The Official Type R Thread

[tommyk90 5,000+ posts]

Is it a first or second gen S-10? Some of those really are some weird results. lol

first gen

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Good to know. Im planning on walling off my first gen blazer one of these days, I'll have to watch for those results myself.

 

[delvryboy 5,000+ posts]

just curious...

whats the nominal impedence at the amps for -

1 - sexxx

2 - sx

3 - typeR

 

[delvryboy 5,000+ posts]

all i have 2 say is "TYPE R POWA" now tommy all u need 2 do is get rid of those 9.1s and get some orion 1200ds yo. some real power hahaha

ah yeah, the 1200d's.... thats why you so loud //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/tongue.gif.6130eb82179565f6db8d26d6001dcd24.gif

 

[tommyk90 5,000+ posts]

just curious...
whats the nominal impedence at the amps for -

1 - sexxx

2 - sx

3 - typeR

seXXX and SX are both 1.2 ohm nominal

type-r is ~1 ohm nominal (fluctuation).

But who knows what impedence rise is doing for all the subs. Either way, the power difference wouldn't bear any noticeable affect on the score.

 

[delvryboy 5,000+ posts]

from the 1.2 to the

doesn't explain the difference from the sexxx to the sx since they are getting the same power //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

wang... time to be disappointed.

If you read that thread, you would see that no where did David say this was the testing RE did to make their decision. Someone asked about the 'new' SX because he wanted some for a wall, and david replied with this. If you can show me where this is in fact the only testing RE relied on, then yes I'll be disappointed (and very surprised). wang... nice try.

 

[tommyk90 5,000+ posts]

from the 1.2 to the
doesn't explain the difference from the sexxx to the sx since they are getting the same power //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

I highly doubt i will lose that much. Anyways, the type-r did that number after a few rollups, so the sub was already hot, i.e. impedence was already up.

The type-r just takes the power better. I couldn't even play music on the seXXX/SX with both amps, and the type-r takes it like a champ up to a point. It's not like i can just drive around all day with it on full tilt though.

 

[tommyk90 5,000+ posts]

If you read that thread, you would see that no where did David say this was the testing RE did to make their decision. Someone asked about the 'new' SX because he wanted some for a wall, and david replied with this. If you can show me where this is in fact the only testing RE relied on, then yes I'll be disappointed (and very surprised). wang... nice try.

Who knows if they even did any testing besides that?

They could've just assumed that the better design/parts made for a better driver. BTW, i've never seen of/heard of other test results being posted.

 

[delvryboy 5,000+ posts]

i don't think RE put the SX against the seXXX just to discontinue the loser.

they wanted a solid line of subs, the seXXX was basically a hybrid. from a marketing point of view, they did what was best for their company.

it's all about the $$$, not which one was .142337263 db louder than the other //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Who knows if they even did any testing besides that?
They could've just assumed that the better design/parts made for a better driver. BTW, i've never seen of/heard of other test results being posted.

The absence of him saying "we did more testing than this" in that thread does not mean it is so. The original poster asked about SX's, in a wall. David so happened to have a wall in his vehicle and he'd tested these drivers. Anymore than that we cannot conclude without simply guessing. IMO its a poor guess to assume a speaker designer and manufacturer would do no more testing than this. Most likely, they knew the comparison results of the SX to their current drivers fairly well before they even built one, from the design. These speakers are not built by assumption. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

 

[Hundreth 10+ year member]

it's all about the $$$, not which one was .142337263 db louder than the other //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/word.gif.64b12e39f936af3b4fff38a1c0bd0244.gif

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

I agree its about the $. I remember david stating the reason they discontinued the HC (and SeXXX) when the SX came out was (they felt) the SX out-performed them in both SPL and had better SQ, for about the same money... hence obsoletion. But I'll be ****ed if I can find the thread now, archive doesn't seem to go back far enough. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif Best I found was someone quoting david stating this about the HC (but no mention of the SeXXX). Not sure how relevant, just adding it in here.

 

[delvryboy 5,000+ posts]

i remember him saying that about the HC, not the seXXX.

if i recall correctly, David said he was sick of "people calling him and asking for the S-E-X-X-X, the C-X-X-X, the SEXY, the SE with the XXX motor....." he said he decided to design a good street beating sub that would fairwell in the local competition lanes and bring it to production.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

So you think the SeXXX is louder than an SX?