Bannerman
Well-Known Member
Our water supply is our town's municipal supply which is currently obtained from 4 deep wells. The water has a total peak hardness of approx. 22 gpg and as it is from a municipal supply, it is chlorinated with a distribution residual of 0.70-1.58 mg/L.
As we typically have red, non-slimy deposits in our toilet tanks and anywhere water collects for any length of time (ie: shower curtain), iron appears to be also an issue. The town states they add 'WaterWorx' 28% (previously 'Calciquest' 28%) as an iron sequestering agent and I understand the presence of chlorine should also eliminate/reduce any negative effects of iron.
Our 30K softener (circ. 1997) has recently developed a reduced flow issue as well as reduced capacity. As the softener is otherwise in good condition, I thought I'd investigate replacing the resin and piston/seal/spacers versus replacing the entire softener. I have periodically ran Iron Out or Res-Care type products through the unit to clear-out any possible build-up of iron.
Today I contacted a local water treatment supplier who offer softener resin for a very reasonable cost, including to the general public. As they typically stock only one main resin type (Ion Plus CA-10) which is 8%, I inquired into obtaining 10% cross link resin due to the chlorine. The agent replied that Ion Plus CA-12 could be specially ordered at only $5.00 more per cu/ft bag.
Are there any drawbacks to 10% cross link resin? I ask this as there is such a small price difference between the 8% and 10%, is there any reason the supplier couldn't/shouldn't stock and supply 10% cross link resin instead of 8% as a matter of routine? Perhaps with an increased volume of 10% resin purchased, their cost would become equal to their cost for 8%.
Thank you!
As we typically have red, non-slimy deposits in our toilet tanks and anywhere water collects for any length of time (ie: shower curtain), iron appears to be also an issue. The town states they add 'WaterWorx' 28% (previously 'Calciquest' 28%) as an iron sequestering agent and I understand the presence of chlorine should also eliminate/reduce any negative effects of iron.
Our 30K softener (circ. 1997) has recently developed a reduced flow issue as well as reduced capacity. As the softener is otherwise in good condition, I thought I'd investigate replacing the resin and piston/seal/spacers versus replacing the entire softener. I have periodically ran Iron Out or Res-Care type products through the unit to clear-out any possible build-up of iron.
Today I contacted a local water treatment supplier who offer softener resin for a very reasonable cost, including to the general public. As they typically stock only one main resin type (Ion Plus CA-10) which is 8%, I inquired into obtaining 10% cross link resin due to the chlorine. The agent replied that Ion Plus CA-12 could be specially ordered at only $5.00 more per cu/ft bag.
Are there any drawbacks to 10% cross link resin? I ask this as there is such a small price difference between the 8% and 10%, is there any reason the supplier couldn't/shouldn't stock and supply 10% cross link resin instead of 8% as a matter of routine? Perhaps with an increased volume of 10% resin purchased, their cost would become equal to their cost for 8%.
Thank you!
Last edited: