"A Challange"...........any parts selection here yet guys?

[Blackeagle]

Title pretty well sums it up.

I'm interested in what you fellas will choose. As well as seeing the eventual comparisons outcome of course.:)

[SlaterSpeed]

What were the rules of this thing again? no big tubing or what?

[BillA]

"rules" - no idea

but the spirit of the endavour was to compare a good smaller dia tubing 'kit' with that of a 1/2" ID 'kit'
- the 'kit' aspect seems no more, so I'm guessing that each 'side' is going to propose a 'system'; which pH would then test

perhaps on your side of the pond a determination is to be made as to whether to go with 6 or 8mm ID ? (my notion only, 10mm seems similar to 3/8" - middle sized)

should not be difficult as the Aquacool kits seem to be configurable almost in any desired manner
(easy for direct sales - and good for the user, impossible through distribution channels)

EDIT: whoa, that title !
ok I guess

[Knipex]

Thought Pug had sorted all this out with Ph ?????

[BillA]

???

it seems that Cathar is putting together a Aussie system for pH - based on popular items actually used in OZ

don't see anyone sparkplugging it at the moment on procooling - the idea of a consensus there is laughable, pardon my saying so

[mrplow]

*yawn*

[Pug]

Umm, did you miss the follow up thread which had my offerings detailed in it?

Essentially, I issued the original challenge to point out that as far as production kits went, performance was easily available from German offerings. With that done, I saw no point in carrying it on in the way that I started it.
I hope it has inspired other mfrs to offer what the market appears to want and even if the challenge goes ahead regardless of my input - If competing kits are released from others to give people what they truly want, I'll consider it worthwhile.

Aside from the original challenge, I am working towards getting some kit sent to pH as I proposed, to compare larger hose with smaller tubing. I think many people would like the difference quantified to subjectively quantify how it weighs up with the other pros & cons of it (ease of routing, strain on components, resistance to internal airflow in combined space etc.)

These things do take time though, sorry.

For reference (in case you did miss it)

Test setup 1 (high flow).
Xtreme Pro kit (AP1500 pump, BIX) but with 15mm OD barbs and 1/2" or 3/8" hose

Test setup 2 (low flow).
Exchange barbs for 10mm plugin, 7mm ID tubing, AP900 instead of 1500 and HTF (continuous tube) rad instead of BIX.

Test each of these configurations against each other to see how a single manufacturer can utilise both approaches and quantify the performance difference between the two (high flow vs low flow).
Take the winning combination (or both) and stick it/them in the shootout originally planned (performance of similar production kits from various manufacturers or German vs US, if you will).

Cover advantages/disadvantages that you personally find between the two and nightic (original poster) has his answer from an impartial third party which I can feel confident in showing people to back up any feelings I have on the subject.
[Edit] Hi BillA. Welcome to WizD.
Thanks for coming along. I know we got off on the wrong foot a few times but all things considered, I'm glad to put it behind us.
Look forward to positive dealings with you. B)