05 RE XXX vs RE MX..

[steveBeatz]

I'm doing 2 6'' Aeros'

 

[SPLunatic 10+ year member]

I'm doing 2 6'' Aeros'

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif...sounds familiar.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

i ran a 15" XXX of a good 1800-1900w. they get pretty loud and sound **** good.good subs. watch for port noise..

What does port noise have to do with this discussion? Port noise is a function of a poor enclosure design, too little port area for the shape and amount of air the sub is displacing. It is not a function of a specific subwoofer.

Alot of people have run 03-05 XXX's off of the orion 2500D's... quite common setup a couple years ago (for this board anyway). But I suspect they generally kept them gained down abit.

 

[steveBeatz]

I think "da box king" just types random stuff to make it seem like he knows what hes talking about lol but what were these subs originallly rated at for rms? 1500?

 

[mazdakid 5,000+ posts]

i think the rms on the older xxx is 1600. the mt is more like a btl, not an xxx

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

i think the rms on the older xxx is 1600. the mt is more like a btl, not an xxx

Correct on both accounts. Their rms rating was conservative however.

 

[steveBeatz]

What you guys think of the 05 model vs new model?

 

[CobraStang98 10+ year member]

They are entirely different subs.... Like comparing apples to oranges.

 

The old XXX was a rather efficient woofer, u could run anywhere from 1k -2k+ daily without any issues. The new XXX generally need upwards of 2.5k+ for it to be brought anywhere near it full capability.

 

The old XXX is generally believed to be the best all around woofer ever made. It had extremely good SQ and if u had 1/2 a brain box building wise it would be a very loud woofer also.

 

[RE_XXX]

They are entirely different subs.... Like comparing apples to oranges. 

The old XXX was a rather efficient woofer, u could run anywhere from 1k -2k+ daily without any issues. The new XXX generally need upwards of 2.5k+ for it to be brought anywhere near it full capability.

 

The old XXX is generally believed to be the best all around woofer ever made. It had extremely good SQ and if u had 1/2 a brain box building wise it would be a very loud woofer also.

THE OLD XXX WAS NOT EFFICIENT!!! Apparently you have on idea....

XBL^2 was a very inefficient motor design!

 

[CobraStang98 10+ year member]

THE OLD XXX WAS NOT EFFICIENT!!! Apparently you have on idea....
XBL^2 was a very inefficient motor design!

I used to run older XXXs so im pretty sure i do have a good idea of what they do in real world applications. I used to run 2 12s off an Orion 2500D (they only saw 1250 watts or so each) and they got a good amount louder than many other setups i had with much more power.

The older XXXs got plenty loud off a lil power. Also have u ever played around w/ MKII Brahmas?? Ive seen a 15" Brahma off 800 watts pull a 140 in a daily box, in one of my buddy's SUVs. If they were so inefficient they why didn't they need more power to put up numbers like that?

 

[steveBeatz]

ruh roh

 

[RE_XXX]

I used to run older XXXs so im pretty sure i do have a good idea of what they do in real world applications. I used to run 2 12s off an Orion 2500D (they only saw 1250 watts or so each) and they got a good amount louder than many other setups i had with much more power.
The older XXXs got plenty loud off a lil power. Also have u ever played around w/ MKII Brahmas?? Ive seen a 15" Brahma off 800 watts pull a 140 in a daily box, in one of my buddy's SUVs. If they were so inefficient they why didn't they need more power to put up numbers like that?

Well...... the previous 7 05 model XXX's I had were inefficient. They did get loud and sounded good. But mine would only come alive to where I like them with 2400+ watts.

And Yes, I have played with many brahmas.....

Read up on XBL^2, They didnt design it to be efficient. Just a motor with a flat BL curve with the increase of throw

 

[steveBeatz]

Well...... the previous 7 05 model XXX's I had were inefficient. They did get loud and sounded good. But mine would only come alive to where I like them with 2400+ watts.
And Yes, I have played with many brahmas.....

Read up on XBL^2, They didnt design it to be efficient. Just a motor with a flat BL curve with the increase of throw

I like when you talk dirty ..

 

[RE_XXX]

I like when you talk dirty ..

LOL..... dude..... your startin to freak me out //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

 

[CobraStang98 10+ year member]

Well...... the previous 7 05 model XXX's I had were inefficient. They did get loud and sounded good. But mine would only come alive to where I like them with 2400+ watts.
And Yes, I have played with many brahmas.....

Read up on XBL^2, They didnt design it to be efficient. Just a motor with a flat BL curve with the increase of throw

Idk maybe it had to do with box design or impedance rise in your case. All the XBL^2 subs ive had the pleasure of running ive found to be rather efficient. When i did increase the power on my XXXs they did get a little louder(obviously because of power increase) but it wasn't to the point where it was a ridiculous amount.

I have read up on XBL^2 in the past and realize that it wasn't designed to be efficient but i think that the real world applications were a bit different than the designed plan for it.

I guess it seemed to me that they were rather efficient compared to others i have run in the past. And especially compared to the new XXX/MX.