PDA

View Full Version : 350z - To rear speaker or not?



Chromatic
01-06-2014, 01:27 PM
I'm letting my other threads falls off the list,.. to get to more specific threads now everything is decided on and ordered.

Here's the dilemma. My car is a 2008 350Z (base edition, stock 6.5" fronts and rears).

I've ordered a 5 channel PPI 900.5 amp,.. and JBL MS-62C 80Watt front components and have some Mb Quart 6.5" 70watt RMS coaxials in my closet I was plannong on putting in the factory rear 6.5" locations. Primary reason I went with the 5 channel PPI amp over the 4 channels. (So total setup is 6.5 JBL components front, MB Quart Coaxials in rear, and 10" JL sub).

Now (this is my fault really).. I've read in many places that putting rear speakers in this car ruins the front stage/sound.

What are your thoughts?

I really want to install these speakers in the rear cause they are great speakers and I have the amp for it.. and they are already stock locations.

So in this car (350z) -- 2 seater, hatchback.. coupe. Would you just leave the MB Quarts in the closet and install the components up front and the sub and that be that?

Or would you do what I want to do.. and install the rear speakers (MB Quarts) as well.. Then maybe I can dial them in at a lower level to 'fill" the sound a bit better?

Just trying to get thoughts on this. At the moment I'm inclined to go ahead and install them as planned.. and I can adjust them to 20% power or less if need be.

I guess the question is,.. is it really likely to sound worse to have any amount of rear sound coming out in this car,.. or would just a little bit of rear make it a net positive sound gain?

Plenty of people say rear speakers ruin the sound of the car.

I'll obviously go by ear on what *I* like.. but just wanted your opinions on the matter. If it ends up that any rear sound whatsoever makes things worse, I'll take them out and just bridge the front channels for more amp headroom.

Thanks for opinions/speculation.

atownmack
01-07-2014, 01:46 PM
I run only fronts, and I were you I would not run the rears. Some people like rear fill, personally I'm not a big fan of it. The rears tend to pull the sound stage behind you as opposed to have the sound stage in front of you at windshield level, making for a less than optimal listening experience. Since you already have the amp and speakers, why not install them and see if you like it. If you are happy with them keep them as is, if not take them out. Either way you have options, so test them out and see what you are most happy with! My opinion is forget the rears!

Chromatic
01-08-2014, 01:50 PM
My thoughts exactly!

Thanks for the reply.

Side Show
01-08-2014, 11:33 PM
Spend the xtra $$ on the front stage (specially the install)

Chromatic
01-09-2014, 11:40 PM
Spend the xtra $$ on the front stage (specially the install)

Money's spent.. Front stage is JBL MS-62 Components.. Rear's are MB Quart's, and Sub is JL 10" W1v3-4 in a custom enclosure built to order.. -- This was purchased last Sunday. Rears I have already,.. so no money spent there.

As for install,.. this is being installed solely by me. After all the knowledge accumulated over the last month,.. I'm 100% ready to rip the interior out and get to work this weekend. I have 30 Sqft. of Sound deadener which will help a great deal. Everything else is the best money can buy install wise,.. no corners are being cut , so to speak.
I'll likely dial the rears back while sitting in driver seat until the center of the "Stage" sounds best.. Where I am. Which is the primary reason behind the Rear vs no Rear argument: I've done a lot of reading.. this was helpful : GlassWolf's Pages (http://www.glasswolf.net/papers/rearfill.html)

Thanks!

d77543020
01-12-2014, 11:16 AM
you can always bridge the Front channels for more power

keep_hope_alive
01-12-2014, 12:49 PM
you will like the improved output when bridged.

while the car is out, install the rears. wire it back to the amp. then experiment for yourself. people can tell you what they like, but no one can tell you what you will like. so give yourself the opportunity to experiment.

you could also wire relays to allow you to switch between bridged front only vs. front and rear. hell, i've already made a relay board that does just that and it's sitting in my basement.
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e128/phat_funky_beats/audio%20testing/relaybridgingafter008.jpg

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e128/phat_funky_beats/audio%20testing/speakerbridgingrelay.jpg

jrdnhsnbrg
01-12-2014, 01:10 PM
I amped my rear speakers simply because quite frequently I have people (friends, family members) back there who also like to get the full effect of an amplified setup. And running the speaker wire was super easy, I spliced into the factory wiring just inside the door.

