# Bestmax Premium & Water Hardness



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

Hi All

I am toying with the idea of installing the Bestmax Premium filter cartridge under my sink. I have Oxford water that is hard as nails (around 220 CaCo3) What I dont understand is the mooted boost it gives for Magnesium whilst claiming also reduce carbonate hardness. Wouldnt the additional Mg cause scale, offsetting any Calcium ion exchange? Is this really about a tradeoff between a) better tasting water (with the additional Mg) as opposed to b) ensuring 'boiler safe'. In other words, you can have one, but not really both?

If there is anyone who has the Bestmax Premium installed I would be interested to understand whether temporary hardness has also been reduced. Or views from any water gurumiester

Many thanks


----------



## GlennV (Mar 29, 2013)

That water's quite soft compared to Cambridge!

The bestmax premium uses an ion exchange resin loaded with magnesium as well as the usual hydrogen ions. So some calcium ions are exchanged for hydrogen, some for magnesium and some remain. Temporary hardness is reduced because of the hydrogen exchange. The magnesium exchange doesn't alter hardness, but does reduce the likelihood of scale formation. I'm not sure it would work here, which is why I haven't fitted one myself, but should be fine for your water.


----------



## fluffles (Sep 4, 2012)

It definitely reduces temporary hardness. I've got one installed in Nottingham, on setting 2 it reduces temporary hardness from 7 to 3 degrees German hardness.

Do you know the exact hardness level of your tap water?


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

Thanks both.

Fluffles - using a water test kit regent my temporary hardness is around 222 ppm of CaCO3, 13 dH. So a bit harder than Nottingham (but much softer than Cambridge - yikes!) Looks like yours has reduced your temporary hardness by 57% which may not be enough for my water to get into boiler safe mode. Although it seems that I can adjust the setting to get more treatment?

Glenn - thanks for your 101 on the filter. Makes sense. Logic would suggest that a filter that is all loaded with hydrogen might be more effective in terms of temporary hardness reduction (with some possible tradeoff to taste and longevity). Are sodium filters unfashionable these days?

Finally, the set up of my plumbing and drawers dictates that I will need to fix the filter at a 25 degree angle from straight. I assume that makes no difference, but let me know if you reckon otherwise.

Many thanks for your wise counsel.


----------



## fluffles (Sep 4, 2012)

Oops, sorry the literature is based on total hardness not temporary... Do you know that?


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

Not exactly from the tap, but Oxford town water supply from Thames Water suggests a total hardness of 263.5 ppm.


----------



## GlennV (Mar 29, 2013)

Temporary hardness is not directly measurable. Your test kit will either be telling you total hardness (GH) or carbonate hardness/alkalinity (KH). Temporary hardness is the minimum of the two.


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

GlennV said:


> Temporary hardness is not directly measurable. Your test kit will either be telling you total hardness (GH) or carbonate hardness/alkalinity (KH). Temporary hardness is the minimum of the two.


Indeed. It is the kit that Londinium sells which is carbonate hardness. I have bitten the bullet and ordered the Premium cartridge. Will install it as soon as....

Cheers


----------



## GlennV (Mar 29, 2013)

Good luck, I look forward to hearing how you get on. (I'm still thinking of getting one of these myself, as I'm getting fed up of mixing my own water.)


----------



## fluffles (Sep 4, 2012)

ziobeege_72 said:


> Not exactly from the tap, but Oxford town water supply from Thames Water suggests a total hardness of 263.5 ppm.


By me reckoning that puts you at about 15 degrees German hardness. According to the docs you're on the borderline of needing bypass setting 2 or 1. Make sure you do a drop test on each setting (remembering to flush between settings).


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

Thanks guys for the tips. Will look to install over the weekend. I'll report back


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

Update. Installed the Bestmax Premium. Lots of flushing and testing. On setting 2, carbonate hardness drops pretty consistently from 11 drops to 8 drops. On setting 1, it reduces to 7 drops. Each drop being a 1dH or 17.1ppm (which the test kit seems to cautiously round up to 20ppm). So there is a bit of reduction, but nowhere enough to get me closer to boiler safe zone which is bit of a shame. Credit at least to the chaps who sold me the kits - they have offered to analyse my pre and post treated water to give me a view of options. I speculate that in hard water places the Premium doesn't have enough cation "guts" to deal with the carbonates sufficiently if some of the filter is reserved for Mgs. Will see. I was certainly getting more softening effect via the britta maxtras, albeit for only a short period of time.

So am now in the slightly absurd arrangement where my tap water is being filter by the bestmax premium which then goes into my londinium which has an in-tank Bestcup filter, which drops the number of drops to around 4-5 dH carbonate hardness. That seems a sensible number. Its probably not a bad arrangement as it is at least flicking up the Mg+ levels at the expense of Ca+ before the hydrogen ions on the bestcup sweep in. Feels a little OTT nonetheless.

