SoftPro Bone Char Carbon Water Filter Review by Real User

Hi, I'm Lori H. I live in Arizona. 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 the average American household consumes over 300 gallons of water daily, yet most of us have no idea what's actually flowing through our pipes?
I certainly didn't until six months ago when I made what turned out to be one of the best investments in our home's health and comfort. After living with questionable water quality in Arizona for three years, I finally took the plunge and installed the SoftPro Fluoride & Chlorine SUPER Filter system.
What started as a simple quest to eliminate the strong chlorine smell in our water turned into an eye-opening journey about water filtration technology, unexpected health improvements, and the real-world performance of catalytic bone char carbon systems. If you're considering a whole-house water filter and want the unvarnished truth from someone who's been living with this system daily, you're in the right place.
The Water Crisis That Pushed Me Over the Edge
Living in Arizona, I thought I understood water challenges. We deal with hard water, mineral buildup, and the constant battle against desert dust settling into everything. But it wasn't until we moved to our current home in a newer development that I realized how much municipal water treatment could affect daily life.
The chlorine smell hit you the moment you walked into our bathroom. Not just a faint chemical odor – I'm talking about a pool-like atmosphere that made morning showers feel like swimming laps. My husband joked that we should charge admission for our "home aquatic center," but the reality was far from amusing.
The taste was equally problematic. Our morning coffee had an underlying chemical bite that no amount of premium beans could mask. I found myself buying bottled water for drinking, which felt ridiculous when we had perfectly "safe" tap water according to municipal reports. The monthly grocery bill reflected this frustration – we were spending nearly $60 on bottled water alone.
But the real wake-up call came when I noticed changes in our skin and hair. My daughter, who's always had sensitive skin, started complaining about itchiness after showers. My own hair felt dry and brittle despite using expensive moisturizing products. The dermatologist suggested it might be environmental factors, and that's when I started connecting the dots.
I began researching our local water quality reports and discovered that while our municipal supply met EPA standards, it contained fluoride levels at 0.8 ppm and chlorine levels that fluctuated between 1.2 and 2.5 ppm depending on seasonal demand. The TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) readings averaged around 320 ppm – not terrible, but definitely on the higher end of acceptable ranges.
The final straw came during a dinner party when one of our guests, who happened to be a water quality specialist, politely declined our offer of tap water. When pressed, he mentioned that he could "taste the treatment chemicals" and suggested we might benefit from filtration. That conversation haunted me for weeks.
My Deep Dive Into Water Filtration Research
What followed was three months of intensive research that made me feel like I was pursuing a degree in water chemistry. I started with basic whole-house filtration options, quickly learning that the market is flooded with solutions ranging from simple sediment filters to complex multi-stage systems costing thousands of dollars.
Initially, I gravitated toward reverse osmosis systems because they seemed like the most comprehensive solution. However, the more I learned about RO technology, the more I questioned whether it was right for our situation. RO systems remove virtually everything from water – including beneficial minerals – and generate significant wastewater. For every gallon of filtered water, some systems waste 3-4 gallons. In Arizona's desert climate, that wastewater ratio felt environmentally irresponsible.
Carbon filtration emerged as a more balanced approach. I learned that activated carbon works through adsorption, where contaminants adhere to the carbon's massive surface area. A single pound of activated carbon can have a surface area exceeding 100 acres. But not all carbon filters are created equal – the source material, activation process, and media bed design dramatically impact performance.
This is where I discovered catalytic carbon and bone char carbon, two specialized filtration media that addressed my specific concerns. Catalytic carbon, I learned, is particularly effective at removing chlorine and chloramines while also reducing certain volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The catalytic process actually breaks down chlorine molecules rather than simply filtering them out, making it more effective for long-term use.
Bone char carbon intrigued me because of its unique ability to remove fluoride – something standard activated carbon cannot effectively accomplish. Made from animal bones heated to high temperatures, bone char creates a calcium phosphate structure that attracts fluoride ions. The combination of surface adsorption and ion exchange makes it particularly effective for fluoride reduction.
I spent weeks comparing flow rates, contact time requirements, and media replacement schedules. I learned that effective filtration requires sufficient contact time between water and media, which means balancing flow rate with filter size. Most whole-house systems need to maintain 5-15 GPM flow rates while ensuring adequate contact time for effective contaminant removal.