Valdis
01-12-2014, 02:26 PM
I think I'm going to do this too.. I was going do go with comps up front and coaxial in the rear.
Instead of splitting my $$ up, now I spend it up front.
Great, need to think about a sub now. I didn't really want to get into all that.

Your next upgrade should be to get rid of that lame 350z and get a 300zx TT :D

ALSO, on a side note.... Why didn't you get MB Quart comps? I would assume they would sound better with the MBQ's you're putting in the rear.
Hope my "lame 350z" comment didn't offend you... I have a 300zx TT and they are killer in every way!!

Chromatic
01-12-2014, 03:46 PM
you will like the improved output when bridged.

while the car is out, install the rears. wire it back to the amp. then experiment for yourself. people can tell you what they like, but no one can tell you what you will like. so give yourself the opportunity to experiment.

you could also wire relays to allow you to switch between bridged front only vs. front and rear. hell, i've already made a relay board that does just that and it's sitting in my basement.


That's the track I'm on.. Rears are going in.. and my ears will be the final deciding factor on that.

And.. Yes.. Bridging the channels will give me incredibly headroom.. something like 70 watts x 4.. or 230wwatts RMS x 2.. It's crazy the power difference bridged. But,.. I'm going 70x4 RMS, + 270W x 1 for the sub to start.

Thanks for the relay idea and the diagram. If it comes to that point, I may just build it.

Chromatic
01-12-2014, 03:48 PM
I amped my rear speakers simply because quite frequently I have people (friends, family members) back there who also like to get the full effect of an amplified setup. And running the speaker wire was super easy, I spliced into the factory wiring just inside the door.

Yeah, a 4 seater with passengers really makes putting in rears a much easier decision. Given this is a 2 seater with the rears behind the seats.. it's hardly even questionable .. 90% of those who "know" say front only.

But.. I had the MB Quart coaxials already from an older system.. so that is the ONLY reason I even went this route.

Chromatic
01-12-2014, 03:53 PM
I think I'm going to do this too.. I was going do go with comps up front and coaxial in the rear.
Instead of splitting my $$ up, now I spend it up front.
Great, need to think about a sub now. I didn't really want to get into all that.

Your next upgrade should be to get rid of that lame 350z and get a 300zx TT :D



lol.. I have had a 300ZX NA, and 300ZX TT.. They are wonderful cars.. in fact the entire Z line has not dissapointed. I prefer the 1990+ Z's of course.. which is 300ZX, 350Z and 370Z.

The 350Z has more horsepower than the 300ZX TT (stock).. and 0-60 on them are identical IIRC. My 350Z is not 100% stock, but just a few bolt-ons.. so it pushes around 340HP.. 0-60 Just a smidge under 5 seconds. But, I don't use it .. I drive it 99% of the time at low shift points and cruise. :)




ALSO, on a side note.... Why didn't you get MB Quart comps? I would assume they would sound better with the MBQ's you're putting in the rear.
Hope my "lame 350z" comment didn't offend you... I have a 300zx TT and they are killer in every way!!

Well.. two reasons.

1) I already owned the MB Quart coaxials 6.5" with 1" tweeter.. (from, ironically a system I had in a former 300ZX of mine.. and they were $500 speakers at the time 10+ years).. and had them active the whole time so they are not blown. I figured I might as well run them and see what happens.

2) The factory slots in the back (behind seats) for the rears is coaxial.. no tweeter location,.. and as so I don't see any need whatsoever to drill the car for tweeter components in the rear.. especially when just putting rear speakers back there is something 90% of people say just makes things sound worse.

Make more sense now? :)

d77543020
01-12-2014, 04:09 PM
depending on what car you got the rears on deck power will be plentey

Valdis
01-12-2014, 04:35 PM
The 350Z has more horsepower than the 300ZX TT (stock).. and 0-60 on them are identical IIRC. My 350Z is not 100% stock, but just a few bolt-ons.. so it pushes around 340HP.. 0-60 Just a smidge under 5 seconds. But, I don't use it .. I drive it 99% of the time at low shift points and cruise. :)


Depending on what engine you have, the 350z has 280 or 300hp stock. The 300zx TT has 300hp stock... so they are the same.

