Hi, I’m Carl F.. I live in Los Angeles.

Craig “The Water Guy” Phillips asked me to share my homeowner experience with the local tap water from the city and the SoftPro® Elite HE Water Softener for City Water (Industry’s Best Softener & Filter Combo) I purchased.

This is how my adventures played out. I hope this helps you in your decision.

Eight months ago, I was at my breaking point with our water situation. Every morning, I’d wake up to crusty white buildup around our faucets, and my wife constantly complained about how dry and itchy her skin felt after showers. Our glassware looked perpetually cloudy no matter how carefully we hand-washed them, and I was spending a fortune on bottled water because the tap water tasted like it came straight from a swimming pool.

What finally pushed me over the edge?
Our five-year-old water heater started making strange noises, and when the technician opened it up, he showed me the massive scale buildup inside. “This thing should last another decade,” he said, “but with your water hardness, you’ll be lucky to get two more years.” That’s when I realized our water wasn’t just an inconvenience—it was costing me serious money.
The Problem That Was Draining My Wallet and Patience
Living in Los Angeles, I knew our municipal water was heavily treated, but I didn’t understand the full scope of what that meant for my household until I started digging deeper. The chlorine smell was obvious—you could detect it the moment you turned on any faucet—but the hardness minerals were the silent destroyers working behind the scenes.

Did you know that Los Angeles water typically contains 12-15 grains per gallon of hardness?
I tested our water and found we were sitting at 14 GPG, which puts us firmly in the “very hard” category. For context, anything above 10 GPG is considered extremely hard, and the damage compounds quickly.

The calcium and magnesium in our water were creating scale deposits throughout our plumbing system. Every appliance that used water—our dishwasher, washing machine, coffee maker, even our ice maker—was fighting an uphill battle against mineral buildup. Our dishwasher’s heating element had a thick, chalky coating that reduced its efficiency by an estimated 25%, according to the appliance repair technician who serviced it.

But the real eye-opener came when I calculated the hidden costs. We were going through twice as much laundry detergent because the hard water prevented proper lathering. Our soap scum required harsh chemical cleaners and significant elbow grease to remove. I was replacing our showerheads every eight months because the mineral deposits would clog the holes completely.

The chlorine situation was equally frustrating. At 3.2 parts per million, our municipal water exceeded what I was comfortable drinking. The taste was metallic and heavily chemical, and I worried about what long-term consumption might mean for our family’s health. We were buying cases of bottled water for drinking and cooking, which added up to about $80 per month.

My previous “solution” attempts had been band-aids at best. I tried a basic pitcher filter, but it couldn’t keep up with our family’s water consumption and did nothing for the hardness minerals. A faucet-mounted filter helped slightly with taste but again ignored the larger hard water issues affecting our entire plumbing system.
Research Phase: Learning What I Actually Needed [

](https://www.softprowatersystems.com/products/softpro-elite-basic-high-flow-high-efficiency-water-softener)

After the water heater wake-up call, I dove deep into understanding water treatment options. I spent weeks reading about different technologies, comparing systems, and trying to figure out what would actually solve our specific combination of problems.

The first thing I learned was that I needed two different technologies. Hardness minerals require ion exchange resin to remove calcium and magnesium ions, while chlorine and taste issues need activated carbon filtration. Most basic systems only address one problem or the other, not both comprehensively.

I researched salt-based versus salt-free systems extensively. Salt-free systems, while appealing from a maintenance perspective, don’t actually remove hardness minerals—they claim to condition them to reduce scaling. Given the severe hardness levels in LA water and the damage I was already seeing, I needed true removal, not just conditioning.

Capacity became a crucial factor in my decision. With a family of four and typical Los Angeles water hardness, I calculated we needed a system capable of handling approximately 40,000 grains of hardness removal between regenerations. This translates to about 2,800 gallons of treated water at our hardness level—roughly a week’s worth of usage for our household.

I also prioritized efficiency ratings. Traditional water softeners can waste 50-100 gallons during each regeneration cycle, but high-efficiency models reduce this to 18-25 gallons. With California’s water restrictions and our environmental consciousness, this was non-negotiable.

Flow rate requirements were another consideration. We needed at least 10 gallons per minute to handle simultaneous water usage—shower running while the dishwasher operates, for example. Many systems restrict flow significantly, creating pressure drops that make showers unsatisfying.

After comparing technologies, certifications, and user experiences across multiple brands, the SoftPro Elite HE consistently emerged as the solution that addressed all our requirements: true hardness removal, effective chlorine reduction, high efficiency, adequate flow rates, and compact design suitable for our utility room space.
Why I Chose the SoftPro Elite HE System
Several specific features made the SoftPro Elite HE stand out from the competition, but the deciding factor was its combination approach to multiple water problems.

