Any plans for this to be developed? Or are they working on it already? Maybe Marci can chime in here.
Printable View
Any plans for this to be developed? Or are they working on it already? Maybe Marci can chime in here.
What i got only 2 week ago via e-mail when i asked him for a PA120.4
Speka directly with Marci, he sent me a very indepth set of over informative e-mails but the deman is there..trust me
Marci, mark you e-mail as confidential in futre please
Freaking forum was down and then wouldn't load so unable to chnage till now..sorry
*ahem*
Emails are confidential communications not to be shared without permission. T'would be appreciated if you removed the above.
See signature of my email on 14th Feb regarding Performance Shroud... (which admittedly was omitted from the specific email in question, but on principle t'would be appreciated)
Quote:
This email, its content and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the addressee and may be legally privileged and/or confidential
Pete,
Honour the confidentiality, please.
Its probably cheaper and better to use a PA120.3 in combo with 120.2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon
120.4 where would you put it? no cases on the market can handle the length.
Indeed, the added length of another fan in the typical ThermoChill-esque way (ie: our larger fan spacing between the fans) results in a PA120.4 of current format being too big for installation in any case, hence we're in no rush to release them until there is a clear and strong demand for such.
There are other formats that are being investigated that are more accomodatable within current popular cases that would offer similar (if not better) performance... but the majority at the moment are happy to go with multiple radiators and (relatively) simple fitting than have to find something to accomodate a radiator that would total 556mm(ish) length. One-off's and limited runs are simply not economically viable for us to produce. Work is in progress, when there's any news or updates I'll let ppl know... but until then, PA120.3 is our largest format radiator and will remain so...
Now if only you would use G1/4 fittings for easier barb fittings. LOL but I know thats not going to happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marci
Now if only you would use G1/4 fittings for easier barb fittings. LOL but I know thats not going to happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marci
Never say never...
Why would Thermochill use G-1/4" when all it would do is introduce more restriction and it kills performance?
We should convince all the bloody water block manufacturers to adopt 3/8" instead. Forget it.. everyone move to 1/2" straight through...
I agree but G1/4'' is same as 1/2' being 12mm anyway is it not?Quote:
Originally Posted by IanY
I agree.. But look at a G-3/8" or 3/8" BSP.. look at the inside connector where the barb is screwed into the Thermochill.. its actually 14 mm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete
The last thing I want is to shrink barbs. Why can't we have 1 inch tubing anyway :)
LOL cos i don;t fancying routing about 14'' in dia hose in my 7 loops
I do agree keep the barbs as they are on the rad they work well
Why dont we all just use garden hoses then?:slap:Quote:
Originally Posted by IanY
lol, a bit big there. Anyways, it would be nice if everyone switched to the same sized barbs.
OT: Anyone notice that quotes are going bananas literally?
wouldn't it be better to make a 120.4 and 120.6 by doubling the rows? instead of making a rad twice as long, make it twice as wide. not wide as in the thickness kind of wide, but as in add more 120mm fans on another row.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marci
yeah, i noticed... i think they're trying to make changes to the way the board software handles quotes... imo, they should just ditch this board software and move on to PHPbb or SMF like the rest of the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by ramenchef
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcorn
I think garden hose is either 1/2" or 3/8" isnt it?
Most garden variety hose is 5/8" or 3/4".Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxxxRacer
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxxxRacer
Ok I meant fire hoses:)
bah i meant 5/8" not 3/8".
lol redcorn.. that woud be a little pointless. with 3/4" ID tubing the flow resistance is so low that anything below that is just pointless to the point that not even XS members would think to go bigger.. (not that any of us are contemplating 3/4" now anyway, atlhough I did use 5/8" for a while)
back on topic, a 140.3 or a 160.2 would be intresting :)
140.3 would be rediculously expensive, and 160.2 is stated by marci to have the same surface area as a pa120.3, and the pa120.3 is much easier to mount, so there is no point.
guess i missed that post about the 160 :p: . I thought that the pa160 was just below the pa120.2 in performance :confused:
It is. pa120.3 is not twice as good as a pa120.2.
I didn't say it was, I just figured if everything scaled equally a 160.2 would scale just under a theoretical 120.4 (this is a rather large assumption on my part with no data to back it up :p: )Quote:
Originally Posted by ramenchef