Menu
Forum
What's new
New posts
Live Activity
Search forums
Members
Registered members
Classifieds Member Feedback
Car Audio Discussion
General Car Audio
Car Audio Build Logs
Car Audio Equipment
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Help
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Car Audio Classifieds
Car Audio Wanted
Classifieds Member Feedback
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
SHOP
Shop Head Units
Shop Amplifiers
Shop Speakers
Shop Subwoofers
Shop eBay Car Audio
Test
Forum
Search
Search titles only
Search titles only
Log in / Join
Search
Search titles only
Search titles only
What's new
New posts
Live Activity
Search forums
Members
Registered members
Classifieds Member Feedback
Menu
Reply to thread
Forum
Car Audio Equipment
Subwoofers
RL-p vs XXX
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ngsm13" data-source="post: 695064" data-attributes="member: 544830"><p>I remember a certain person who whined and cried when it was proven the SX was louder than the XXX in two applications on the mic, by 1.3 dB to be exact. You whined, and complained about not showing umpty nine tests to prove it to the Nth degree. You whined about it only proving the SX is more efficient. You whined about 1.3 dB never being noticeable. Why buy a subwoofer that takes 1600wrms to get as loud as a subwoofer with 750wrms (w/in 1dB). (This is where Mrray has said NUMEROUS times...that IN THAT APPLICATION the rl-p wins!) Why are you so defensive when someone doesn't hold your precious XXX as god?! Why?!</p><p></p><p>What's so hard to understand, the rl-p is OBVIOUSLY more efficient as you probably already know. Just because it only needs 500 wrms to reach xmax doesn't mean it can't handle more. Look at the SI magnum d2, originally it was rated at 600wrms because that's all they needed. I sent each of my 12's 1200+ wrms daily ported...for over a year...and had absolutely no problems. Dustin Flege @ NSPL world finals 2003 had a modded EQ d2 on each one of his magnums...near 2800+ wrms a piece. Look at the brahma, even tho it is rated @1600 wrms, it's not needed to reach xmax...it also can reach xmax with as little as 600wrms. I'm sure companies think about this when they rate the power handling of their subs. Also, they probably don't want some kid to throw the woofer in a ported enslosure that is GROSSLY too large, and throw 1600 wrms at the woofer b/c supposedly it can take it. They don't want the woofer to fail, because of an inexperienced kid's mistake. This is why more experienced people may feel more comfortable sending their woofer over the RMS wattage, they know what they are doing and may monitor how it acts/performs in the enclosure. The rl-p's Fs is also much lower than the XXX's...the tc9 is known for wicked wicked lows. (Not saying this proves anything as fact or otherwise, just stating and observation of information.)</p><p></p><p>As stated before, if someone can't afford the 1600wrms to power the XXX, much less the XXX itself then the rl-p is an EXCELLENT choice and i think what mrray is trying to say is...that it's not that big of a step down from the XXX. Also, if you want crazy lows from a sealed enclosure and not too much wattage, then the rl-p is also a better choice. I own a XXX, i love it and i sacrifice a lot of room in my truck for it (partially b/c it's an 18 ported) and i also spent a lot building a stable electrical system to support the power needed for it and my other amplifiers. The XXX and rl-p are both excellent woofers, i wouldn't hesitate recommending either, the application tho would dictate which one i would recommend over the other! Anyways, to all a good day!</p><p></p><p>NG</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ngsm13, post: 695064, member: 544830"] I remember a certain person who whined and cried when it was proven the SX was louder than the XXX in two applications on the mic, by 1.3 dB to be exact. You whined, and complained about not showing umpty nine tests to prove it to the Nth degree. You whined about it only proving the SX is more efficient. You whined about 1.3 dB never being noticeable. Why buy a subwoofer that takes 1600wrms to get as loud as a subwoofer with 750wrms (w/in 1dB). (This is where Mrray has said NUMEROUS times...that IN THAT APPLICATION the rl-p wins!) Why are you so defensive when someone doesn't hold your precious XXX as god?! Why?! What's so hard to understand, the rl-p is OBVIOUSLY more efficient as you probably already know. Just because it only needs 500 wrms to reach xmax doesn't mean it can't handle more. Look at the SI magnum d2, originally it was rated at 600wrms because that's all they needed. I sent each of my 12's 1200+ wrms daily ported...for over a year...and had absolutely no problems. Dustin Flege @ NSPL world finals 2003 had a modded EQ d2 on each one of his magnums...near 2800+ wrms a piece. Look at the brahma, even tho it is rated @1600 wrms, it's not needed to reach xmax...it also can reach xmax with as little as 600wrms. I'm sure companies think about this when they rate the power handling of their subs. Also, they probably don't want some kid to throw the woofer in a ported enslosure that is GROSSLY too large, and throw 1600 wrms at the woofer b/c supposedly it can take it. They don't want the woofer to fail, because of an inexperienced kid's mistake. This is why more experienced people may feel more comfortable sending their woofer over the RMS wattage, they know what they are doing and may monitor how it acts/performs in the enclosure. The rl-p's Fs is also much lower than the XXX's...the tc9 is known for wicked wicked lows. (Not saying this proves anything as fact or otherwise, just stating and observation of information.) As stated before, if someone can't afford the 1600wrms to power the XXX, much less the XXX itself then the rl-p is an EXCELLENT choice and i think what mrray is trying to say is...that it's not that big of a step down from the XXX. Also, if you want crazy lows from a sealed enclosure and not too much wattage, then the rl-p is also a better choice. I own a XXX, i love it and i sacrifice a lot of room in my truck for it (partially b/c it's an 18 ported) and i also spent a lot building a stable electrical system to support the power needed for it and my other amplifiers. The XXX and rl-p are both excellent woofers, i wouldn't hesitate recommending either, the application tho would dictate which one i would recommend over the other! Anyways, to all a good day! NG [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Car Audio Equipment
Subwoofers
RL-p vs XXX
Top
Menu
Home
Refresh