It isn't that I don't like CS, and I have no idea if I like their IC or not, because no one has it, nor all the numbers behind it. I think it's odd that they haven't given us any numbers behind the claims they made, especially this close to public release. I'm not whining to you about it, I'm trying to get CS to put their money where there mouth is (and no, this isn't the only way I'm addressing this). I would think that other people that are putting hundreds of dollars up for the piece would want verified claims as well. Saying something works well and showing us that it works well are two different things. Am I impatient? Sure. But given the only reason we aren't getting the original ship date [now] is because of the amount of orders they received, means testing, for the most part, is complete...now it's just QC on the volume of goods in stock. is it that crazy to ask a company to prove their performance upgrade is actually an upgrade (which I'm sure it is, but to what extent)? I don't think so. I am not going to take them at their word so when someone asks, "what kind of gains do you see with that?" I can simply reply "significant".
Bolt-ons are pretty black and white. testing shows how much/little you've gained lost by adding them. grey words/claims like "significant" don't really fly.
It isn't like i'm boycotting CS or not going to buy parts from them in the future...it's a new piece...i want to know relevant things about it.
Bolt-ons are pretty black and white. testing shows how much/little you've gained lost by adding them. grey words/claims like "significant" don't really fly.
It isn't like i'm boycotting CS or not going to buy parts from them in the future...it's a new piece...i want to know relevant things about it.