The dual-tank configuration immediately caught my attention. Instead of trying to solve everything with one vessel, this system uses a dedicated softening tank with high-capacity ion exchange resin alongside a separate carbon filtration tank. This means each component can be optimized for its specific job without compromising the other’s performance.

The softening capacity of 48,000 grains gave us headroom above our calculated needs, which translates to longer periods between regeneration cycles and more consistent performance even during high-usage periods. The high-efficiency design promised to use only 18 gallons per regeneration compared to the 60-80 gallons traditional systems consume.

Flow rate specifications showed 12 GPM capability, which meant no pressure drops during normal household usage. I’d read too many complaints about other systems reducing shower pressure to unacceptable levels, especially in homes with multiple bathrooms.

The carbon filtration component uses coconut shell activated carbon, https://www.trustpilot.com/review/softprowatersystems.com which is particularly effective at chlorine removal and taste improvement. The system’s design allows for independent replacement of carbon media without disturbing the softening resin, making long-term maintenance more straightforward and cost-effective.

NSF certification for both hardness reduction and chlorine removal provided third-party validation of performance claims. Too many systems make bold promises without independent testing to back them up.

Size considerations were important for our utility room installation. At 54 inches tall and 13 inches wide, the system fits in tight spaces while still providing commercial-grade capacity. Many comparable systems require significantly more floor space.

The 10-year warranty on the tanks and 5-year coverage on the control head demonstrated manufacturer confidence in build quality. This wasn’t a “hope it works” purchase—it was an investment in long-term water quality with substantial protection.
Installation Day: Easier Than Expected
I opted for professional installation despite being fairly handy with plumbing projects. The complexity of properly integrating a dual-tank system into our existing plumbing, along with the warranty requirements, made professional installation the smart choice.

The installer arrived with the system components and spent about 20 minutes surveying our utility room and existing plumbing before beginning work. He explained that the installation would require tying into our main water line, installing bypass valves, connecting to our drain system, and running electrical to power the control head.

Our existing plumbing used 1-inch copper supply lines, which was ideal for maintaining proper flow rates through the system. Homes with ¾-inch supply lines sometimes experience flow restrictions, but we had adequate infrastructure.

The bypass valve installation took the longest—about 90 minutes—because it required cutting into the main supply line and soldering new fittings. This component allows water to flow around the system during maintenance or emergencies, which proved valuable during the initial setup and testing phase.

Drain connection was straightforward since our utility sink was nearby. The system requires a drain connection for the regeneration cycles, and proper air gap installation prevents any possibility of backflow contamination.

Electrical installation was simple—just a standard 110V connection to power the digital control head. The power consumption is minimal, adding maybe $2-3 per month to our electric bill based on my calculations.

Initial system startup took about 45 minutes. The installer programmed the control head with our specific water hardness levels, set regeneration schedules based on our usage patterns, and ran the first regeneration cycle to properly condition the resin bed.

Total installation time was approximately 4 hours, and the installer left me with a comprehensive overview of operation, maintenance requirements, and troubleshooting basics. The first treated water came out about 30 minutes after completion, and the difference was immediately noticeable.
Performance Testing: The Numbers Don’t Lie
I’m a bit of a data nerd, so I documented the system’s performance extensively using water testing kits and my TDS meter. The results exceeded my expectations across every metric I measured.

Hardness reduction has been consistent and dramatic. Pre-treatment tests showed our water at 14 grains per gallon, while post-treatment measurements consistently read 0-1 GPG. This represents over 95% hardness removal, which matches the NSF-certified performance specifications.

Chlorine elimination has been equally impressive. Our municipal water typically contains 3.2 PPM of chlorine, but treated water tests at 0.1 PPM or less—well below taste and odor thresholds. The difference is immediately apparent: no chemical smell, no metallic aftertaste, just clean-tasting water.

Flow rate performance has maintained manufacturer specifications. I measured 11.5 GPM at our kitchen faucet during system operation, compared to 12.2 GPM with the bypass engaged. This represents less than 6% flow reduction—imperceptible during normal use.

Regeneration efficiency has proven as advertised. The system uses exactly 18 gallons during its regeneration cycle, which occurs approximately every 8 days with our family’s usage pattern. Previous research suggested traditional systems would use 60-80 gallons for similar capacity, so we’re saving about 50 gallons per week.

Salt consumption averages 35 pounds every six weeks. At current salt prices, this translates to approximately $12 per month in consumable costs. When compared to our previous $80 monthly bottled water expenses, the operational savings are substantial.

Carbon filter performance has remained consistent over eight months of operation. Taste and odor removal capability hasn’t degraded noticeably, though I plan to replace the carbon media at the 12-month mark as recommended.

TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) measurements show the system selectively removes hardness minerals while leaving beneficial minerals largely intact. Pre-treatment TDS measured 280 PPM, while post-treatment reads 180 PPM—removing the problematic minerals while maintaining water that isn’t overly stripped.
Daily Life Transformation: The Unexpected Benefits
The changes to our daily routine and household maintenance have been more significant than I anticipated. Some benefits were immediate and obvious, while others became apparent over weeks and months of use.

