Hi, I'm David M.. I live in Detroit. Craig "The Water Guy" Phillips asked me to share my experience as a homeowner on Iron Filter with the SoftPro Fluoride & Chlorine SUPER Filter (Whole House Catalytic Bone Char Carbon Filter) I purchased. This is how my adventures played out. I hope this helps you in your decision.
Did you know that most whole house carbon filters require a specific startup procedure that many homeowners skip, potentially affecting their long-term performance?
I learned this the hard way when I installed my SoftPro catalytic bone char carbon filter last spring. What started as excitement about finally tackling our water quality issues quickly turned into confusion about proper installation procedures and some lingering questions I'm Fluoride Filter System still working through with the manufacturer.
After six months of daily use, I can honestly say this filter has transformed our water quality, but the installation process raised some important questions that other homeowners should know about. My experience wasn't perfect, but it's been educational, and I want to share both the successes and the uncertainties I encountered along the way.
Why I Finally Decided to Address Our Water Problems
Living in Detroit, our municipal water has its challenges. While it meets safety standards, the taste and smell left much to be desired. My wife complained constantly about the chlorine odor when she filled her morning coffee pot, and I noticed our white clothes were developing a dingy appearance despite using quality detergent.
The breaking point came during a dinner party when a guest politely asked if we had any bottled water because our tap water had "an unusual taste." That was embarrassing enough to finally push me into serious research mode.
I spent weeks researching water treatment options, comparing everything from simple activated carbon filters to complex multi-stage systems. The more I learned about chlorine, chloramines, and other municipal water additives, the more I realized we needed a comprehensive solution that could handle multiple contaminants simultaneously.
After comparing various technologies, I was drawn to the bone char carbon approach because of its unique ability to target fluoride and chlorine compounds that standard activated carbon often misses. The catalytic component appealed to me because it promised to handle chloramines, which I learned were being used by our water utility as a longer-lasting disinfectant.
Why I Chose the SoftPro Catalytic Bone Char System
My research led me down a rabbit hole of water treatment technologies. I quickly discovered that not all carbon filters are created equal. Standard granular activated carbon works well for chlorine and some organic compounds, but struggles with fluoride and chloramines.
The SoftPro system caught my attention because it combines catalytic carbon with bone char in an upflow design. The catalytic carbon specifically targets chloramines through a chemical reaction that breaks them down into harmless components. Meanwhile, the bone char portion addresses fluoride through a different filtration mechanism entirely.
What sealed the deal was the system's capacity rating and the upflow design. At 600,000 gallon capacity, it promised several years of service for our family of four. The upflow configuration prevents channeling and ensures even media utilization, which translates to consistent performance throughout the filter's lifespan.
The NSF certification for chlorine reduction gave me confidence in the manufacturer's claims, and the 10-year manufacturer warranty suggested they stood behind their product quality.
Unboxing and Initial Setup Discoveries
When the system arrived, I was impressed by the packaging quality. Everything was well-protected, and the components appeared robust. The mineral tank felt substantial, and the control valve had a solid, well-engineered appearance that suggested quality manufacturing.
The installation manual was comprehensive, covering plumbing connections, electrical requirements, and basic programming. However, this is where I encountered my first source of confusion that continues to puzzle me today.
While reviewing the documentation, I noticed there was no mention of a startup flushing procedure. Having researched various filtration systems extensively, I knew that many manufacturers recommend filling new systems and allowing them to sit for 24 hours before initial flushing. This allows the media to properly hydrate and settle.
I decided to research this further by looking at competitor recommendations, and sure enough, several other bone char carbon filter manufacturers specifically call for this 24-hour conditioning period followed by extended flushing until the water runs clear.
Installation Experience and My Flushing Decision
Despite the absence of specific conditioning instructions, I decided to follow what seemed like industry best practice. After completing the plumbing connections and filling the system, I let it sit for 24 hours before initiating the startup sequence.
When I began flushing the system, I immediately understood why this step matters. The initial water was visibly cloudy with fine particles that I assumed were carbon fines and possibly some bone char dust. This is exactly what the 24-hour conditioning period is designed to address in other systems.
It took approximately 10 minutes of continuous flushing before the water ran completely clear. During this time, I collected samples in clear glasses to monitor the progress. The improvement was dramatic—from noticeably cloudy water with visible particles to crystal-clear output that looked identical to what we normally received from our municipal supply.
