re mt

[patalpine]

i am thinkin about purchasing a re mt 15 i would like to stay in the stock class i have a box built below my window line which is 6 cubic feet tuned to 58 hz for spl would this be big enough for this sub alos at the moment i have one pa 2250 which would be ran on the sub for a while and then i will later get another 2250

Click to read more...

 

[bumpin_blazer 5,000+ posts]

Might be enough for a MT 15". Are you talking 6cubic feet net after all port displacement or 6cubic gross?

 

[patalpine]

its around 7.15 before all displacments

 

[patalpine]

may be over 6 then

 

[bumpin_blazer 5,000+ posts]

Well how big is the port?? Also have to remember that the MT 15" takes up .21 cuft so it's a little more than most 15"s.

 

[patalpine]

port is around 120"

 

[AudioAnonymous 10+ year member]

hi...might think about getting the RE SX's for stock class ...the MT's seem to not be as loud in "non-walled" vehicles...RE MTs do dominate in superstreetlike classes though

 

[Raven 10+ year member]

If I remember rightly, the SX is somewhat revered for it's efficiency. I'd guess the MT is on the opposite end, and probably very inefficient like most uber-SPL woofers are. Unless you have more power than an SX would ever handle, I'd consider the less expensive option.

Speaking of which, how much can a 15" SX handle?

 

[Trancer 10+ year member]

I believe they are rated at 1000 rms

 

[AudioAnonymous 10+ year member]

MTs are still efficient ...they just enjoy more air

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

I think the SX's are more revered for their hump in freq response, the peak that when coupled with cabin gain gives those nice SPL burps. But Ive not read anything about them being anything special in terms of over all efficiency.

 

[bumpin_blazer 5,000+ posts]

port is around 120"

what's the full length/height/width of the port??