I'd rather overpower a sub than underpower one.
Why? Can you tell the difference?
The W6 will probably get louder it's more effecient with more cone area and his amp will push it to it's limits.
The W6V2 has BARELY more linear displacement than the Q. But here's an an interesting thought:
in 2.8 cubic feet tuned to 28hz on 700W, the W6V2 reaches ~14mm of excursion at around 40hz and will reach xmax (21mm) at around 22hz. The FI Q will reach ~16mm of excursion at around 38hz and will reach xmax (27mm) at around 22hz as well.
So which one is really more efficient? Don't fall for those published specifications if you don't know how they are derived.
And you want a driver to be pushed to it's limits? Quite frankly, I would prefer the Q which retains it's BL and Cms values over a longer stroke.
In fact, the Q uses a larger voice coil (if you get flat wound, you're really flying) and will likely suffer less power compression, which means more consistent Re, which leads to a more consistent Qes/Qts and very little change in your alignment.
The Q won't be being fully pushed, but the amp might be. If he's not stupid with his gains he'll get max output out of his sub, without stressing his amp at all with the W6. With his current amp, he'll probably never see full potential from the Q, without clipping that amp alot. He's got headroom by 40% or so, not a huge deal, IMO. Usually this forum praises headroom, for good reason.
In this situation, you have made totally illogical comments. On one hand, you praise headroom from the amplifier, but disregard headroom on the subwoofer's part. Clipping is easy to avoid; I don't see that as a valid concern, particularly if they are already online because no one let's anyone get away with clipping online.
Here is an idea that struck me:
You accuse Fi of being the new boner, and yet you adamantly stick by the original "sq sub" boner?
May I introduce you to Mr. Kettle?
