Hi everyone, im planning to put a new system in my ride, and i need a little help from the sound enthusiasts out here, please tell me which one of the three set ups following i sthe best, when we take both SQ and SPL(not looking to break any records but to turn some serious heads and to win some parking lot competitions) 1) 2 JL W7 12inch with 2 JL 1000/1 OR 2) 3 kicker S15L7 with 3 PPI PCX-1500 OR 3) 3 MTX 9500 15 inch with 3 PPI PCX-1500 please tell me which set up is going to be standing out the most....... THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.
Forget the MTX setup, and decide between the JL and the Kicker. Basically, the kicker setup will sound good with higher SPL, but the W7's should sound a little better, but with a little less SPL. Of course, the l7's setup has more surface area, and is basing this comparision on two subs instead of three. Would you be interested in other options?
What am I smoking, Three L7's have a lot more surface area that two w7's, do the math. If you read my post it stated that this comparision was unfair because he was comparing two subs against three. Even with the extended x-max of the W7, it will not make up for the added surface area, and subsequent air movement, of the third sub. Come on now bacon, if it doesn't say JL, you put it down! Sit down, do the math, and you will see that the x=max would factor in a comparsion of two w7's against two l7's, but when you compare three subs against two, the three will move more air, and not have to extend as far, because of the increased surface area. Step away from the JL cheerleading section, and look at the basic physics of the matter.
12W7= 2 12" subs with total surface area of 24" 15L7= 3 15" square subs, with 38.1 surface area each, totals a total surface area, equals 114" of surface area. Yes, Bacon, I agree that in a situation of two W7 12's against two L7 12's that the x-max excursion of the w7's would negate the additional surface area of the L7's. However, in a comparsion of two 12's against three 15's squares, the surface area is so large that the x-max excursion cannot make up for total surface area.
still, add up the xmax...16+16+16 = 48, 29+29 or 32+32 = 58 and 64
sure theyll have less cone area but they have superb SQ and they will take up much much less space than those kickers...not to mention kicker square subs have stress points with the increased surface are... you probly wont be pushing them hard ernough to notice but they will quite whne u put them through tough stuff
also, considering power - two 13w7s only take 2000w rms to run, 3 S15L7's take 3000w rms to run.. thats ~170A for the w7's to run and ~250a for the kickers to run..those kickers are ALOT more power hungry to move alot less im not all for JL stuff but i would take JL over kicker and MTX anyday..
even if the JLs arent as loud, they will give you alot more than just SPL...superb SQ, less power hungry, MUCH less power to run, MUCH less space to run them in, and come on, even with 2 13w7's or even 12w7's, youll hit 150+ dB so why would you want +3 dB more if those kickers give it to you anyway and sacrafice everything JL offers with those w7's? keep in mind L7's dont have much SQ at all... in my mind and ANY other audiophile's mind, the w7's with 1000/1's are a better buy
ok lets try this again.. find the surface area of a circle A=(pi) radius (squared) thats about 3.14 x 36 for a single 12
113 square inches for a 12w7, 226 for two.. ok ill agree the 15" kickers have almost 3x surface area.....
i dont know where you got your calculation but those kickers have around 225 square inches per sub, and also keep in mind that you're going to have to build a box for each one of these probably more than 3 cubic feet for a ported box and 2 for sealed box, thats 6 or 9 cubic feet and thats ALOT for someone to put in a trunk
im still standing tall by the w7's, but moreso 13w7's
I pulled the surface area from the Kicker site, I will double check, might have fat fingered it, but notherless, the surface area is 3x the area of the JL's, and I would agree with you if the comparision had been two subs against two subs. I also have read the discussion about stress points, but the original post emphasized SQ and SPL, in which case surface area would factor in greatly. Honestly, I like the W7's, but there are other alternatives out there that sound as good. And yes, I know the X-Max is close, but the l7's don't need to extend that far, because their surface area more than makes up for the excursion. Anyway, Check out the Autotek X-Class mono blocks, the mean machine 1500.1 or 3000.1, or their stealth 1600.1, all are 1 ohm stable and provide a true rms.
lol yes i am and a good alternative for the 1000/1 for a 13w7 would be a JBL BP1200.1 although if you put the 13w7 in a slot ported box, you would need an external subsonic filter for frequencies lower than the Fs or tuning of the box so you dont over excurse (is that a word?) the sub and damage it
an alternate amp for a 500/1 on a 12w7 would be a hifonics brutus BX1000D, it would put about 750w rms at 1.5 ohm which is a good match for the 12w7...its a decent amp but theres better out there
I have been reading a lot about the BX1500D because I was also told it would be a great match to run my dual 10w7's. However, i have read that the only time the hifonics bx1500d truely throws what its listed as is the 1500.1@1ohm. at 2 and 4 ohm loads its nowhere near the 500.1 and 1000.1 it is posted as and as for th 1.5ohm load where it should be about 750W its no where close. anyone else read that and is it true? Really need to find a nice amp besides the 1000/1 to power these without emptying a wallet.
i was talking to this guy at my local car audio store, and he was talking about this guy who came in, bought one JL 13w7 and a 1000 watt amp and was hitting 157.6 dB, WITH JUST ONE mind you, i'd go with that, or you could try kove :-) lol.
ok, 13w7 has 107 in^2, NOT 143.. and the w7 only has 84 in^2, so the 13 is close to 30 higher.. so, 3 15 L7's is WAYYYY MORE than 3X the surface area.. the surface area of a circle is pi*r squared, but the 13w7's radius is NOT 6.5", and the 12w7's is NOT 6".. due to the surround design of high excursion woofers.. usually lose about 2" radius after taking into account half of the surround's surface as cone area..
15" L7 = 225 in^2 X 3 = 675 in^2 2 12w7 = 84 X 2 = 164 in^2 2 13w7 = 107 X 2 = 214 in^2
the 13w7's excursion would have to be in excess of 50 mm one way.. =4
but, YES, 12 or 13w7's should be taken for SQ and SPL over Kickers or MTX..
and as for comparing 2w7's vs 3 15" L7's, he's probably taking into account PRICE..
Bacon man, ur math is horrible(at least it appears to be)! Go back to geometry!!!
no, his geometric equations, mathmatical calculations are just great, actually.. he just didn't know about the reduction in cone area, etc, so his initial and final figures weren't right.. honestly, that's something i think almost everyone would do.. hell, i'd do it too, if i hadn't discovered such knowledge during previous speaker research..
oh, also.. correct me if i'm wrong, but.. if one was to go PORTED, EXCURSION wouldn't matter as much, as you get to the tuned frequency of the box, excursion of the sub becomes less, minimal actually,.. so, for SPL, at any frequency tuned, wouldn't cone surface area be a greater factor?.. *shrug*
Hi everyone... im the one started this thread.. thank you so much for all your replys, but i like you to look into a new line.. CROSSFIRE AUDIO, they came out with a XT@ 15inch.... i think its way better than kicker L715 in SPL and almost close to SQ with JL... anyone has any thoughts?