The upside at least is that the espresso tastes ruddy good

Will inform of progress, but right I can't recommend it for hard water areas just yet if boiler safe water is the main aim.


----------



## GlennV (Mar 29, 2013)

Is there a setting 0, for no bypass?


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

Good point there is actually. Its recommended that this is only needed when you are hitting 26dH. I'll give it a flick and see how we go....


----------



## Obnic (Jan 14, 2014)

Forgive my ignorance here, what do you consider boiler safe? I was under the impression that 50ppm was boiler safe and you seem to be hitting 20ppm. Am I wrong? Also, doesn't the rate of flow through the canister affect the efficiency with which it softens the water? Are you running it at full bore on mains pressure or have you tempered the flow? I'm curious because I've just fitted a Bestmax Premium thinking it will both protect my boiler and improve my spro.


----------



## espressotechno (Apr 11, 2011)

For a hard water area such as Oxford, you want the "no bypass" setting. (I used to live in the Chilterns - pure chalk under the garden...)

Try testing the output at the flowrate used for your machine ie quite slow (!)


----------



## fluffles (Sep 4, 2012)

Obnic said:


> Forgive my ignorance here, what do you consider boiler safe? I was under the impression that 50ppm was boiler safe and you seem to be hitting 20ppm. Am I wrong? Also, doesn't the rate of flow through the canister affect the efficiency with which it softens the water? Are you running it at full bore on mains pressure or have you tempered the flow? I'm curious because I've just fitted a Bestmax Premium thinking it will both protect my boiler and improve my spro.


1 dH is around 18ppm so he's got a fair bit more than 20ppm.

You'll only know if it is doing an adequate job by doing a drop test, have you got a test kit?


----------



## Obnic (Jan 14, 2014)

fluffles said:


> 1 dH is around 18ppm so he's got a fair bit more than 20ppm.
> 
> You'll only know if it is doing an adequate job by doing a drop test, have you got a test kit?


Yes, I will test but I'm expecting to achieve around 50ppm.

@ziobeege_72 seems to be unhappy with 20ppm which I would have thought was well inside the boiler safe margin.


----------



## MediumRoastSteam (Jul 7, 2015)

Obnic said:


> Yes, I will test but I'm expecting to achieve around 50ppm.
> 
> @ziobeege_72 seems to be unhappy with 20ppm which I would have thought was well inside the boiler safe margin.


He never said 20ppm. He said that it has reduced to 7 drops. Each drop is 17.1ppm, which the reader rounds to 20ppm.

7 X 17.1 = 119ppm.


----------



## Obnic (Jan 14, 2014)

Ah! I see. Thank you.


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

So a bit more playing around over the last 24 hours or so..

Have flicked to setting 0 and flushed for a good 5-10 mins. And then played around with various flow rates. It is good that these regent test kits last a while as I have gone through a few drops of late...my thumb and index finger have had a solid workout.

Anyway, on setting '0' and slowing the flow rate down to about taking 1 min to fill 1 litre the number of drops reduces down to between 5-6 on average, or around 95ppm carbonate hardness (using 17.1ppm per drop or per dH). If the flow rate increases to solid 10secs to 1L the drops increases to 8 on average. Interestingly, the guidance doesn't really mention an ideal flowrate, only that the intake pressure needs to be over 1.2bar.

So overall it is a useful improvement, but not quite where I would like it to be (and thought I could get).

To answer the question above the ppm carbonate hardness I would like to aim for is between 50-75ppm, or say 3-4 drops. I will still get a bit of scaling at the margins, but nothing like tap water potential. Using the Premium at a zero setting and a slow flow rate + an intank Bestcup filter gets me there it would seem, and is a step up using the brita maxtra waterjug + Best cup intank filter in terms of cost, hassle and consistency. I hope it does anyway as I know the filter life capacity reduces substantially on zero setting. But it seems I can't quite dispose of the supporting in tank filter just yet to get me over the line.

Will see what the analysis says. Have sent my water samples off today. Any other analysis from any other hard water areas would be interesting to know.


----------



## Obnic (Jan 14, 2014)

Hmmm. That's not very reassuring. I'm not really up for a two step process.

I just had a water softener fitted for all but drinking water. The installer (BWT engineer) measured our hardness at 30f / 300ppm and has reduced it to 8f/80ppm.

At the same time I had a Bestmax premium installed for drinking/espresso but I have yet to get the kitchen tap fitted so I haven't commissioned and tested it yet. As soon as I am up, I will report back with numbers.

When I was in London I used a 3M system SGP195BN-T. I ran it at about 3 liters per minute and it achieved c.50ppm from about 220ppm (from memory). I switched to Bestmax because of the Mg+ step and the variable bypass. If this fails to work out here I will switch back to 3M and see where we are.


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

Thanks Obnic. I think from my perspective at least the Bestmax Premium can't be recommended IF scale reduction to more boiler safe levels is your prime motivation AND you live in a hard water area. That is the conclusion so far anyway. Will update if my views change from this. Win some lose some I guess.