After analyzing dozens of options, the SoftPro Fluoride & Chlorine SUPER Filter stood out for several reasons. The system combines catalytic carbon with bone char in an upflow design that maximizes contact time while maintaining consistent flow rates. The 1.5 cubic foot media bed seemed appropriately sized for our household consumption of approximately 150 gallons daily.
Unboxing and Initial Setup Experience
When the SoftPro system arrived, I was immediately impressed by the packaging quality. Everything came wrapped in protective material with clear labeling and organization. The main components included the fiberglass tank, control valve assembly, media blend, and comprehensive installation hardware.
The fiberglass tank felt substantial – definitely built for long-term use rather than budget construction. The Clack control valve had a solid, professional feel that gave me confidence in its reliability. I particularly appreciated the clear labeling on all components and the detailed parts diagram that helped me understand how everything fit together.
The installation manual deserves special mention. Unlike many technical documents that assume extensive plumbing knowledge, SoftPro's guide walked through each step with clear diagrams and explanations of why each connection mattered. They even included common troubleshooting scenarios and solutions.
One pleasant surprise was the inclusion of bypass valves and all necessary fittings. Many filtration systems require additional trips to hardware stores for miscellaneous parts, but everything needed for a complete installation was included. The attention to detail extended to small items like pipe thread compound and properly sized tubing.
I decided to tackle the installation myself, partly for the learning experience and partly to avoid the $300-500 professional installation fee. The system requires connection to main water lines, which initially seemed intimidating, but the step-by-step approach made it manageable for someone with basic DIY skills.
Installation Journey and First Challenges
The installation process took me a full Saturday, though someone with more plumbing experience could probably complete it in 4-5 hours. I allocated extra time for careful work and inevitable learning moments that come with tackling new projects.
The first step involved shutting off main water supply and draining the system – straightforward but requiring coordination with family members who needed advance notice. I chose a location in our utility room that provided easy access to main lines while leaving room for future maintenance.
Cutting into the main water line felt like the point of no return. I measured three times before making cuts, following the manual's guidance for proper spacing and alignment. The bypass valve installation proved crucial – it allows system isolation for maintenance while maintaining household water supply.
The control valve mounting and programming presented the biggest learning curve. The Clack valve offers multiple programmable settings for regeneration cycles, flow rates, and monitoring functions. Understanding these options required careful manual reading and some trial-and-error adjustment.
I encountered one significant challenge during initial startup. The system's automatic air purge cycle didn't complete properly, leaving air pockets that caused sputtering at fixtures. After consulting the troubleshooting section, I learned that manual air bleeding was necessary for our specific plumbing configuration. This involved opening faucets in sequence while monitoring pressure gauge readings.
The media bed settling process took longer than expected. The manufacturer recommends running water through the system for 15-20 minutes to settle the catalytic carbon and bone char media. However, it took nearly 45 minutes before the water ran completely clear. I later learned this is normal for new installations and indicates proper media distribution.
Once everything stabilized, the initial performance test was revealing. I used TDS meters and chlorine test strips to measure before and after filtration results. Pre-filtration readings showed 1.8 ppm chlorine and 325 ppm TDS. Post-filtration measurements dropped to undetectable chlorine levels and 290 ppm TDS – exactly what I hoped to see.
Performance Analysis: Six Months of Real-World Testing
Six months of daily use has provided extensive performance data across different seasons and usage patterns. I've maintained a testing log to track system effectiveness and identify any performance changes over time.
Chlorine Removal Performance
The catalytic carbon component consistently reduces chlorine to undetectable levels. I test weekly using both test strips and electronic meters, and results remain stable regardless of seasonal fluctuations in municipal chlorine levels. During summer months when our water utility increases chlorine concentration for safety, the system maintains consistent removal efficiency.
The elimination of chlorine odor was immediate and complete. No more pool-like bathroom atmosphere, and the change in shower experience was dramatic. My family members noticed the difference within days, commenting on how much more pleasant bathing became.
Fluoride Reduction Results
The bone char media effectively reduces fluoride from our municipal supply's 0.8 ppm to approximately 0.2 ppm based on laboratory testing I conducted at three-month intervals. This 75% reduction rate aligns with manufacturer specifications and provides the fluoride control I sought without complete elimination.
I chose to maintain some fluoride presence based on dental health research, and the bone char system allows this balanced approach. Complete fluoride removal would require reverse osmosis or specialized ion exchange resins, but the bone char reduction meets our family's preferences.
