Originally Posted by claes
Nope, but you wouldn't have posted this baited/trolling question if you did not know already!
This is why I asked for clarification earlier on what you meant
Sometimes I make statements in good faith, mostly because I'm lazy, but it turns out I was wrong about this.
Assuming you are talking about their CFM measurements and similar, you can see the device they used in 2006 here:
In 2007 they found that this wasn't accurate, and played around with several other systems, also pictured here:
Then, in 2010, they decided that trying to measure CFM was too difficult, but there's still a picture of their anemometer and their fan test setup:
While I had reviewed these articles before posting earlier (I haven't read them in years), I had assumed (in good faith) that these pictures weren't good enough (because you felt so). Now, having skimmed more thoroughly, I am curious what you feel is missing?
I do not ask this as a baiting/trolling question - I'm serious! SPCR, despite many problems (they don't measure intake temp, anechoic chambers aren't real world, they don't bother to OC and are okay with running their GPUs in the 80s, etc), has been my go to source for best method. What do you feel is lacking? Maybe you were referring to a different measurement's method lacking?
Edit/Pst: The colored section below shows you do not understand my point:
Edited by claes - 2/4/16 at 4:15pm
Originally Posted by doyll
Baiting maybe, but not trolling at all. When they won't show us the whole test system but expound in detail about the test instruments doesn't that ring little warning bells in your ears? The colored section above shows you get my point!
There are many interpretations to be sorted. Way to many. A good review is one that sticks to only the facts and analyzes them them accurately without bias. Very few do that.
So Mike and staff are now maybe a little careful about what they say? Maybe, maybe not. but this all backs up what I've been saying.
Maybe I misinterpreted what you were doing when you started this thread. The spcr article is not a bad builders log. But it also has lots of praise about things for the purpose of 'kissing the hands that feed them'. Their suppliers of samples.