Possibility of bridging amp for front components?

  • 6
    Participant count
  • Participant list

rjay
10+ year member

Senior VIP Member
So I have Rockford Fosgate Punch P1000X5D 5 channel amp. Other than my sub running off the sub channel, I have my front components being ran off my two front channels (75w to each) and my rears are vacant as I'm just using my HU to run my rear speakers and plan to keep it that way. The specs for this amp says 250 watts RMS x 2 bridged at 4 ohms. Am I able to do this with the components that I have? If so, how would I wire them? If it can be done then wouldn't that mean I would be getting roughly 125 watts to each component set? That would be nice as that is what the rms is for my components.

 
you can do that just fine. Just have ch. 1 and ch.2 ran through with a 2m1f y-splitter and the same for ch.3 and ch.4. Then for the speakers, you will run the wires from the amp where it is labeled for bridged. This will give you 250watts/ch, not 125

 
you can do that just fine. Just have ch. 1 and ch.2 ran through with a 2m1f y-splitter and the same for ch.3 and ch.4. Then for the speakers, you will run the wires from the amp where it is labeled for bridged. This will give you 250watts/ch, not 125
^^^^this ^^^^^ unless your deck has frt rears and sub put ,then just run the other set of rca's.and do what dragnix said

 
My HU does have front, rear, and sub outputs so I could do it without the splitters. Now with doing this and having the 250 watts to each component and being well over the rms rating, will I be okay? Do you think it will be worth it to get the extra power out of the amp or will it not be that noticable? I've only had one other set of components (Boston SC60) in the same car and they only had about 50 watts going to each component set, but they actually sounded better to me than these CDT's do now, so I figured maybe I wasn't giving them the power they needed.

 
My HU does have front, rear, and sub outputs so I could do it without the splitters. Now with doing this and having the 250 watts to each component and being well over the rms rating, will I be okay? Do you think it will be worth it to get the extra power out of the amp or will it not be that noticable? I've only had one other set of components (Boston SC60) in the same car and they only had about 50 watts going to each component set, but they actually sounded better to me than these CDT's do now, so I figured maybe I wasn't giving them the power they needed.
On music some components can do well above rated. However, you don't need to use all the power just because you have it, keep the gain low and give the components the sufficient amount of power

 
On music some components can do well above rated. However, you don't need to use all the power just because you have it, keep the gain low and give the components the sufficient amount of power
So do you think I would be better off leaving it as is with 75w to each component? I'm just suprised on how much better the Boston's sounded vs these CDT's (to me anyways). I was under the impression that these were supposed to be some baddazz components! So I was thinking they just needed more power or something. I really want to keep everything being ran by a 5 channel amp, thought about getting the Alpine PDX-V9 for the extra power (before I realized the bridging options on the RF amp) but if 75 watts should be doing the trick then I will keep what I got.

 
On music some components can do well above rated. However, you don't need to use all the power just because you have it, keep the gain low and give the components the sufficient amount of power
So do you think I would be better off leaving it as is with 75w to each component? I'm just suprised on how much better the Boston's sounded vs these CDT's (to me anyways). I was under the impression that these were supposed to be some baddazz components! So I was thinking they just needed more power or something. I really want to keep everything being ran by a 5 channel amp, thought about getting the Alpine PDX-V9 for the extra power (before I realized the bridging options on the RF amp) but if 75 watts should be doing the trick then I will keep what I got.

 
Don't use two sets of RCA's to run one set of components. If the amplifier is bridgeable it will have input management to allow you to use the same left and right RCA to run in bridge mode.

 
So do you think I would be better off leaving it as is with 75w to each component? I'm just suprised on how much better the Boston's sounded vs these CDT's (to me anyways). I was under the impression that these were supposed to be some baddazz components! So I was thinking they just needed more power or something. I really want to keep everything being ran by a 5 channel amp, thought about getting the Alpine PDX-V9 for the extra power (before I realized the bridging options on the RF amp) but if 75 watts should be doing the trick then I will keep what I got.
You can put more power to it, I think it can do better like that. Just do it incrementally though, move it up to 100 watts to see how it'll do, then a bit more, keep going until you feel it's enough power n that it won't overdrive the components

 
Don't use two sets of RCA's to run one set of components. If the amplifier is bridgeable it will have input management to allow you to use the same left and right RCA to run in bridge mode.
I guess most amps will have that option. But my jl amp doesn't, in the owners manual it says, if you want to run a pair of speakers bridged you have to use 2 ''y'' splitters.

 
I guess most amps will have that option. But my jl amp doesn't, in the owners manual it says, if you want to run a pair of speakers bridged you have to use 2 ''y'' splitters.
Okay, but still use only one set of RCA's. Left into a Y splitter for a bridged set of channels and right into a Y splitter for the other set of bridged channels. JL is so 'awesome', I'm surprised they don't have this very simple feature built into the input stage.
Untitled-2-5.jpg


 
So do you think I would be better off leaving it as is with 75w to each component? I'm just suprised on how much better the Boston's sounded vs these CDT's (to me anyways). I was under the impression that these were supposed to be some baddazz components! So I was thinking they just needed more power or something. I really want to keep everything being ran by a 5 channel amp, thought about getting the Alpine PDX-V9 for the extra power (before I realized the bridging options on the RF amp) but if 75 watts should be doing the trick then I will keep what I got.
As with anything INSTALL is key here. Much of CDT speaker line is not optimized for installs in car doors. I have no doubt that their high end stuff is good, but perhaps better suited for the home environment. The boston MAY sound better due to higher QTS etc of the midwoofer. Hard to chime in on this since I didn't see any other specifics other that it sounds better. More power will only help so much, but speakers that are designed for car environment + install can go a long way.

 
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.

Similar threads

That amp does not have the RCA summing feature. You will have to use RCA splitters at the amp. If you already have that, then check the gains.
2
951
Bridging the amplifier Mono(LPF)on that sub will work just fine @4ohms
1
1K
The HU us likley 12-15 x 4 at best so yes, using an amp will be hugely beneficial, night and day. The HU us not going to drive a sub to any...
3
64
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07DLC9M48/?tag=caraudiocom-20
25
234

About this thread

rjay

10+ year member
Senior VIP Member
Thread starter
rjay
Joined
Location
oklahoma city
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
12
Views
2,310
Last reply date
Last reply from
rjay
IMG_0632.jpg

just call me KeV

    Apr 19, 2024
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_0629.jpg

just call me KeV

    Apr 19, 2024
  • 0
  • 0

Latest topics

Top