Flow Rate and Pressure Maintenance
One of my primary concerns involved potential pressure drops during peak usage periods. Our household routine includes simultaneous morning showers, dishwasher operation, and laundry cycles that stress any filtration system.
The upflow design effectively maintains pressure during high-demand periods. I measured pressure drops of only 3-5 PSI during peak usage, compared to 10-15 PSI drops I experienced with previous point-of-use filters. The 1.5 cubic foot media bed provides sufficient capacity for our 150-gallon daily consumption without flow restrictions.
Water Quality Improvements
Beyond targeted contaminant removal, several unexpected improvements emerged. The catalytic carbon reduces chlorinated volatile organic compounds (CVOCs) and certain chemical byproducts that affect taste and odor. Our coffee and tea taste significantly better – no underlying chemical notes that previously required masking with additional flavoring.
The TDS reduction, while modest, removes some dissolved minerals that contributed to scale buildup in appliances. Our dishwasher's performance improved noticeably, with fewer water spots on glassware and reduced mineral deposits in the unit itself.
Seasonal Performance Variations
Arizona's seasonal temperature swings affect municipal water treatment, which in turn impacts filtration performance. During cooler months, chlorine levels drop slightly, while summer heat requires increased disinfection chemicals.
The SoftPro system handles these variations without performance degradation. The catalytic carbon media adapts to different chlorine concentrations automatically, maintaining consistent removal rates regardless of input levels. This adaptability eliminates the need for seasonal adjustments or system modifications.
Daily Life Impact: The Unexpected Benefits
While I installed this system primarily to address chlorine and fluoride concerns, the broader impact on daily life has been more significant than anticipated. These improvements emerged gradually, making them even more meaningful because they represent genuine lifestyle enhancements rather than immediate placebo effects.
Personal and Family Health Changes
The most dramatic change occurred with my daughter's sensitive skin issues. Within three weeks of installation, her post-shower itchiness disappeared completely. Her pediatric dermatologist noticed the improvement during a routine visit and asked what environmental changes we'd made.
My own hair and skin condition improved noticeably. Hair feels softer and more manageable, requiring less conditioning product. Skin dryness that I attributed to Arizona's desert climate diminished significantly. These improvements suggest that chlorine exposure was contributing to dermal irritation more than I realized.
My husband, who was initially skeptical about water filtration benefits, became a convert when he noticed that his morning coffee ritual improved. As someone who takes coffee seriously, he immediately detected the elimination of chemical undertones that previously required darker roasts to mask.
Household Appliance Performance
Our dishwasher's performance transformation surprised me. Previously, glassware emerged with water spots requiring additional rinsing or hand-drying. Now, dishes air-dry without spotting, and the dishwasher itself shows reduced mineral buildup in spray arms and filters.
The washing machine also benefits from improved water quality. Clothes feel softer without fabric softener, and colors appear brighter. White items maintain their brightness longer, suggesting that chlorine was contributing to fabric degradation over time.
Our water heater operates more efficiently with reduced mineral content. While the system doesn't soften water like a salt-based system would, the modest TDS reduction appears to slow scale accumulation in heating elements.
Financial Impact and Cost Savings
The elimination of bottled water purchases provides immediate monthly savings of approximately $60. Over six months, this represents $360 in direct cost recovery. Extended over the system's expected lifespan, bottled water savings alone justify a significant portion of the investment.
Reduced soap and shampoo usage adds additional savings. Without chlorine stripping natural oils, we use approximately 25% less personal care products. Laundry detergent consumption dropped similarly, as clothes clean more effectively in chlorine-free water.
The improved appliance longevity, while harder to quantify immediately, represents long-term value. Our dishwasher and washing machine should require less maintenance and last longer with improved water quality.
Entertainment and Social Benefits
Hosting dinner parties became more enjoyable when we could confidently offer tap water without embarrassment. Our water quality specialist friend, who initially declined our tap water, now compliments our system's performance and has recommended similar filtration to other homeowners.
Cooking improvements extend beyond coffee and tea. Soups, pasta water, Get more info and other recipes that rely on water quality show noticeable enhancement. Ice cubes taste clean and clear, making mixed drinks and cold beverages more enjoyable.
Maintenance Reality: What Actually Required Attention
Six months of ownership has provided realistic insight into maintenance requirements, costs, and time commitments. The manufacturer's maintenance schedule serves as a guideline, but real-world conditions require some adaptation and ongoing monitoring.