----------



## Obnic (Jan 14, 2014)

Just done a quick and dirty using the flush tap. Ran five liters through the system to purge water in the cylinder. Wound the bypass cap down as low as possible (irritatingly my little arrow on the cap doesn't line up with any numbers so just wound it down as much as possible which slowed the flow considerably so I'm assuming this is no-bypass). Used a colored dipstick which I know is not too great. It's showing a colour that falls between 40 and 80 ppm. I will do better in due course.


----------



## Obnic (Jan 14, 2014)

Could one daisy chain two Bestmax cylinders to get the job done?


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

So I have received my tap water analysis and Bestmax Premium analysis (level 1) from BWL. Results:

Raw Tap Water:

- 12 DTH (c. 210 ppm)

- 7 DKh (122 ppm)

- 7.96 pH

- 566 conductivity

Treated Bestmax Water

- 8 DTH (c. 140 ppm)

- 5 DKh (88 ppm)

- 7.25 pH

- 538 conductivity

The first thing that struck me is the inconsistency between the dkH given here and my analysis using the reagent droplet that I have. After a bit of research I am pretty confident that the Londinium's reagent solution is actually a total hardness kit (testing for both Mg & Ca) rather than carbonate hardness that is advertised. These drops rely on a reactive agent called EDTA that is that turns a separate indicator solution pink/red if there are remaining Mg + Ca+ ions left after a reaction with EDTA, or blue if there are none. It seems a standard method with these things. It also chimes in with the number of drops that I saw in my tap and treated waters - they were the same number of drops as the dTH levels given above. Also, the guidance that comes with the kits simply refers to "hardness".

So I think my conclusion has shifted, thankfully. These cartridges indeed seem to be good and effective, leaving sufficient remaining hardness but taking out enough carbonate hardness. BWL also test at a flow rate of 60L per Hr, or 1L per minute, fwiw.

BWL were adamant also that the correct setting given my hardness was 2, believing that the tap water was being over treated at level 1. I am going to shift it back to level 1 from 0, as I think I am at the borderline at 1 & 2. Also, I am broadly happy with these numbers given here.

Over the next couple of weeks I will see if using this water scales up my kettle to any material degree. And I mayaswell get myself a carbonate hardness kit whilst I am at it.

So sorry for the slightly hoaxed call folks.


----------



## GlennV (Mar 29, 2013)

Good news. I would recommend the API GH&KH kit for quick and easy drop tests and/or the Salifert KH(Alkalinity) one for a more accurate back titration test for carbonate hardness. Both readily available on ebay for less than a tenner.


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

Thanks Glenn. Will give those a crack.


----------



## fluffles (Sep 4, 2012)

Any comments on coffee taste using the treated water?


----------



## ziobeege_72 (May 6, 2013)

fluffles said:


> Any comments on coffee taste using the treated water?


Not yet. I've only now just taken out the in tank Bestcup filter, which I've always had as a kind of hardness reduction "insurance policy" working with a Brita maxtra jug. Now that I have established the efficacy of the Bestmax Premium carbonate reduction i can finally toss that in-tank filter away.

Give me a few days with the treated Premium water, including this weekend, to provide an informal view.


----------



## Obnic (Jan 14, 2014)

@ziobeege_72

Sorry about the delay, I had to find and import a three-way tap from the U.K. So results are now in:

Raw water here is 34 Df or 340ppm

My Bestmax (screwed shut to 0 so no by-pass) is testing as follows:

KH 5-6 German degrees or 90-120 ppm of carbonate (I used an API drop testing kit)

This is in line with my BWT drop testing kit that I thought was a general hardness kit but now I'm less certain.

So... is it possible to daisy chain Bestmax filters to achieve a 50ppm result? Has anyone tried this before.


----------



## hotmetal (Oct 31, 2013)

Obnic said:


> So... is it possible to daisy chain Bestmax filters to achieve a 50ppm result? Has anyone tried this before.


Good question. I don't know but I could imagine it's a bit like tightening a bolt with a torque wrench to 50Nm and then doing it a second time hoping to achieve 100!  I mean, if the filter is basically like a sieve that stops particles of a certain size, then it won't work. But I'm not sure if that's really a valid comparison so I'll make way for the better informed ;-)


----------



## Obnic (Jan 14, 2014)

Thought I'd ask again to catch the weekend expertise.

Does anyone know whether running two Bestmax filters in series will soften my water more than running through one? My raw water is 340ppm. The Bestmax is achieving c.100ppm on the no bypass setting. I would like 50ppm.

The trouble shooting section of the BWT booklet is ambiguous. One reading suggests that a larger cylinder might be required (I'm using a M cylinder) but I thought larger just meant greater capacity rather than greater softening power - am I wrong?

Any advice gratefully received.


----------

