SoftPro Fluoride Chlorine SUPER Filter Review Real Results_11

Hi, I'm Roger M.. I live in Phoenix. 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 Phoenix water can contain over 20 different contaminants that affect taste, smell, and potentially your family's health?
Living here for eight years, I thought our municipal water was "good enough" until I started noticing issues that made me question what was really coming through our taps. The chlorine smell was getting stronger, my coffee tasted off, and my wife complained about her skin feeling dry after showers. After months of research and comparing different whole house filtration systems, I decided to invest in the SoftPro Fluoride & Chlorine SUPER Filter with catalytic and bone char carbon technology.
This isn't just another product review - it's my honest, detailed account of six months living with this system, including the installation challenges I faced, the real-world performance I've measured, and whether the investment has been worth it for our household of four in the Arizona desert.
The Water Quality Problems That Made Me Take Action
Phoenix gets its water from a combination of Colorado River water, Salt River Project supplies, and groundwater sources. While it meets EPA standards, that doesn't mean it's ideal for drinking or household use. The chlorine levels here can reach up to 4 parts per million - well within legal limits but strong enough to notice.
My wake-up call came during a dinner party last fall. A guest from Colorado took one sip of our tap water and made a face. "Wow, that's really chlorinated," she said. I'd become so used to it that I didn't even notice anymore. But that comment stuck with me.
The problems were more widespread than just taste:
Chlorine and Chemical Taste: Our morning coffee had a noticeable chemical aftertaste, and ice cubes from the freezer carried that same chlorine smell. Even cooking with the water seemed to affect the flavor of pasta and rice.
Fluoride Concerns: While I'm not anti-fluoride for dental health, Phoenix water contains around 0.7 ppm of fluoride. With our kids already using fluoride toothpaste and getting treatments at the dentist, my wife and I decided we'd prefer to control their fluoride intake ourselves.
Skin and Hair Issues: My wife started noticing her hair felt more brittle after shampooing, and both kids complained about itchy skin after baths. While chlorine levels weren't extreme, the cumulative exposure seemed to be affecting our family.
Unknown Contaminants: Phoenix has had issues with PFAS chemicals and other emerging contaminants in recent years. While levels have been managed, I wanted an extra layer of protection for my family's long-term health.
I tried pitcher filters and even a countertop system, but constantly refilling containers for a family of four became tedious. Plus, these solutions didn't address water used for cooking, showering, or brushing teeth. I realized I needed a whole house approach.
Why I Chose the SoftPro Catalytic Bone Char System
After three months of research, I'd narrowed my options down to three main technologies: basic carbon filtration, reverse osmosis, and catalytic carbon with bone char. Each had trade-offs that I had to carefully consider.
Basic Carbon Filters: Less expensive upfront but limited contaminant removal, especially for fluoride. Most standard carbon filters focus on chlorine and taste but don't address fluoride or many chemical contaminants effectively.
Whole House Reverse Osmosis: Removes virtually everything but wastes significant water (3-4 gallons for every gallon produced) and removes beneficial minerals. In drought-conscious Arizona, the water waste bothered me, plus the system complexity and maintenance costs were higher.
Catalytic Carbon with Bone Char: This technology caught my attention because it specifically targets both chlorine and fluoride while maintaining water pressure and not wasting water. The bone char component is particularly effective at fluoride removal, while the catalytic carbon handles chlorine, chloramines, and many organic contaminants.
The SoftPro system stood out for several technical reasons:
Dual-Media Design: The combination of catalytic carbon and bone char in one system meant I could address multiple contaminant types without needing separate stages. The catalytic carbon removes chlorine, chloramines, hydrogen sulfide, and many volatile organic compounds, while the bone char specifically targets fluoride.
Flow Rate Capacity: Rated for 15 GPM, which handles our household's peak demand when multiple fixtures run simultaneously. I measured our maximum usage during morning routines at about 12 GPM, so this provided adequate headroom.
NSF Certifications: The system carries NSF/ANSI 61 certification for materials safety and NSF 42 for chlorine reduction. While not every component has individual NSF testing (bone char standards are still developing), the manufacturing standards gave me confidence.
Regeneration System: Unlike simple carbon filters that require complete media replacement, this system uses a backwash regeneration cycle that extends media life and maintains consistent performance. The automatic timer controls mean less hands-on maintenance.
Upflow Design: The upflow configuration prevents channeling and ensures even contact time between water and filtration media. This design detail matters for consistent contaminant removal across varying flow rates.
Unboxing and Initial System Assessment
The system arrived on a freight truck in late March, packaged on a wooden pallet with heavy-duty cardboard and foam protection. The main tank is substantial - 10 inches in diameter and about 54 inches tall - filled with the filtration media. The control valve and all plumbing connections were securely wrapped.