Routine Monitoring Tasks
Weekly testing became part of my routine, taking about 10 minutes to check chlorine levels, test taste and odor, and verify system pressure readings. I use simple test strips for chlorine detection and maintain a log to track any changes or trends.
Monthly system inspections involve checking bypass valve operation, inspecting connections for leaks, and reviewing control valve settings. These tasks require minimal time but provide early warning of potential issues.
Media Replacement Planning
The catalytic carbon and bone char media blend requires replacement every 3-5 years depending on usage and water quality conditions. With our consumption patterns and municipal water characteristics, I'm planning for replacement at the four-year mark.
Media replacement costs approximately $150-200 for the complete bed, making annual operating costs quite reasonable. The process involves draining the system, removing old media, and installing fresh carbon and bone char – manageable for DIY maintenance or professional service.
Control Valve Maintenance
The Clack control valve requires minimal maintenance beyond occasional programming verification and seal inspection. The manufacturer recommends annual lubrication of moving parts, which takes about 30 minutes and costs under $20 for supplies.
One advantage of the mechanical control system is its reliability compared to electronic alternatives. No complex circuit boards or sensors that can fail, just proven mechanical timers and flow controls that operate consistently.
System Cleaning and Sanitization
Annual system sanitization helps maintain optimal performance and prevent bacterial growth. This involves introducing a dilute chlorine solution, circulating it through the system, and thoroughly rinsing before returning to service.
The sanitization process takes about two hours including contact time and flushing cycles. I schedule this maintenance during periods when household water usage is naturally low to minimize inconvenience.
Unexpected Maintenance Issues
The only unplanned maintenance occurred when mineral deposits partially blocked the control valve's flow meter. This happened after four months and required disassembly and cleaning – about an hour of work with basic tools.
This issue resulted from our area's high mineral content and represents typical wear for Arizona water conditions. Now I inspect and clean the flow meter during regular maintenance cycles to prevent recurrence.
The Honest Truth: Limitations and Disappointments
After six months of daily use, I've identified several limitations and minor frustrations that potential buyers should understand. While I'm ultimately satisfied with the system's performance, honest assessment requires acknowledging these imperfections.
Installation Space Requirements
The system requires more space than I initially anticipated. The tank dimensions are clearly specified, but real-world installation needs additional clearance for maintenance access and valve operation. Measure carefully and plan for serviceability, not just fitting the unit into available space.
The control valve extends beyond the tank footprint, and the bypass valve assembly adds complexity to plumbing connections. In tight utility rooms, these space requirements might eliminate convenient installation locations.
Initial Water Waste and Setup Time
The media settling process wastes significant water – approximately 50-75 gallons during initial startup and annual maintenance cycles. In water-conscious Arizona, this feels wasteful, though it's necessary for proper system operation.
Setup time exceeded expectations, particularly for programming the control valve and achieving proper media bed settling. Plan for a full day installation even with good plumbing skills, and have backup water arrangements for your family.
Performance Limitations
The system doesn't address all water quality issues. Hard water minerals remain largely unchanged, so you'll still experience scale buildup if that's a concern in your area. The modest TDS reduction helps slightly, but dedicated water softening requires different technology.
Fluoride removal, while effective, isn't complete. If your goal is maximum fluoride reduction, reverse osmosis or specialized ion exchange systems provide more comprehensive removal. The bone char media provides good reduction but not elimination.
Ongoing Cost Considerations
Media replacement costs accumulate over time. While annual operating costs remain reasonable, the periodic major expense of media replacement (every 3-5 years) should factor into long-term budgeting.
Professional installation, if chosen, adds $300-500 to initial costs. While DIY installation is possible, the complexity might justify professional service for homeowners without plumbing experience.
Seasonal Performance Variations
During periods when our municipal utility increases chlorine levels, I notice slightly more breakthrough than during normal conditions. While removal remains effective, the system operates closer to capacity limits during these periods.
Hot weather affects media performance slightly, requiring more frequent testing to ensure consistent results. This isn't a significant issue but requires awareness for optimal system management.
Minor Design Frustrations
The control valve display, while functional, lacks backlighting for reading in dim utility room conditions. Programming requires consulting the manual repeatedly until you memorize the sequence.
Drain line routing during regeneration cycles can be challenging in some installations. Plan drain routing carefully to avoid flooding or inadequate drainage during maintenance cycles.
Despite these limitations, the system delivers its primary promised benefits effectively. Understanding these constraints helps set realistic expectations and avoid disappointment with capabilities outside the system's intended scope.


