on each curve, each tic represents the progression 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 3.0 gpm
so the RBX flow rate at 0.5m head loss is 1.5gpm

key ? on the graph ?
well hell yes, just read the name of the wb

Cathar, these guys need help

ahh - suddenly all is clear!... so to see the whitewater & cascade at their best we need the rest of it at over 1m....
and the 5003's disadvantage is that it is more restrictive than a 6000 - or even a cascade.....?? but the C/W vs Headloss graph flatters the less restrictive blocks (since the balance of the system would be a higher proportin of the total resistance and so a given pump would give a lower headloss to a less restrictive block...) so then the 5003g is better than i thought - :confused:

Why can't we stick to the old flow rate versus thermal resistance? Ack, this is probably much more useful, if we could see the full thing. I can't think tonight... It would seem that the RBX is the best, but that's at a much higher flow than the Cascade and WW are at in that chart. Do you still test, Bill, even though you work for Swiftech? Possibly for the reason of comparing? Is that the reason this graph exists?

Edit: Well, obviously you must still test, for this to exist. "Why?" is a much better question.

He tests because he is compelled to do so. Bill you should REALLY mess with people and make up an x,y,z graph with C/W, flow rate, and head loss as axes :)

If no tests are made, how do you know where you stand on your design (or others on theirs) ?.

Bill, I'd suggest a package deal for the MCW5003g and MCP1200.

hey; since neither exist, I'll bet its benchmarked at 110%

I'm quite into the numbers game, but truly we are discussing small increments; for any real user less than the mounting variation or the effects of hose bending on the TIM joint's compression

Okay..... heres a diagram I threw together on how I was planning on placing everything. It goes- Pump >> CPU >> GPU >> NB >> Radiator >> Reservoir >> Pump. I've tried to draw everything to their actual size as best I could without getting real technical:rolleyes:. The Reservoir in the diagram is the Tank-O-Matic and the Radiator is the Black Ice Xtreme II. I'm not saying that these are for sure the parts I'm buying, I just used their measurements for the diagram.
Alright.... now the big question. If I had those 120mm fans exhausting (pulling air through the radiator which is what I've heard is best), and seeing that the radiator is pretty close to the dvd-rom...... how much do you think this would this hurt my cooling capabilities to leave the dvd-rom there? I think the space would be about a half inch at the most. So, which would be better.... a single 120mm fan sized radiator/heatercore? Or a Dual 120mm fan sized radiator/heatercore with that very small gap on one side? :shrug: :shrug:

https://home.comcast.net/~snowrydr/diagram.jpg

This case sure wasn't built for watercooling lol...

https://home.comcast.net/~snowrydr/diagramplacement.jpg

you might want to consider splitting the loop after the CPU block and putting the Y adapter
after GPU & NB back to the Radiator
my 2¢

Can that MCP600 handle that? I was thinking that since the pump has good head pressure but not a very good gallons per minute rating that the other way would be better?? I don't know.... I'm no expert.

I'm no expert either..
i was just thinking it would be less restrictive that way...
if i'm wrong I'm shure some one else will pipe up and say so...

Parallel is generally bad, and always complicated. The more resistance you have on your system, the more the MCP 600 shines, relative to must pumps (most being everything but the MD-20RZT)

Alright, here's another question. I just went to the Hardware labs website (the company that makes the Black Ice radiators) and came up with these performance spec's (I underlined the heat ratings so they'd stand out more)......

So my question is how do these ratings compare to that of a heatercore? Everyone says heatercores are better, but I've never seen actual comparisons between the two.

I would think it would be the other way around...
the less restrictive i think would be better..
if the more resistance was better...
then i would kink all my hoses untill i had almost no flow... max resistance...

well I went for BIX rev2 and BIXmicro2 knowing full well that they wern't as eficient as a heater core.
the only reason i went with that instead is due to size...
i was unable to find a heatercore that would fit that size.
complete listing of heatercores listed here

if in this list you can find one that meets your requirements go with that instead.
I have a mini tower, 15" tall and in it i have the 2 above listed heatercores as well as 2x120mm fans in a push pull effect on the BIX and 4x80mm fans on the BIXmicro2 and add 2x1" for the shrowds for each BIX, leaves almost no space. but i got it all to fit :)
but if it wasn't for the size I would have gone with a heatercore. which is what i'm am planning to do with my server(Full height case).

Those radiator dissipation rating are a triumph of marketing. 1838 watts? With what, 80 C water and 90 dB 400 cfm fan? Their numbers are meaningless without knowing the test conditions.

