Quote Originally Posted by gabe View Post
I do not intend to keep it to myself. You know me better than that
I am working with an independent tester. The strategy is that if the data is presented by a well-known independent, it will be accepted more readily. Too many people (even if they do not openly say so) question the data I present. just read these comments: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...3&postcount=53 , it's fairly typical, and very frustrating to me.

So I will let him present his data, and then be available for comments and additional input.

I just wish for the community to accept the findings as unbiased, that's all.
I don't think that's the problem. I think the problem is that your tests appear, to some, to be fairly... rigid in methodology, whereas other tests cover a broader, and more realistic, scope.

To give you an example it's fairly well known that the Koolance 350 block performs better with higher flow, and that the GTZ performs better, comparatively, when flow is lower. So a "fair and unbiased" test of these blocks would cover various flow rates, imo. But your tests have yet to do that, and when asked to do so you have either not acknowledged the request or attempted to discredit it.

So you state you want to go to an independent tester (I'd say that's happened quite a bit already, but whatever). So, if said independent testing house also follows a specific singular test condition, most favorable to the GTZ, wouldn't you also expect it to be met with skepticism by at least some folks?

I really don't think it has nearly as much to do with you personally, certainly ANYONE performing legitimate tests adds value, and your tests have been legitimate, if not narrow in focus

But I have an issue with a vendor posting "tests" of competitors blocks in a community forum without stating clearly these conditions. Posting these kinds of things in a sales forum where it's clearly from an adverstizer, or on your own website, is different. But here they hold a different level of credibility as they appear to be less biased as they are in a community forum, so extra care SHOULD be taken to make sure they cover a broad range of conditions. Low, medium and high flow, for example. Single block loop instead of multi block loop, for example.

I also find it odd that you are complimented for doing your job as CEO, which is to advertize your product. And anyone who thinks that this is anything other than brand promotion is fooling themselves. To imply some kind of nobility to promoting your product is a bit odd to me.

Anyway, no disrespect meant here Gabe, but we are all entitled to our opinions, and our right to speak out, respectfully. Personally I think the GTZ is a good block, and in certain conditions, such as your test bed, the better block. But not all conditions and WE as a community have an obligation to assure that the community readers are getting unbiased, unconfusing, and applicable test results. I'm not quite sure this has been done here.

To close out, I'd refer you to the survey I tossed up yesterday. Question 5 specifically. Of the 60 XS readers that responded
78.6% run their pumps at max speed, 3.4% don't know and the rest run at medium or low. For what it's worth.