They actually had a drag race with numerous stock Z cars... If I remember correctly they finished 300zx >370 >350

I also have a few mods on mine... pop charger, ECU, underdrive pulley, Dupree downpipes, stock testpipes, upgraded exhaust, Stillen SMIC's, and Profec Spec B boost controller. I'm around 430-440hp... I can't drive the thing when it's under 70 degrees because when the turbos kick in the *** end wants to whip around the front of the car... I need better tires!!
Unlike yours, my car is not a DD.. she's a garage Queen :)

I'll stop hijacking the thread with car talk....

I understand why you are putting the MBQ's in the rear locations.... just wondering why you went with JBL up front and not another set of MBQ's

keep_hope_alive
01-12-2014, 04:57 PM
I understand why you are putting the MBQ's in the rear locations.... just wondering why you went with JBL up front and not another set of MBQ's


because the JBL's are better speakers than the MBQ and the MBQ were what he already had. If anything, he would get another matching set of JBL's for the rear so tonality was maintained.

Valdis
01-12-2014, 05:07 PM
So in the price range of ~$180... JBL has better speakers than MBQ? Is this true at all price points or just this one.
My thought was to keep the MBQ (just the 6.5") in the rear, since he already has them .... then match the tonality with another set of MBQ up front.

I understand that the MBQ he currently has are old... and buying new MBQ for the front won't have the same tonality anyway. I was just asking for sake of uniformity

Chromatic
01-13-2014, 02:05 AM
So in the price range of ~$180... JBL has better speakers than MBQ? Is this true at all price points or just this one.
My thought was to keep the MBQ (just the 6.5") in the rear, since he already has them .... then match the tonality with another set of MBQ up front.

I understand that the MBQ he currently has are old... and buying new MBQ for the front won't have the same tonality anyway. I was just asking for sake of uniformity

Hrmm.. interesting idea.

It would be next to impossible to "match" these MB Quarts. These 6.5" Coaxial MB Quarts are from 1998,.. $499 a set,.. and are IIRC Model QM-160 KX, 6.5" mids with 1" tweeters. I don't know the full story, but I do know these MB Quarts were built in Germany before MB Quart was bought out by .. I think.. Kicker? (Don't quote me). So while MB Quarts aren't junk now,.. they aren't the speakers they were back when these were made.

But.. I did A TON of question asking on what speakers to buy for the front components.. (So much so,.. more than one person got rather annoyed at me..) -- And the JBL MS-62C's were highly recommended here, .. AND on a 350Z forum I frequent. So after reading tons of reviews.. and research,.. I went with the JBL MS-62C's, for the front.

Now which speakers are the better speaker? That's a tough one. I know back in the late 90's.. these were some of the best Coaxials (under $750) you could buy. They sounded phenomenal and at 70watts RMS a piece (rather low considering).. they were louder WITH great Sound quality than TWO , JL Audio 12" subs in the rear hatch (sealed box) in a 300ZX.

When I started this "hunt" and research on upgrading the TWO 10watt factory speakers.. (Here's the build log, if you want to see what the factory Speaker looked like (magnet the size of a quarter).. and what the MB Quarts look like installed, etc.. --- Click For Build LOG: http://www.caraudio.com/forums/car-audio-build-logs-cars-trucks-suvs/598484-2008-350z-installation-process.html )

I was VERY much in favor of buying more MB Quarts, and Kenwood amps -- After visiting here for a month or so.. I ended up with JBL Components, and a PPI amp! I DID stick to my guns on the sub brand.. JL Audio 10" sub. People didn't particularly light my selection of JL Audio,.. saying essentially that JL isn't what it used to be.. and for $99 I could get a much better Sub than the JL 10" I bought. Shrug,.. I think it'l do fine for my needs.