Shower and bathing experiences improved dramatically within the first week. My wife noticed softer skin and hair almost immediately, and we’ve both reduced our use of moisturizers and conditioners. Our teenage daughter’s skin improved noticeably—something we hadn’t expected but were thrilled to see.

Dish and glassware cleaning became effortless. No more cloudy spots on glasses, no more soap scum buildup, and significantly less detergent required. Our dishwasher performance improved to the point where we rarely hand-wash anything anymore.

Laundry results surprised me the most. Clothes come out brighter, softer, and we’re using about half the detergent we used previously. Towels stay fluffy instead of becoming stiff and scratchy after a few washes. Colors seem more vibrant, and whites stay whiter longer.

Coffee and cooking water quality transformed our kitchen experience. Coffee tastes cleaner and more complex—we can actually taste the bean characteristics that hard, chlorinated water was masking. Ice cubes are crystal clear instead of cloudy, and soups and pasta dishes taste noticeably better.

Cleaning throughout the house became less labor-intensive. Faucets stay shiny longer, shower doors don’t develop that impossible-to-remove film, and bathroom fixtures require minimal scrubbing to maintain their appearance.

Our plants have responded positively to the treated water. The chlorine removal has been particularly beneficial for our indoor plants, which were showing stress signs from municipal water chemicals.

Unexpected financial benefits continue emerging. We’ve eliminated bottled water purchases entirely, reduced cleaning product consumption by roughly half, and our appliances are running more efficiently without mineral buildup affecting their performance.
Operating Costs and Long-Term Economics
After eight months of operation, I have solid data on the actual costs of ownership, and the economics are even better than my initial projections.

Monthly consumable costs average $14.50, broken down as follows: salt ($12), electricity ($2.50). This represents the total variable cost of operation, assuming normal household usage patterns.

Salt consumption has been predictable at 35 pounds every six weeks. I buy 50-pound bags of solar salt for approximately $6 each, making salt costs very manageable. The system’s efficiency means we’re not wasting salt through excessive regeneration cycles.

Annual maintenance requirements are minimal. Carbon filter replacement at 12-month intervals costs approximately $85. The ion exchange resin should last 8-10 years with proper maintenance, representing a future cost of about $150 when replacement becomes necessary.

Savings generated by the system continue growing. We’ve eliminated $80 monthly bottled water expenses, reduced cleaning products by about $20 monthly, and our improved appliance efficiency should extend equipment life significantly.

Energy savings aren’t dramatic but are measurable. Our water heater operates more efficiently without scale buildup, and our dishwasher completes cycles faster with soft water. I estimate 5-8% reduction in water heating costs.

Return on investment calculations show payback in approximately 18 months when considering eliminated bottled water costs alone. Including reduced cleaning products, improved appliance efficiency, and potential plumbing maintenance savings, the payback period drops to about 14 months.

Comparative cost analysis shows this system delivering better value than annual bottled water expenses while providing whole-house benefits that bottled water can’t match. The per-gallon cost of treated water works out to approximately $0.003 per gallon—dramatically less than any bottled water option.
Honest Assessment: What Could Be Better
While I’m extremely satisfied with the system’s performance, honest evaluation reveals several areas where improvements could enhance the ownership experience.

The digital control head, while functional, feels somewhat dated compared to modern smart home devices. Programming requires consulting the manual, and the interface isn’t intuitive for adjusting settings. A smartphone app for monitoring and control would be a welcome upgrade.

Physical footprint, though reasonable, still requires dedicated utility room space. Homeowners with tight quarters might struggle with installation, especially considering the dual-tank configuration requires more space than single-tank alternatives.

Salt loading requires lifting 50-pound bags every six weeks. While not excessive, homeowners with physical limitations might find this challenging. The salt storage compartment could accommodate more salt to reduce loading frequency.

Initial water taste required a brief adjustment period. The first few days of operation produced water that tasted “different”—not bad, just unfamiliar after years of heavily chlorinated municipal water. This resolved quickly as we adapted to clean water taste.

Regeneration noise is noticeable but not problematic. The system regenerates during programmed overnight hours, producing motor and water flow sounds audible in adjacent rooms. It’s not disruptive to sleep, but light sleepers might notice.

Carbon filter replacement requires basic plumbing knowledge and tools. While not complicated, it’s more involved than changing a pitcher filter. Professional service is available but adds to operational costs.

System monitoring requires manual checking of salt levels and periodic testing of water quality. More automated monitoring capabilities would enhance the user experience for those who prefer hands-off operation.

These limitations are relatively minor compared to the system’s benefits, but they’re worth considering based on your specific situation and expectations. None of these issues would prevent me from recommending the system or purchasing it again.