Please stop spreading this misinformation, you clearly misunderstand the directions given in them.
You make a claim of misinformation by presenting 0 information of your own to counter the statement. I have an open mind but you have provided no support by which one can evaluate or modify one's understanding. What is in any way ambiguous in this statement ?
"For the best cooling performance, we recommend mounting the fans as an air-intake into your PC."
What word am I misunderstanding ? In our testing, which was done at varying case fan rpms, the displayed temperature sensor for the coolant was pretty consistently around 33C ... at a given rpm, the ambient air sensor would be say 23.1C and the interior case air sensor would read 26.7 C. Do the math ... what cools better 23.1C or 26.7. Simple math says:
Delta T => Ambient = 33.0 - 23.1 = 9.9 C
Delta T => Inside Air = 33.0 - 26.7 = 6.3 C
Ambient therefore cools 1.57 times (9.9 / 6.3) as well as interior case air ... the only way to change that is to somehow get interior case air < ambient. The mathematics is unassailable. How are you able to accomplish getting air inside the case that is cooler than ambient ?
That's Corsair's published recommendation; it's in their manual. You could maybe write to them and tell them they have no idea how their products work. If you want to discuss the point, published sources and links please. There's not much ambiguity in the statement ..... no way for a layman to misunderstand let alone someone who taught college level fluids and thermodynamic, has been practicing in the field for 42 years (licensed PE in 3 states), has served as an expert witness in over 50 court cases and has been building PCs since the early 90s. But I'm still listening ... if you have some facts, published test results contradicting Corsair and our own measurements, I'm anxious to see them. But how is it that you better understand how Corsair products work than the people who design, manufacturer and support those same products ? Why did they make this statement if it's not true ? Why has no one told them they are wrong in all these years ?
What equipment was used in your test rig that was responsible for your current understanding ? We use 6 thermal sensors accurate to 0.1C (4 coolant / 2 air), a 6 channel LCD temperature readout and a fog machine.
If you have actual data or published sources contradicting the manufacturer's and our our own rest results, I'm most interested in reading them. I like to say, "no one is ever wrong, someone has been misinformed". If I have been misinformed, please provide contradictory information so we can re-evaluate our position. What is the source of your information ? If you are going to just say "you don't understand", I don't have anything to look at which would change our view on the matter.
Last night I watched Professor Dave present his arguments on the Flat versus Round Earth theories on Youtube (
Response to Globebusters - The Earth Still Isn't Flat) and in response to Professor Dave's statements, the Globebusters provided no applicable experiments or test results, they just would laugh and answer "Dave, you clearly don't understand the science involved". As that was the entire basis of their rebuttal, I don't see any minds being changed.
Now while the flat earth stuff is ridiculous, I am not saying your position is ridiculous. I understand why many folks draw the same conclusion. We all learned in 8th grade earth science that hot air rises and in the absence of other factors it does ... very slowly. So I do understand the mindset. But there's that huge other factors thing. Sit under a ceiling fan at the kitchen table and light a candle, you are not going to see smoke rise. I'd be happy to have an ongoing discussion of the science involved but that conversation can noto happen w/o something meatier than "John, you clearly don't understand the science involved".