Anyhow,.. my intuition is that I'm going to end up toning the rears down to about 20-25% with fronts at 100%.. Due to their location (you can see in the build log link above).. So it's going to essentially be less about matching tonality and more about making sure the mid/high stage is positioned up front properly.. and not blown out by these MB Quarts screaming at 100 percent fighting with the Front's,.. in effect creating a degradation of sound.

I had these MB Quarts as you read already,.. so it's no big deal to have them running at 20% or so of their "potential". They've been sitting in my closet in a sealed box for a decade anyway,.. Might as well do something with them.

Side Show
01-13-2014, 02:18 AM
MBQ used to be qite high-end..... but now El-cheapo

Chromatic
01-13-2014, 02:20 AM
Depending on what engine you have, the 350z has 280 or 300hp stock. The 300zx TT has 300hp stock... so they are the same.

They actually had a drag race with numerous stock Z cars... If I remember correctly they finished 300zx >370 >350


Heh. This car is the 2008 (last year of the 350).. and they upgrading the engine in 06-08.. This has the HR motor, which has 306 factory hp,.. (6 more than the fastest 300ZX TT, which was the 93 model). Hit's it at 6800rpm,..

At any rate.. The 0-60 stock is 5.1 on this motor/car,.. and Quarter mile is 13.5 Stock on this motor/car.

Don't get it confused with the 2003-2005 350z's.. they are slower (not a HUGE amount.. but they didn't completely reengineer the motor of the Z I have for nothing. :) ).

So essentially.. Stock for stock -- The 300ZX TT and 2008 350Z are identical in 0-60 times (nothing done to them). Differences are the 300ZX TT , well, has forced induction (two turbos).. is a 3.0 Liter, and 5 Speed Manual. The 2008 350Z has naturally aspirated,. one easy way to tell difference in the slower motor and faster motor on the 350's is to pop the hood,.. The older ones 2003-2005 have single intake. The Newer ones have dual intakes on each side of the engine.

The 350Z , as the name implied, is a 3.5 Liter engine,.. As opposed to the 300ZX's 3.0 liter (Turbo or NA)
The 2008 350Z has a 6 speed Manual Trans,.. and is faster in the quarter than the 300ZX TT.

If I had my pick of either car.. 300ZX TT or my car.. I'd take mine all day long,.. just too many improvements not to. In fact the HR motors in the later 350Z year models share more in common with the 370's than the older 350's..

Don't get me wrong.. I LOVE 300ZX's,.. great cars,.. STILL look awesome 24 years later,.. A timeless design (Most 24yr old cars look , well, old!.. the 300ZX doesn't.. and I don't think ever will.)

I just threw on a new set of Rubber on this 350Z.. Tirerack has great deals. Got some Bridgestone Potenza S-04 Pole Position 225/45/18 and for rears 245/45/18's for $650 shipped. In the store they would have been over a grand. As I just got this car,.. I'm content with my ~350 HP.. But, plenty of mods are coming down the line.. Right now I'm working on the speaker/amp/sub upgrade. :)



I understand why you are putting the MBQ's in the rear locations.... just wondering why you went with JBL up front and not another set of MBQ's

I addressed this best I could in a reply above this one.

Jeffdachef
01-13-2014, 02:51 AM
you know, what you could do is disable the tweeters on those mb quarts and use them as midbasses in the kick panels pretty much running a 3 way active setup, will take some fiberglass work and tuning but it might be a fun project in the future.

Valdis
01-13-2014, 03:19 AM
Heh. This car is the 2008 (last year of the 350).. and they upgrading the engine in 06-08.. This has the HR motor, which has 306 factory hp,.. (6 more than the fastest 300ZX TT, which was the 93 model). Hit's it at 6800rpm,..

I just threw on a new set of Rubber on this 350Z.. Tirerack has great deals. Got some Bridgestone Potenza S-04 Pole Position 225/45/18 and for rears 245/45/18's for $650 shipped. In the store they would have been over a grand. As I just got this car,.. I'm content with my ~350 HP.. But, plenty of mods are coming down the line.. Right now I'm working on the speaker/amp/sub upgrade. :)

Didn't know there was 306hp version of the 350z.. interesting.