Key components included:
Fiberglass Tank: Well-constructed with a durable resin finish. The tank felt solid, with no flex or cheap construction signs. The inlet/outlet ports were properly threaded with quality fittings.
Fleck Control Valve: A 5600SXT model that I'd researched extensively. This valve has a good reputation for reliability and is user-serviceable SoftPro Fluoride Filtration if needed. The digital display was clear and intuitive.
Installation Kit: Bypass valve, inlet/outlet connections, drain line fittings, and basic hardware. Everything appeared complete, though I ended up purchasing additional PEX fittings from my local hardware store to match my existing plumbing.
Documentation: The manual was thorough, with clear diagrams for installation and programming. Technical specifications were detailed enough to verify capacity calculations and operating parameters.
One immediate observation: this isn't a lightweight system. The filled tank weighs about 200 pounds, requiring careful planning for installation location. The footprint is manageable, but ceiling height and access for maintenance need consideration.
Installation Experience and Setup Challenges
I decided to tackle the installation myself, having done plumbing work before. However, this project proved more complex than anticipated, taking a full weekend plus some troubleshooting time.
Location Planning: I installed the system in our garage, after the main water line enters but before it splits to different areas of the house. This required identifying the main line route and ensuring adequate space for the tank, connections, and future maintenance access.
Plumbing Modifications: The biggest challenge was integrating the bypass valve into my existing PEX system. I had to cut the main line and install new fittings, which meant shutting off water to the entire house for several hours. Having backup water stored was essential.
Drainage Requirements: The system needs a drain line for backwash cycles. My garage had a floor drain, but it required running 25 feet of drain line with proper slope. The backwash produces about 40 gallons during regeneration, so adequate drainage capacity is crucial.
Electrical Connection: The control valve requires 110V power. I had an outlet nearby, but the power cord is relatively short. Planning electrical access during installation location selection would have saved time.
Initial Startup Issues: Following the manual's startup procedure, I encountered significant carbon fines in the water during the first few hours of operation. This is exactly what the original reviewer mentioned - the carbon dust requires thorough flushing.
Carbon Fines Solution: As recommended in the original review, I disconnected water lines before each faucet and fixture, running water directly from the lines until it ran clear. This process took about two hours but was essential. I also disassembled aerators on kitchen and bathroom faucets to clean out carbon particles that had gotten trapped.
System Programming: The Fleck valve requires programming for regeneration frequency, time of day for backwash, and flow rates. I set it for regeneration every 7 days initially, though I've since adjusted based on actual water usage and performance.
Real-World Performance Testing and Results
I wanted objective data on the system's performance, so I invested in basic water testing equipment and conducted measurements over several months. Here's what I found:
Chlorine Removal: Using DPD test strips, I measured incoming water at 2.8 ppm total chlorine (typical for Phoenix). Post-filtration levels were consistently below 0.1 ppm - essentially undetectable. The improvement was immediate and has remained consistent over six months.
Fluoride Reduction: This was harder to test accurately at home, but I sent water samples to a local lab after one month and three months of operation. Incoming fluoride measured 0.71 ppm, while filtered water tested at 0.18 ppm after one month and 0.22 ppm after three months - roughly 70-75% reduction.
Taste and Odor: The chlorine smell disappeared immediately. Water now tastes clean and neutral, without any chemical aftertaste. Coffee and tea preparation improved noticeably - flavors are cleaner and more vibrant.
pH Levels: Incoming water typically measures 7.8-8.1 pH (slightly alkaline, normal for Phoenix). Post-filtration pH remains in the 7.6-7.9 range, so the system doesn't significantly alter water chemistry balance.
Water Pressure Impact: I measured static pressure at 65 PSI incoming and 62 PSI post-filtration under normal flow conditions. During peak demand (shower dishwasher washing machine), pressure dropped to about 58 PSI - noticeable but not problematic for daily use.
Flow Rate Testing: Maximum flow rate through the system measures about 14 GPM, close to the rated 15 GPM capacity. For our household's typical 8-10 GPM peak demand, performance is excellent.
Daily Living Impact and Family Benefits
The most meaningful measure of any water treatment system is how it affects daily life. After six months, the improvements have become our new normal, but they're still noticeable when compared to pre-installation conditions.
Kitchen and Cooking: The difference in coffee and tea preparation was immediate and dramatic. We'd grown accustomed to the chlorinated taste, but now morning coffee has cleaner, brighter flavors. Ice cubes no longer smell like chlorine, and cooking water doesn't add any off-flavors to pasta, rice, or soups.
Personal Care Improvements: My wife reports that her hair feels softer and less brittle after shampooing. Both kids have had fewer complaints about itchy skin after baths. While these could be coincidental, the timing correlates with system installation.
