Pioneer 80prs vs Alpine 149

p99rs is also deadly expensive //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/*******.gif.a649d21efc0d1fd4890a6428166586c1.gif
It would have been a better choice for me. Now I want a processor to have full 3 way plus sub control and the 99 would have done it all in one deck. By time I get a processor that does what the 99 does I'll be in it the same amount of money.

 
so if someone needed a HU to run an active setup the 80prs would be the option because 149bt isn't active capable?
no, you buy the Alpine then run an external crossover or buy amps that have more flexible crossovers (they are usually much nicer amps anyway). if you care about SQ, you aren't running budget amps anyway. both the 80 and 149 only have 6 channel outputs and both have 6 channel T/A.

and to me, it doesn't matter what the Pioneer has for crossovers because i don't like Pioneer crossovers and won't use them anyway.

in the 2005 Scion tC we had a huge gain in SQ by defeating the crossovers in the Pioneer and used the Audison crossovers instead.

My 1996 Alpine amps were active capable in their crossovers.

I'd rather run JVC or Clarion if Alpine wasn't an option.

 
I own 2 80 PRS, and a 9887. I like the features of the 80s, but I love the ease of the 9887. The 80s also display voltage as well. But to throw another hat in the ring, the Eclipse CD 7200MKII is worth finding.

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...
Old Thread: Please note, there have been no replies in this thread for over 3 years!
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.

About this thread

LosIsATool

5,000+ posts
CarAudio.com Veteran
Thread starter
LosIsATool
Joined
Location
Pensacola, Florida
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
40
Views
13,115
Last reply date
Last reply from
TurdFergueson2
IMG_20260516_193114554_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_20260516_192955471_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top