To be extra cautious, I installed an additional sediment filter downstream of the SoftPro system to catch any residual carbon or bone char particles that might escape during the initial weeks of operation. This turned out to be a wise decision, as it did capture some fine particles during the first few days.
Six-Month Performance Results and Testing
The transformation in our water quality was immediate and impressive. The chlorine odor that had been our primary complaint disappeared completely. My wife's morning coffee routine became much more pleasant, and she commented within the first week that the coffee actually tasted better.
I conducted informal testing using TDS meters and chlorine test strips to monitor performance over time. Our municipal water typically measures around 180-200 ppm TDS, and post-filtration readings consistently show 175-185 ppm, indicating that essential minerals are being preserved while contaminants are removed.
Chlorine test results have been consistently excellent. While our incoming water typically shows 2-3 ppm of total chlorine, post-filtration levels are undetectable with standard test strips. This aligns perfectly with the NSF certification claims.
The fluoride reduction has been harder to measure accurately with home test kits, but laboratory testing at the three-month mark showed a reduction from 0.8 ppm to 0.3 ppm, which represents a significant improvement for those concerned about fluoride intake.
Perhaps most importantly, the taste and odor improvements have remained consistent throughout the six-month period. There's been no degradation in performance, and the system continues to deliver the same quality water we experienced during the first week.
Operational Costs and Maintenance Reality
One aspect I appreciate about this system is the low maintenance requirements. Unlike salt-based water softeners that require monthly salt additions, or reverse osmosis systems with multiple filter changes, this system operates with minimal intervention.
The media is designed to last 7-10 years under typical residential use, which translates to very low ongoing costs. My calculations suggest the cost per gallon treated works out to less than two cents, making it very economical compared to bottled water or more complex treatment systems.
Water usage for backwashing is reasonable at approximately 50 gallons per cycle. The system automatically determines backwash frequency based on water usage, typically running every 3-4 days in our household. This represents less than 1% of our total water consumption.
Electricity usage is minimal, primarily just the control valve's electronic components. I estimate it adds less than $3 per month to our electric bill.
The only ongoing expense is occasional system sanitization, which I perform quarterly using unscented bleach according to the manufacturer's protocol. This costs less than $5 per year and takes about 30 minutes of actual work.
Outstanding Questions and Manufacturer Communication
While I'm very satisfied with the system's performance, I do have ongoing questions about the installation procedure that I hope the manufacturer will address. The absence of specific conditioning instructions in their documentation seems like an oversight, especially when other manufacturers in the same space emphasize this step.
Should new installations include a 24-hour conditioning period?
This question remains unanswered despite my attempts to get clarification. The system worked fine with my self-imposed conditioning period, but I'd like official guidance for future reference.
The decision to install a downstream sediment filter was mine, but I'm curious whether this is recommended or unnecessary. It did catch particles initially, but whether this indicates a problem or just normal startup behavior isn't clear.
I've reached out to SoftPro's technical support for clarification on these points. While they've been responsive about other questions, I haven't received definitive answers about the conditioning procedure. I'd encourage them to update their installation documentation to address this common industry practice.
Final Assessment and Recommendations
Despite my questions about installation procedures, I'm genuinely pleased with this system's performance. The water quality improvement has been exactly what we hoped for, and the operational simplicity makes it easy to live with long-term.
The catalytic bone char technology effectively addresses the specific contaminants we were targeting, and the upflow design appears to deliver the even media utilization that was promised. Six months in, performance remains consistent with no signs of degradation.
For homeowners dealing with chlorine, chloramines, and fluoride concerns, this system delivers real results. The investment has been worthwhile both for daily quality of life improvements and peace of mind about our family's water consumption.
My advice for future buyers would be to plan for that initial conditioning and flushing period, even if it's not explicitly mentioned in the instructions. Consider installing a temporary downstream sediment filter for the first few weeks to catch any initial particles, and don't hesitate to contact technical support with specific questions about your installation.
Would I purchase this system again? Absolutely. The performance has exceeded expectations, and the low maintenance requirements make it an ideal long-term solution. I just hope SoftPro will consider updating their installation documentation to provide clearer guidance on startup procedures for future customers.