And why the hell do they alway try to tack something to the end of watts? Power isn't watt-hours or watts per hour, it's just plain watts. Damn, I'd like to kick a marketor in the balls right now. :mad:

but that is what marketing is all about...
if you can take a number.. like watts and then multiply by 3600 to give watt/hours then they have a bigger number to make their claims with...

unless they make a statment that you can actualy prove that is wrong...
then they can be sued... and if they can't be sued.. then they will make that statment..
hell... a marketer will tell you that the sky would be more blue if you bought their product if they could get away with it. :evilaugh:

Thing is, W/h is a rate of change of heat dissipation, while Wh is a total energy dissipated in an (unspecified) time. Hence, these are meaningless...

To plumb it in parallel or series is quite easy to decide. Just buy some cheap vinyl tubing and try it both ways, see which way its flowing faster through the CPU block. Give it the old bucket test.

Too bad about the Black Ice radiators. Are you sure there isnt a core or two to fit? BIX seem like kind of a rip off to me.

Hmmm...
They're changed their site. They used to state measurement conditions on every page that had ratings for their radiators.
The one for the BlackIcePro (120mm but thinner than the BIX)
still does *100 CFM, .28inH2O fans, 6 l/min flow rate. The missing ones are (IMHO) a simple oversight - stuff gets lost nearly every time a web site gets re-designed.
I've been using the BIPs because they seem to do a decent job if you're watercooling for low-noise.
Without getting into the inaccuracies of stating CPU diode temps) I just swapped a BIP out for a chevette core + criticool shroud in my "main" PC.
Reported temps (adjusting for ambient, which have gone from 20C to 24C -not that my wall thermometer's particularly accurate either) are 1C cooler - which means they are essentially the same.
Bear in mind that I'm "off the bottom of the chart" in terms of airflow and air pressure (single panaflo on rad undervolted to 5V).

That is NOT what marketing is about. Bill gives out real numbers, and gives us the test conditions. However, most people don't give a **** about the test conditions, they just see the 100W rating he gives to the Micro, and think, "Hey, that's good enough!" "Marketing," like that of HELabs, is the worst part about watercooling.

SnowRider
you say you have read up on the subject; your questions conceal the expected results
go here and read the article on the Thermochill rads

as Groth stated, undefined conditions = bs marketing

bobkoure
and the temp rise across the wet side ?
dry side ?
suggest you read that rad article also

the BIX is expensive...
but essential in where size was the major factor... only factor.
the other option that should be considering when you plumb everything in...
how many bends and length of tubing you will need...
I have seen certain recommended flow paths... but if the recomended flow paths cause to many bends... make your own flow path...
like AntiBling said.. the bucket test is truely the only way to test your flow rate.

Ok, I've already read through the "Online Database for Heatercores: Ben" thread which poses my next question. I can't seem to figure out how to actually buy or look at the heatercore I'm interested in. For example, I like the dimensions of this heatercore but I don't know how to do anything with that information. Help?? :shrug:

*edit* I really should've waited to post my questions about radiators until this question got answered which will definitely limit my choices on rads/heatercores

2-756 is the Fedco number.
9.5 and 5.375 (aka 5 3/8") are the dimensions.
1.625 is the thickness (i.e. 1 5/8").
0.625 (twice) is the inlet and outlet diameter (5/8").

I knew the dimension part of it (sorry, I guess I didn't clarify that) but didn't know what to do with these #'s: 306 | a304 | 2-756
Ok, the 2-756 is the Fedco #....... what's that:shrug:?
What are the other #'s for and how would I go about buying this heatercore if it was the one I wanted? Thanks

Umm... We know for SURE that more water will flow through series, unless we're talking outrageous restriction like an X-flow. Parallel offers lower inlet temperatures.

Erm... You sure about that? If you've got two similar blocks, the flow resistance from them in parallell will be less than that for them in series. While this cuts the flow rate through the paralell blocks, it increases the system flow rate as a whole. If you split the flow at/after the CPU block then surely the CPU benefits from the increased flow while the GPU/NB/Other gubbins (which is less temperature sensitive) has reduced cooling.
This is all theoretical (I have yet to build a water cooled system) but it appears to make sense to me.

i note that still omits the key to their overblown ratings... 40C differential over the air... :rolleyes:

Fedco are one of the firms that make heatercores, each of whom have their own numbering system....
this extremely useful site lets you find the others:
http://www.autopart.com/radiatorinfo/heatercoretech.htm

enter the fedco number, change manufacturer to fedco and click continue... it also gives you a drawing from the GDI number...

Ok thx. That'd help except for the fact it didn't seem to be working. I entered the Fedco # switched the manufacturer to Fedco and clicked continue but just got a page where it looked like information should've been but wasn't there. I'll keep trying but I think they might be having problems at that site maybe? Thx again.