCL. To help remove even more contaminants, an RO would benefit you there. I work with Kinetico products. Have you called them? Of the two that were recommended so far, I agree with the Fleck.

I would hope the filter has a gravel/garnet bed. This would lift the KDF above the distributor at the base of teh riser tube allowing the water to flow up in a more uniform manner. KDF will channel after a short while.

I prefer KDF for chlorine removal in refillable 2"x10" filter cartridges. You can use 1.5 lbs at a time and then top off with carbon. Here they are more effective in using the whole media and very easy to replace. A simple chlorine test kit can indicate when media needs to be changed.

Carbon is light and constantly reconstitutes itself as water is passing through it in a large flow through filter. KDF won't move at all, or extremely little if any. It is extremely heavy.

Andy Christensen, CWS-II
 
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
 
Ask a Question
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: