General Discussion General discussion about all things car audio, from pioneer, orion, alpine and eclipse.

Amp rating system

Old Oct 5, 2004 | 09:02 PM
  #1  
Speakerman's Avatar
Thread Starter
Yankee
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 219
Lightbulb

I don't know about ya'll, but I am tired of some amps being rated "conservatively" and some being "way over-rated." Some companies rate there products at XXXX Watts rms at like 16V+. Most people are not going to run that much voltage so they get screwed. A lot of times the websites do not even post a voltage, they just say its "3000 WATTS RMS!!!!" It makes it hard on a person that is really trying to find the best deal on an excellent amplifier. This new rating system that I stumbled across is what I think the answer to this problem. I want ya'll to check it out and tell me what ya'll think.

http://jbl.com/car/support/AUTOMEDIA_CEA2006.pdf
Old Oct 5, 2004 | 10:05 PM
  #2  
Drysuit John's Avatar
50 Watt CAFz'r
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 307
Post

Kewl! Bout time the standards returned to ' apples to apples. '
Old Oct 5, 2004 | 10:26 PM
  #3  
Haunz's Avatar
4000 Watt CAFz'r
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,218
Post

I've heard people scoff about the new standard and just didn't pay attention... reading that now I think I know why.. lol..

First problem is its voluntary... amp manufacures could already list specs to other standards that tell you the same stuff....

If I designed a standard for power output I would include:

Continuous RMS power and maximum RMS power into resistive and reactive loads (with specified test signal) at 12.5 & 14v (plus higher volatage if desired)

there.. thats like 6-9 pieces of info that will tell you everyhing about power output...

The change stating S/N ratio sounds pointless... as does the difference in compairing damping factor....

uhh, when was the last time someone saw a car amp with an output impedance approaching even 1ohm let alone 4...

I give the new rating a C-

[ October 05, 2004, 11:29 PM: Message edited by: Haunz ]
Old Oct 6, 2004 | 05:40 AM
  #4  
Speakerman's Avatar
Thread Starter
Yankee
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 219
Post

No doubt you are correct Huanz, there are definately some holes in it's design. The fact that it would be a standard for amplifier manufactures is the "pro" that I was aiming upon emphasising. If those things in which you have mentioned were fixed, or amended, the idea behind having a set standard is undoubtedly a good one.
Old Oct 6, 2004 | 01:33 PM
  #6  
Haunz's Avatar
4000 Watt CAFz'r
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,218
Post

Originally posted by DWVW:
Why would you test reactive and resistive?
An IHF reative load will emulate a voice coil... This is what many dynamic ratings are based on...

It gives a good picture of how stable the amp really is and what it can put out below nominal rated load....
Old Oct 6, 2004 | 09:27 PM
  #8  
Haunz's Avatar
4000 Watt CAFz'r
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,218
Post

I'm not %100 sure why resistive tests are used.. But its probably because its easier to do a continuous RMS test with a dummy load rather then a coil....

Not that continuous RMS output means a whole lot either (after all most of us dont use our amps to play test tones into resistors)

But its a spec I like to see... Its also the basic spec most reputable manufacurers seem to use...
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Ray
Off-topic Chat
17
Feb 8, 2006 08:57 PM
91stang
General Discussion
3
Jun 2, 2005 08:45 AM
95Probite
General Discussion
1
Dec 23, 2004 01:26 PM
Vanilla Gorilla
General Discussion
11
Dec 2, 2004 03:04 PM
cplessl
General SQ
5
Aug 10, 2004 04:31 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 PM.