Cerwin Vega?!?!?!!?!?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Jun 3, 2005 | 05:53 PM

#11

Dereck Waller

Guest

Posts: n/a

Peak to peak means nothing if the sub can't be driven by the motor that far.

Jun 4, 2005 | 01:08 PM

#12

Special_K

Thread Starter

0 Watt CAFz'r

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Oct 2004

Posts: 37

Quote:

Peak to peak means nothing if the sub can't be driven by the motor that far.

Are you reffering specifically to the new RE sub, Stroker, or in general?

Jun 4, 2005 | 04:37 PM

#13

Dereck Waller

Guest

Posts: n/a

In general.
It's the same as a max power rating IMO, it tells you nothing.

Jun 4, 2005 | 09:20 PM

#14

MTA

2000 Watt CAFz'r

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Nov 2003

Posts: 2,281

Quote:

Originally posted by Special_K:
I have not heard or tested it, true, but the specs on it say 29mm one way....now when you have Subwoofer-A with 2.2" peak to peak and sub B with 5" peak to peak [img]graemlins/jack.gif[/img] , what will most likely be louder? This is all I am basing my criticism on, I am not saying it is a poor quality subwoofer or anything like that, just saying on paper it looks like it is behind the mark. I put this post to see if anyone has indeed tested it and can prove or disprove its spl capabilities.

keeping everything fair equal power input... and same box you would really need to see the rest of the theile small for each sub to determine which would be louder... in this world if it was strictly based on xmax... the one with more would be louder... but that depends if the coils of the woofer will be thermally capable of handling that much power that it would take to make a sub move that far...and would the motor structure and suspension be strong enough to control the cone at that much excursion... how much power, how big of a box would you need and how low would you need to tune it to make it move 5" peak to peak.... answers = ALOT + HUGE + LOW