Pro/Forums - View Single Post

Cathar · 09-23-2004, 03:40 PM

The Cascade clearly had non-standard barbs fitted. I had no control over what was done to it as it went to WCP by way of a private sale. Normally when blocks are reviewed they come direct from the maker, or at the very least, are configured as the maker intended.

Check out Procooling's low-flow results with the same blocks as measured by WCP:

http://www.procooling.com/html/pro_testing.php

Procooling's results, even at really low flows (~0.5gpm), agrees with by my own testing, and a third independent properly setup industry tested.

Adjusting for the scale of the results, the difference between and RBX and a Cascade at the sorts of flow rates that the WCP testbed is pushing should be around the 2.0C mark, and not the 0.5C presented there. Again comparing to the Maze 4 we would have expected to see a ~7C difference, and not the 5C difference shown. i.e. a Cascade block would normally perform from 1.5-2.0C better than shown at the WCP site.

Given the low-flow prowess of the MCW6000, I can also clearly understand why Bill Adams/Swiftech desperately want WCP to review/rate the MCW6000 as Bill knows that down at the WCP testbed's flow-rates the MCW6000 will be performing a touch better than the Cascade, and I'm sure that Bill has already had a Cascade through his testbed to know what's what.

IMO, there was clearly something awry with the Cascade block tested, but the whole affair was conducted totally outside of my control, including the user modifications done to the block.

I'm tired of repeating this though.

BTW davidzo, continuing from the waterblock material thread, I have a number Alphacool blocks here and for the ones that have see through tops I've been able to measure the size of their main cooling contact patch as being the same as that of the Cascade.

This leads me to believe that your continual comments on the Cascade vs "German" blocks really are without basis or fact, and merely based upon your subjective opinion. It is becoming quite clear at this point that you have no real idea as to how the Cascade block looks internally, its internal dimensions, nor how it is meant to look.

09-23-2004, 03:40 PM	#19
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	The Cascade clearly had non-standard barbs fitted. I had no control over what was done to it as it went to WCP by way of a private sale. Normally when blocks are reviewed they come direct from the maker, or at the very least, are configured as the maker intended. Check out Procooling's low-flow results with the same blocks as measured by WCP: http://www.procooling.com/html/pro_testing.php Procooling's results, even at really low flows (~0.5gpm), agrees with by my own testing, and a third independent properly setup industry tested. Adjusting for the scale of the results, the difference between and RBX and a Cascade at the sorts of flow rates that the WCP testbed is pushing should be around the 2.0C mark, and not the 0.5C presented there. Again comparing to the Maze 4 we would have expected to see a ~7C difference, and not the 5C difference shown. i.e. a Cascade block would normally perform from 1.5-2.0C better than shown at the WCP site. Given the low-flow prowess of the MCW6000, I can also clearly understand why Bill Adams/Swiftech desperately want WCP to review/rate the MCW6000 as Bill knows that down at the WCP testbed's flow-rates the MCW6000 will be performing a touch better than the Cascade, and I'm sure that Bill has already had a Cascade through his testbed to know what's what. IMO, there was clearly something awry with the Cascade block tested, but the whole affair was conducted totally outside of my control, including the user modifications done to the block. I'm tired of repeating this though. BTW davidzo, continuing from the waterblock material thread, I have a number Alphacool blocks here and for the ones that have see through tops I've been able to measure the size of their main cooling contact patch as being the same as that of the Cascade. This leads me to believe that your continual comments on the Cascade vs "German" blocks really are without basis or fact, and merely based upon your subjective opinion. It is becoming quite clear at this point that you have no real idea as to how the Cascade block looks internally, its internal dimensions, nor how it is meant to look. Last edited by Cathar; 09-23-2004 at 03:49 PM.