I think it's a special situation that no one else but Bill has performed any kind of significant radiator testing. I'm not forgetting anyone, am I?

you're getting good at irony Ben

I was pretty careful not to attribute "BillA is a liar" to your comments, Bruce, because I don't believe you said those words. What you implied is another matter. That's all a matter of interpretation, and I'm not even going there. You can come to 1001 conclusions from even one sentence, and there was a heck of a lot more than 1001.

Marci, unless I'm missing something, that was a dang good post. Thank you.

Sounds like I may need to break out some of my own Pine-fresh scent. Too much fecal matter being flung for things to smell good. Might not help, but at least a sh*tty christmas tree smells better than just sh*t. Pardon my crudity, please. :(

Does this forum block the word shit now?

//edit guess not

Nope, just some of us like to self-censor for our own conscience's sake... :D

:D Joe-you're killing me! I started laughing so hard I almost spit all over my laptop. Thanks-I needed a good laugh.

MaxxxRacer did some comparative testing between a 12T and a BIX, but nothing beyond that AFAIK.

Are the "Mark and Bucky from frozen" referenced from page 2 or so the Mark (dunno about the bucky) of frozenCPU? Assuming that they are, do they happen to ever visit any of these forums? Just wondering and frozenCPU's HQ is spitting distance from me.

We(Incoherent and I) are exploring the possibility of obtaining numbers which may be closely related to TTV and Overall(die or IHS) "C/W" from Incoherent's method.(link)
My current view is that Femlabs Centreline(FC) solution is closely related to TTV values
The Average(mean, median or whatever) is the Overall solution.
The problem is that I believe that FC solution requires modeling of the wb.
Hence my continual probing(link) for Cathar's model for Cascade/Storm.

From RoboTech's work(link) I infer a value for the Storm G4( @ 4.5w Hydraulic Power Loss(HPL))of h(eff)=170,000 if 0.1mm thick bp under a ~20x20mm cupped area, and a more likely h(eff)=240,000 if 1mm bp under a ~20x20mm cupped area. Inference based on my model(link and link) for the MP-05-SP where h=~215,000 ( 1.8gpm, 4.5w) over 14.4x14.4mm area.
This range(170,000-240,000) is incompatible with Cathars inferred value of < 77,000(Cathar infers 77,000 -83,000(link) over unknown area @ 6w HPL)
With his access to unpublished data(eg link) , it is difficult to not place some credence on his value.
This leaves me completely stalled in "Incoherent Data Analysis"(link)
Maybe Incoherent has made some progress but........

Edit1: Corrected mis-quoted Cathar value for h(eff) and provided link
Edit2: Fixed non-working linkand spelling.