I have Hankook Ventus V12 Evo's on my car now, 275/35Z/18 and they can't keep me on the road. I'm going to have buy some MT or Hoosier's.. lol

Chromatic
01-13-2014, 03:56 AM
Didn't know there was 306hp version of the 350z.. interesting.

I have Hankook Ventus V12 Evo's on my car now, 275/35Z/18 and they can't keep me on the road. I'm going to have buy some MT or Hoosier's.. lol


Yup engine was overhauled by Nissan in '06 or '07.. As I said it's 75%+ shares engineering with the 370's,.. is totally different than the 03-06 350's.

This article explains it decently..

2008 Nissan 350Z - Overview - CarGurus (http://www.cargurus.com/Cars/2008-Nissan-350Z-Overview-c9343)

Just scroll down to 2008 350Z area. They mention bump in RPM range, HP increase,.. etc.. But the engine really got an overhaul. Which doesn't make a ton of sense doing that to an existing model of the car,.. but Nissan was doing it in transition to the 370.. So the 2008 350Z is sort of like a "360Z" in a sense,.. as it's a transitional model between the 350 and 370 if that makes any sense lol.

Torque didn't get boosted too much at all ,.. but horsepower and dyno curve, plus extended power in the higher rpm's were the goal with the engine re-design.

My first Z was a 300ZX NA,.. with 222hp.. And while that car was insanely fun,.. and fast.. This car is a beast compared to that car. Even with the meager 350hp (close to stock).. this thing will get you into trouble VERY fast. While the 300ZX I had was quite forgiving .. IIRC it did 6.7 seconds with the manual trans,.. I don't think manual vs. automatics change the numbers these days very much,.. but back in the 90's it still made a difference. Though I can't stand to drive an automatic, much less an automatic sports car. ;)

Valdis
01-13-2014, 05:01 AM
Yup engine was overhauled by Nissan in '06 or '07.. As I said it's 75%+ shares engineering with the 370's,.. is totally different than the 03-06 350's.

This article explains it decently..

2008 Nissan 350Z - Overview - CarGurus (http://www.cargurus.com/Cars/2008-Nissan-350Z-Overview-c9343)

Just scroll down to 2008 350Z area. They mention bump in RPM range, HP increase,.. etc.. But the engine really got an overhaul. Which doesn't make a ton of sense doing that to an existing model of the car,.. but Nissan was doing it in transition to the 370.. So the 2008 350Z is sort of like a "360Z" in a sense,.. as it's a transitional model between the 350 and 370 if that makes any sense lol.

Torque didn't get boosted too much at all ,.. but horsepower and dyno curve, plus extended power in the higher rpm's were the goal with the engine re-design.

My first Z was a 300ZX NA,.. with 222hp.. And while that car was insanely fun,.. and fast.. This car is a beast compared to that car. Even with the meager 350hp (close to stock).. this thing will get you into trouble VERY fast. While the 300ZX I had was quite forgiving .. IIRC it did 6.7 seconds with the manual trans,.. I don't think manual vs. automatics change the numbers these days very much,.. but back in the 90's it still made a difference. Though I can't stand to drive an automatic, much less an automatic sports car. ;)

The automatic 300zx has smaller cams than the manual and was rated at 280hp, not 300hp. That is why there was a difference between the auto and manual.
I have a 1996 TT, it's OBDII... which means it has smaller cams than even the automatic and it doesn't have VTC... but it still had 300hp stock. The issue with the 1996 is the cams, you run into a wall at 400whp, you can't get past ~400whp with a '96 regardless of the mods you put on it. The cams are so restrictive that even with the largest turbos on the market you are stuck.
To get past this you have to upgrade the cams and while you're at it, may as well install VTC.
My TT has the Bose speaker system in it, so I'm leaving it alone. Not because Bose makes good speakers, it's just a PITA to make the change. Plus I want to keep it mostly stock on the inside... it's a '96 with 67K original miles, a collectors item :)

I also have a 1993 Honda Prelude VTEC which is a blast to drive (this is what I'm putting new speakers in). It has 190hp and weighs 2,800, which is a little over 500lbs less then our "Z" cars weigh. It's a 1993 with 59K original miles... but it's my DD so that will be going up.