How are the old soundstream amps

[ra4u2nv 10+ year member]

Hey guys I just purchsed this amp from a friend. It is a Soundtream Rubicon 300/2. The manual says it puts out 300 watts @ 4or 2ohm mono. Are they credible. Do they over rate their amps or is it underrated.

Which is better the soundstream rubicon 300/2 or the amp I was planning on purchasin which is the Hifonics Falcon 90x2 according to thezeb.com it puts out 360 total wats rms

what do you guys think?

Click to read more...

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

ss amps are pretty good. i still like my vangogh and own a 6.0 and 2 3.0's great amps

 

[robman69 10+ year member]

As you can get a VGA 800.2 on ebay from IndioAudio for 230 shipped its GREAT... That amp started around $800 retail, but again that was retail: never pay retail //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/up2something.gif.dd110ecf3ae4b76050d87598f2f8de7c.gif

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

Hey guys I just purchsed this amp from a friend. It is a Soundtream Rubicon 300/2. The manual says it puts out 300 watts @ 4or 2ohm mono. Are they credible. Do they over rate their amps or is it underrated.

Excellent old school amps that do over their rated power. Very highly regarded amps.

Which is better the soundstream rubicon 300/2 or the amp I was planning on purchasin which is the Hifonics Falcon 90x2 according to thezeb.com it puts out 360 total wats rms what do you guys think?

This isn't even a comparison; the Soundstream Rubicon is BY FAR the better amp.

 

[bg_Swishahouse 10+ year member]

the 300/2 isnt really considered old school soundstream though. wasnt the 300/2 produced after power acoustik or whoever bought them out. the original is the 302, but im not sure of the differences between the two. i remember reading a test on the 300/2 in one of the magazines and im pretty sure it didnt make rated power. as the amp got hotter, the power output went down they said.

if you ever look at ebay, you see the 300/2 and 500/2s going for quite a bit cheaper than original rubicons and reference series.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

the original is the 302, but im not sure of the differences between the two.

Yeah....I missed the "/2" part of his post for some reason.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/eyebrow.gif.fe2c18d8720fe8c7eaed347b21ea05a5.gif

Though, from everything I've heard...they are exactly the same internally (same board and all). Although people seem to say the -2 series were built to lower quality.

Still no contest between it and the Hifonics IMHO though.

 

[bg_Swishahouse 10+ year member]

now im kind of confused, i know the 302 was first, this a 300/2 or 300-2? doing a search on google doesnt show any kind of 300/2 model, just 302 or 300-2.

 

[ashaman 10+ year member]

Dude you dont need to really worry about it. It is still going to be a great amp, even if it was after the buyout. Just not the oldschool stuff persay...I am running a 500sx and 700sx reference for my car. All my friends gave me **** for saying it looks like crap, and its old, blah blah...that was until they heard it //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif That rubi is still a good amp, hold on to it.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

now im kind of confused, i know the 302 was first, this a 300/2 or 300-2? doing a search on google doesnt show any kind of 300/2 model, just 302 or 300-2.

Well, it would have to be a 300-2 since there was no Rubicon 300/2.