MCW6ks are is great ... but which to choose ?
 

I am definetely going with one of the MCW6k series WB.
I will be using either the MCP600 (AquaXtreme) or the D4 (leaning towards D4)
I had my mind set on 1/2 ID tubing, though the truth is, that 3/8 tubing is becoming more and more appealing to me as it is easier to route and won't stress the block mounting as much.

What appeals to me is that the MCW6000 performs equal to, and at high flowrates even better than its 1/2 brother.

If I do go with 3/8 ID tubing I will continue to use 1/2 OD barbs for the Core (DtekPro) and will probably plumb larger diameter tubing between the T and the pump inlet.

My question is ( I actually just need peer reassurance ), would anybody here recommend this path?
I was so focused on getting 1/2 tubing that I am now having a hard time considering other options. lol

3/8 ID tubing over 1/2 OD barbing sounds good to me (and unrestrictive, too)

I am basing my question on Phaestus's proving that the MCW6002 wont outperform the MCW6000 in a setup similar to mine.

Recommendations are appreciated

SenC.

nobody has any suggestions?
wow

SenC.

If you go with 3/8" ID tubing you can use quick connect fittings too. Just another minor plus.

true.

pHaestus, do you by any chance own a D4, if yes do you think 3/8 ID will go over those barbs and still be safe ?

thanks.

I bought a swifty kit (6x6 heatercore in place of the 80mm rad) for my system at my office, I have a new respect for 3/8" ID systems... still not finnished tweakin but overall I'm thinkin my home system will be getting the same setup. :D

Personally, if I were to go with the high flowing D4 pump, I'd use 1/2" tubing. I would only pair 3/8" tubing with a low flow pump, like the c-systems pump for instance

Well I wouldn't too excited about 3/8. With just a CPU block the difference isn't that great between the 6002 and the 6000. But if you were to add more blocks and restriction I bet that the 1/2 tubing would make up the difference between them if not more. Now I would love to see more 3/8 tubing as the 1/2 isn't exactly easy to work with. I just would like to see more than just peformance of a single waterblock as to whether the 3/8 is sufficient for a complete setup. My next setup will be 3/8 but its going in my gf's machine so I want small and simple. She is going for low noise, not as much overclocking. Although my machine on water seems more stable on water, much less instances of weird behaviour or stuttering.

Well... my D4 has 3/4" barbs on it and not 1/2 so no chance with the 3/8" tubing. I use 3/4" from the inlet to a res (about an inch) and 3/4" hose from the outlet to my heatercore as well (3 inches max). I could easily run 3/8" ID tubing from the heatercore to wbs and back to the res though.

I'm cooling a ti4400 as well as P4 2.8b @ 3.6 with it, seems to be doing fine.

Vid card is @ stock speeds (It's a work system that only sees a bit of UT2k4) and CPU is where it was with air running considerably cooler (MBM for temps so they mean nothing). Haven't had time to really start playin with it again but the CPU should do 3.8 or higher... we'll see.

hmm... That is similar to what I was going to, do minus
the large diameter tubing from pressure-outlet to rad.

@pHaestus: You wouldnt happen to have received this
after placing an order for a 3/4 D4, would you?
3/4 D4 :cool:

Anyways Ill do more research on the pro's and con's of
3/8 (got past that very long ago, but oh well)

SenC.

1/2 will do better I'm sure, but Swiftech did their homework and with this 3/8 setup I should be able to get all this system can give... Hell I think a PCP&C power supply would net me more gain in stable MHz than going to 1/2 in this system.

To clairify if I thought this CPU would pass 4GHz 1/2 would be my choice.

3/8" will hurt much less with a D4 than with a C-systems pump. The more powerful the pump and the more restrictive the block, the less the tubing matters. In this case, with a D4 and a 6000, the 3/8" won't affect temperatures (might help because you can use the 6000). Go for it.

Thats my whole basis for considering the switch to 3/8. I see mainly positive aspects from the change.
A. easier to route and deal with
B. less restriction in barbs if using 1/2 ID barbs (Dont know if thats ACTUALLY the case however!)
C. Looks tidier

I mainly want to consider the future of WC regarding possible upgrades. It seems to me that the WC standard will move towards 3/8 ID tubing. With the advent of future pumps in the style of the D4 but more powerful, 3/8 will IMO become more widespread.
Dont get me wrong I like 1/2 ID just as much, my uncertainty being the reason I started this thread.
Further inout is apprectiated.

SenC.

Don't get confused here. This is a particular case where the inlet nozzle of the MCW6000-A is performing slightly better than the inlet of the MCW6002. 3/8" tubing IS wasting finite pump head that could be used to generate water velocity in a block. Whether that matters is going to be pretty personal: some people value tidiness and quick disconnects more; some people want every last fraction of a degree in cooling.

Personally I wonder how well that the MCW6002 would do if it had an inlet nozzle that tapered to closer to 1/4" ID and but still used 1/2" barbs. Would the increased water velocity make up for the decrease in flow rate?

I'm sure Bill knows...

I was just about to direct a question at you pHaestus. It was going to be
"Does the 00 inlet tube have a tapered nozzle design just like the 02's tube (but obviously coming to a finer point)?"
Maybe someone who owns the block (I dont) could make a sort of nozzle insert doing just that. And test it.

As for the personal matter, I dont (much) care about tidiness, but rather about torque on the block's mounting. Im sure I can get around it, but I 've never held an MCW6k in my hand nevertheless seen one in person so IDK.
Does anyone think that the three prong clip may help in reducing torque due to tubing bend and wheight of 1/2 ID?

SenC.