help decide...rl-p 15 or FI Q 15

[loud-n-low 10+ year member]

from a mag to a q? didnt know that was an upgrade

 

[slikrider20 10+ year member]

i'm goin from a 12" mag to a 15" Q

my buddy on here has a Q man, everytime i hear it, it impresses me. I got a mag and im not impressed. But my box is also limiting me.

 

[loud-n-low 10+ year member]

i would think 1 q 12 being louder than 2 rl-p 12's both setups ported, something might have been setup incorrectly

 

[slikrider20 10+ year member]

It was just louder on the real lows, the rlp's got louder around 37-38hz or so. BTW the guy with the rlp's hit like a 142-143 i believe

 

[loud-n-low 10+ year member]

i really only want to run 1 sub..like denim said, to get the same sound without takin a chance..stick with rl-p...it will be louder than what i have now cuz its a 15...its just all this FI boner going on right now, i was curious if i could get more output,amazing sq with a Q..I have amazing lows..just not loud enough...more displacement FTW

 

[slikrider20 10+ year member]

Well you just answered your own question again, it's just like when your buying a new car. THe car you have now, you know whats wrong with it, you know it's story. but when you go to buy that new car, no matter how many miles on it you don't have a clue whats gonna go wrong and whats its like. flip a coin i dont think you can go wrong either way

 

[loud-n-low 10+ year member]

ya...im indecisive..i love my rl-p,just not loud enough.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

I've heard 2 12" RLP's in roughly 4cf tuned to like 30hz or so off of a nine.1, and 1 FI Q 12" off a nine in 2.5cubes, the Q hit lower and louder than both rlp's.....but i prefered the Sound of the rlp's over the Q. I say get a couple of Q 12's..

And if you listened to them in different vehicles with different setups in different enclosure alignments (all of which appear to be true from your statements), then that pretty much negates it being a valid comparison in any way.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

I think you answered your own question, if you want the same sound, more output, go for the larger version. If not the Q is a great option.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/iagree.gif.15d6c075ee8d3913ba26866d06993068.gif

Couldn't word it any more simply.

If you want the same thing just with a little more output; go with the Rl-p

If you want to try something new; go with the Q.

You shouldn't be disappointed either way.

 

[slikrider20 10+ year member]

And if you listened to them in different vehicles with different setups in different enclosure alignments (all of which appear to be true from your statements), then that pretty much negates it being a valid comparison in any way.

That is pretty true, just tryin to give him a rough idea of what to expect. But then again, you couldn't ever compare subs unless you had the exact same vehicles, in the exact same setups, in all the same enclosure alignments. So if it were to be that way in all comparisons, 95% of the comparisons people post on here are negated because of all the variables involved. But to give people a general idea, you have to compare in someway, even if the variables arent kept constant.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

That is pretty true, just tryin to give him a rough idea of what to expect.

But if the differences you heard were a result of the vehicle differences, the setup differences, or alignment differences (or all three combined).....how is your experience going to even remotely compare to what he (or anyone else) could "expect" ?

It won't. Because the differences you noted are specific to the enviornment and circumstances in which you heard them. They are comparable to nothing else, and nobody should inherently expect similar results or results anywhere even remotely close to similar. Because you aren't comparing the "subs", you are comparing the vehicles acoustics, setup differences, enclosure alignment differences, etc etc, and not accounting for any of them.

95% of the comparisons people post on here are negated because of all the variables involved.

Which is why I've always wondered why anybody cares about or listens to those comparisons as they are worthless.

But to give people a general idea, you have to compare in someway, even if the variables arent kept constant.

You aren't giving anybody a general idea of anything other than how two completely different setups performed. The performance of those two setups aren't relevant to anything else (or even to each other) as they were completely different in every aspect.

Yes, I realize you were "just trying to help". For that I commend you. But I'm pointing out the reasons of why your experience should not be taken as a true comparison between the two products and/or the results one should expect.....it needs to be noted BECAUSE people give too much credence to these types of comparisons.

 

[slikrider20 10+ year member]

I think your 100% right about everything you just said. And i agree, how can one compare one driver to another, one amplifier to another, with all the variables that are in place. I guess that's why car audio is alot of a guessing game, at least for me up to this point.

Nonetheless, flip a coin, i don't think anyone on here will tell you that you "should've picked this" or "should've picked that", i think you will be happy either way. And If your happy with the way it sounds, but want more output, why not add another RLP?

 

[Thieroff 10+ year member]

I've ran both, rl-p 15, and a Fi Q 15

Both are quite satisfying woofers

CT

 

[loud-n-low 10+ year member]

differences? what enclosures?

 

[Thieroff 10+ year member]

Ran both in 2.0 sealed

Although in different vehicles, and with different amps.

They are both quality subs, although I believe the Q has more capability for output.

Being it has more throw and power handling.

Both, in my experience are accurate drivers, and sound quite nice.

Either way you will be happy.

Why not get a second 12, and call it a day?

CT