i would think to get that power acoustik cus its more watts but alot of people said watts dont really matter it all depends on the type of speaker. and people said Power Acoustik isnt that good of a brand. and i know Rockford Fosgate is pretty tight brand. if i get that Rockford Fosgate ima try to save for another one so then i'll have 2000 peak. that'll prolly hit harder than that Power Acoustik 2400 peak right ?
Anonymous
Posted on
Peak doesn't mean anything, the continuous (RMS) power rating it what you're looking at. Peak ratings are just put on an amp to make them look good. Rockford Fosgate out of those two, Power Acoustik just plain out sucks. Really though, Rockford is better, but there are better subs out there that really aren't much more expensive. Adire Audio Shivas are much louder and hit harder than RF, and are 125 each.
Go with the Rockford, they know alot about how to make good AMPs, Powe Acoustic is dirt. If an AMP say 2400 watts dont belive it it probaby only puts out about 600 watts RMS power. RMS is they most important because teqnically it is the 'real' true power you will get. With AMPs no company is right on target with power ratings.
meye2cents
Unregistered guest
Posted on
the RMS rating also indicates how much wattage you can run through a component for 8 hours, before it overheats...
potential momentary power output isn't really a good indicator, for example, there are some computer speakers that run off of 3 or 4 watts rms, but have a pmpo of 250wats, meaning, for a fraction of a second, the amplifier is putting out 250watts,
the amp you speak of might actually put out 2400watts, but probably at an unstable load, and across an extreemly narrow frequency range
Anonymous
Posted on
so you're saying that running a stereo system longer than 8 hours will overheat the components in your car?