How does a RE SX 18 fall into the FI lineup?

[Breakjunki 0]

Just wondering where a RE SX 18 would fall into the FI lineup. It kinda seems THE it would be about the equivalent of a BL. Hopefully Scott can give me some insight into this and if is better and why or how it'd compare.. thanks alot... Joe

[ford302redneck 15]

I would say its inbetween teh SSD with flatwind and BL.

Edited July 19, 2007 by ford302redneck

[JoshHd6 0]

yeah probably the SSD..

[ford302redneck 15]

Nah, teh SSD works in sealed boxes, and teh SX doesnt.

The softparts are very similar. But that doesnt just make teh moofa.

[germanyt 0]

Nah, teh SSD works in sealed boxes, and teh SX doesnt.

The softparts are very similar. But that doesnt just make teh moofa.

I beg to differ. I had 2 SX 15s in 4 cubes sealed in the trunk of my Grand Prix and it was rediculous. Since then i brag about the SQ capablity of the SX.

[ANeonRider 3]

Ridiculous SQ? That's a new descriptive.

[ford302redneck 15]

First Ive heard of SX having ridiculous SQ.

But your ears, and my ears might be 2 different thangs.

[Breakjunki 0]

Well the RE SX 18, has a 3" 8layer v/c. Will easily take 1500+rms all day. triple magnet slug, and 22 x-max. And insane output in 7.5 ft3 @ 34 . Just trying to figure out where it falls....

[bdawson72 0]

SSD

[Fi Car Audio 64]

SSD uses 2 of the same sized magnets as the SX. The standard SSD would fall in between the SE and SX. The SSD with the flatwind option comes much closer to an SX in performance. We have about a 4% motor strength difference between and SX and SSD. Not much of a difference.

BL is a good step above the SX and would fall solidly in between the SX and MT.

Thanks,

Scott

[dopey 0]

Loaded BTL?

Old XXX?

Where do they fit?

Edited July 20, 2007 by dopey

[Fi Car Audio 64]

Old XXX is somewhat along the lines of the Q, although the old XXX is an XBl sub and has a very different sound to it. Some like the drier/sterile XBl sound, some dont.

Loaded BTL doesnt have much of a reference match to it. I guess if you had a XXX and MT mix...

[appleyard 0]

Scott

Any chance you happen to know the Brahma Mk1 against the Q? I had been harassed by Brahma user saying the Q SQ is nothing and wanna prove him totally wrong.

I'm asking this because you have been playing with the XBL^2 for so long and you might be familiar with both sub.

Let just say Brahma with 1500w and Q with 1000w as it supposed to be and in an optimum enclosure.

[NDMstang65 403]

Considering SQ is 100% objective...neither of you will win.

[bdawson72 0]

Indeed

[Fi Car Audio 64]

Hmmm... I guess I could say Im VERY familair with the Brahma Mk1 and 2 subs as I built them all

Two very different sounds. I would say that from a durability point of view that the Q is much tougher overall. From SQ, its hard to say. I do like the XBL sound or I wouldnt have used it in my own products or others for OEM. The Q does sound different and many people prefer it over the drier/sterile XBL sound. As mentioned above, it is completely subjective and harder to actually quantify a preference. 1500W to a Brahma scares me though. The coil is less than half the size of the Q...

[appleyard 0]

Wasnt the Brahma Mk1 was rated at 1500w? Not too sure about coil size though. The Brahma was powered by the Ampman Revo 1500.1

I do had the chance to listen to the Brahma mk1... in fact its 2 15" brahma compared to 1 15" Q. 3000w on the Brahma and mine would roughly goes 1000-1200w (I dont know actually may been lower or higher). I would admit those brahma sounds good with lows and rather weak on the high. the Q has better high compared to the brahma but I have not tested the lows (going to built a new box @30hz for that purpose). I would tell him to wait until I build my new box and hear the lows for yourself.

I do agree that XBL tends to sound dry and the Q was rather in the middle... that will be confirmed when the new box is done.