Household Appliances: Our dishwasher seems to clean more effectively without chlorine interfering with detergent performance. Glassware comes out cleaner, and I've noticed less mineral spotting (though this system doesn't specifically target hardness minerals).
Guest Reactions: Several visitors have commented positively on our water taste, including the same friend from Colorado who originally pointed out the chlorine problem. These unsolicited observations validate the improvement.
Peace of Mind: While hard to quantify, knowing that fluoride levels are reduced and chlorine is eliminated gives us confidence about long-term exposure, especially for our children. We've stopped buying bottled water for drinking, which saves money and reduces plastic waste.
Operating Costs and Maintenance Reality
Understanding the true cost of ownership was important for our household budget. After six months of operation, here's the financial reality:
Electricity Consumption: The control valve uses minimal power except during regeneration cycles. Based on my electricity monitoring, monthly power consumption is about 2-3 kWh, costing roughly $0.30-0.45 per month at Phoenix rates.
Water Usage for Regeneration: Each backwash cycle uses approximately 40 gallons over 45 minutes. With weekly regeneration, that's about 160 gallons per month - roughly $1.20 in water costs based on Phoenix utility rates.
Media Replacement Timeline: SoftPro estimates 3-5 years for media replacement in typical residential use. Based on our family's water consumption (about 8,000 gallons per month), I'm budgeting for media replacement around year 4. Estimated cost is $300-400 for both catalytic carbon and bone char media.
Routine Maintenance: Monthly tasks include checking system operation and programming verification. Quarterly tasks involve inspecting connections and testing bypass valve operation. Time investment is minimal - about 15 minutes per month.
Cost Comparison:** We were spending about $40 monthly on bottled water for drinking and cooking. The system eliminates this expense while providing filtered water for all household uses. Break-even point was reached after about 18 months considering initial investment.
Savings Realized: Beyond bottled water elimination, we use less soap and shampoo without chlorine interference. While these savings are smaller, they contribute to overall value proposition.
Honest Assessment - Limitations and Considerations
No water treatment system is perfect, and this one has limitations that potential buyers should understand:
Installation Complexity: This isn't a weekend DIY project for everyone. The system requires confident plumbing skills, proper tools, and careful planning. Professional installation would add $300-500 to project cost but might be worthwhile for many homeowners.
Space Requirements: The tank footprint and height require adequate space with maintenance access. Our garage location works well, but indoor installation might be challenging in smaller homes.
Initial Water Waste: The carbon fines flushing process wastes significant water during startup. Budget for 100-150 gallons of flushing water and time for thorough aerator cleaning.
Regeneration Noise: The backwash cycle is noticeable - not loud, but audible water movement for 45 minutes. Scheduling regeneration for late night hours minimizes any inconvenience.
Limited Hard Water Treatment: This system focuses on chemical contaminant removal, not water softening. Phoenix water is moderately hard (12-15 grains per gallon), and this system doesn't address hardness minerals. A separate water softener might be needed for optimal results.
Fluoride Removal Variability: While bone char effectively reduces fluoride, removal efficiency can vary based on water chemistry, flow rate, and media age. It's not as predictable as chlorine removal.
Media Replacement Costs: Long-term ownership includes media replacement every 3-5 years. While not excessive, it's a significant maintenance expense that should be factored into ownership decisions.
Despite these limitations, the benefits have outweighed the drawbacks for our family's specific needs and water quality concerns.
Final Verdict and Recommendation
After six months of daily use, I'm satisfied with the SoftPro Fluoride & Chlorine SUPER Filter system. It has delivered on its primary promises: effective chlorine removal, significant fluoride reduction, and improved overall water quality throughout our home.
Who Should Consider This System:** Families concerned about chlorine and fluoride exposure who want whole-house treatment without the complexity and waste of reverse osmosis. Homeowners with moderate DIY skills who can handle installation, or those willing to pay for professional setup.
Who Might Want Alternatives:** Households primarily concerned with hard water minerals should consider water softening systems instead. Those wanting maximum contaminant removal might prefer reverse osmosis despite higher complexity and operating costs.
Value Assessment:** At roughly $1,200 including installation materials, the system provides good value for families using significant amounts of water for drinking, cooking, and personal care. The eliminated bottled water costs and improved water quality justify the investment for our household.
Would I Purchase Again: Yes, with the knowledge I have now about installation requirements and performance expectations. The learning curve was worthwhile, and the daily benefits continue to validate our decision.
Key Success Factors:** Proper installation location planning, adequate flushing during startup, and realistic expectations about what the system does and doesn't address. Following the original reviewer's advice about disconnecting water lines for initial flushing was crucial for success.
This system has transformed our household's relationship with water quality. We drink confidently from any tap, cook without concern about chlorine interference, and have peace of mind about reduced fluoride exposure for our children. While not perfect, it's been an excellent solution for our specific Phoenix water quality challenges.



