New CEA certified Brutus amps?

[mclerico83 5,000+ posts]

I don't like them either...

also the shitty new lanzar vibe amps have them, now the optis are some pretty good amps.

 

[IMOVeCHICKENS! 10+ year member]

nice they made they strappable cool seeing they changed some things

was that the new 1200 from hifonics it had 140 amps of fusing

these are nice budget amps

 

[infamous_e46 5,000+ posts]

some of their uper amps are great like the xxv col and the gp3kpro which is basically like all other 3,000 zenon boards atomic etc, made in korea

full of shit

 

[d77543020 10+ year member]

isent the fact these new ones are CEA certified prove that they will do rated

 

[corrie32 10+ year member]

yes but honestly, i've nerver seen a definative test proving that the old ones didn't do rated, i've heard alot of "hear-say" and" i've tested it", but no real proof. i really want to see a test video showing the results, so we could put this" rated- don't do rated" to sleep. instead of back and forth arguing

 

[jmanpc 5,000+ posts]

isent the fact these new ones are CEA certified prove that they will do rated

No. Look at Kenwood amps. They're still pieces of shit even though they're rated according to CEAs specs.

All the "CEA Rated" label means, is that the amp is rated at x amount of power at 14.4v with 1% THD + Noise. All the CEA sought to do by coming up with that rating system was to standardize they way amps are rated. Some companies rate theirs at 12v and .1% THD. Some companies rate theirs more liberally at 16v and 5% THD *cough*ma audio*cough*. So the CEA was trying to have a uniform rating system so that when you were comparing different amps from different companies, you'd be comparing apples to apples.