Leaderboard

A Sievert is the measure of the radiation dose to tissue 1 Sievert = 1 J/kg = 1 m2/s2 1 mrem = 10 μSv A Becquerel is the activity of a quantity of radioactive material in which one nucleus decays per second. 1 Bq = 1 s−1

Kirill007. That's a better response.

Sorry about the crappy pics. The vehicle is sitting outside and I took some quick shots. I will take more later. I still need to finish the box and clean up the wiring.

What vehicles are you guys waiting for, both Honda's? I have been jumping the foundries shit DAILY about these, and I just keep getting pushed back, another 2-3 days, another 2-3 days.. The first of the three housings is done, and in production, however the other 2 have had to go back to the pattern shop 3 times.. Guys, this isn't about "US" meaning DC Power that's holding these up, we've been waiting a LOT longer than you guys have.. Do you really think that as the owner of the company I like losing $5k a day in sales because I dont have these, how about a hell no... Our first samples should be here this week, we have about 10 coming and they will leave to you guys the day they show up... I just know I'm tired of taking the beating we take because our vendors cant keep up with us and keep breaking promises.... I have the 2008 Hyundai Elantra. Remember....you sold me an alt that would 100% without a doubt fit my car. Then I go to install it and the mounting configuration is wrong! Wtf. So now +4 months later I still havd no alt. I am slowly killing my $450 XS Power batteries and factory 90 amp. I ordered a $215 battery charger from XS Powrer yesterday, thanks DC Power now you are costing me money for the wait. WTF. Where is my alt that I spent hundreds of dollars on last year!!!!!!!! And now Robbie you have enough time to check online forums but can't call me back! I left 5 messages and called over 10 times with no answer!!! I am finished with the excuses and bs. I WANT A FULL REFUND IMMEDIATELY!!! I WANT A FULL REFUND IMMEDIATELY!!

Do they have one of these in there?

Its not arguing but clarifying. If some idiot says that you can't put more than 15w into a BTL and it will blow in the Fi forum would that be an argument? I know it'd be an ass kicking, but can't say that I'd consider it an argument. Just happen to be some people who are getting rubbed the wrong way by fact. Life is going to be hard on them. Not so amusingly you didn't follow it anyways otherwise you'd have your answer, not simple, but nonetheless you surely didn't ask your question in a simple way either. And one more time, there is no place on this forum for spouting of crap information that is wrong. That is the reason this is a better place than others. A thread should be helpful not only for the OP but also those that search and find it. Having crap information that misleads both you and the ones that search is not acceptable.

You just want the dumbed down version, there is no dumbed down version, all amps are tested differently, buy what you think is reputable from a company with good CS.

Thanks for posting this!! Let's dumb this down a little to see if I'm understanding you correctly. A simple vented enclosure for example. If I understand what you're stating above. As the air in the port resonates it places a load, resistance to movement or a "brake", on the cone and this causes the impedance to increase in value. I'd venture to guess that if the if the above, my assumption, is correct. The cone/coil can't cycle "freely" and, for lack of a better term, is causing "feedback" or a higher resistance to movement due to another force fighting the AC voltage being sent to the coil to induce movement. Is this basically correct or completely wrong? Not sure I follow your analogy, so let me try to make this easier to understand. Ported enclosures have three impedance peaks. -The first two are enclosure dependent -1st peak (lowest F) is directly related to the chosen port -2nd peak from resonance -3rd peak from the inductance of the driver – this one you can ignore The confusion you have is around the 1st peak. Your analogy of a load/resistance is not terribly far off. To simplify this, basically we can change this peak in a couple different ways. First we can change the port size. If the port cannot support enough air at the velocity that the driver is trying to push through it, the impedance will change somewhat proportionally. The reason I use somewhat is that it is not a linear behavior. The other way to change the peak besides port size is to change the power. Obviously if the “too small” port above didn’t work at X power if we lowered the power to some level below X it could come into a range where it was okay and the air could move through the port. A third non-controllable impedance changing device is the temperature of the voice coil. This will obviously affect more than just the impedance, but nonetheless the drivers impedance will change with coil temperature.

And inability to perform a better test doesn't validate the results of an improper test. It's an excuse not to perform a better test, and a good one since some of that stuff is expensive. But it doesn't make the results of an inaccurate test anything more than they are, inaccurate. Which makes the results unreliable and not meaningful or useful. I wouldn't go about testing amplifiers because I don't possess or have access to the proper equipment. That doesn't mean I go about testing amplifiers in an inaccurate manor without properly identifying where the uncertainty lies, which in turn leads people to draw completely incorrect conclusions from the information I provide. We don't know with certainty that the ratings are accurate. Does that mean manufacturer's should stop rating amplifiers? No. There is a general level of acceptance that a manufacturer accurately rate their products. There are obvious business reasons to wish to do so. And there are obviously businesses who don't follow this policy. Which is where independent third party testing is useful, it can verify the accuracy of a given manufacturer's equipment. Are you going to be able to do it yourself? Probably not. But that doesn't mean that the ability does not exist. And that doesn't mean that any ability to test an amplifier, regardless of how high the uncertainty may be, is accurate and useful. Up until that point....you are buying based on reputation and a hope and a prayer that the manufacturer is honest. Which is where the companies with a high reputation have gained their high reputation and companies with a low reputation have gained their low reputation. Correct. Nobody you know. That doesn't mean nobody in general. See above. Reputation, hope and a prayer. But that doesn't make inaccurate (high uncertainty) measurement methods any more accurate or meaningful. If he measures two amps in a method with high uncertainty, how useful is his help? Less useful than having no numbers at all because you'll incorrect assume you are armed with knowledge that you actually do not possess. First you have to know what you are trying to measure. Second you need to reduce the uncertainty of the measurement, or control variables. Third you need to properly understand what was measured and where the uncertainty lies. I wouldn't call it nearly impossible. An extremely in-depth analysis would require more tools than most amateurs have access to. That doesn't make the test impossible, just extremely challenging for a given amateur individual with limited tools at their disposal. Other less in-depth analysis would be closer to within the grasp of the amateur. Understand what you are measuring, though. Don't misinterpret the information as something it is not. Understand where the uncertainty lies and how useful or usable the results are. Certainly there are ways to know. Some of the tests may be really expensive to conduct which makes them financially infeasible for an individual. Agreed. It sucks it's really hard to find out. But that still doesn't make some numbers better than no numbers at all, and it doesn't increase the usefulness of any result regardless of test method. Jacob didn't do it intentionally to mislead, or to demonstrate how underrated his amps are. It's been a while since I've read the thread, but IIRC he was extremely careful in his wording and how he represented the test. If you read through the thread, don't just read what he does write....rather, think about what he doesn't write. IMO he fully understood what the test did and did not demonstrate, and chose his words accordingly as to not misrepresent the results. That hasn't stopped everyone else from clearly misrepresenting the results, however.

RAM his test is invalid. 1/ Both amps produce more then 400w, and he was in the 0-400w class. 2/Do you think both amps have the same gain pots? I don't think so. (and if they have, design on the amp is different) 3/The amp was louder at a certain freqeuncy, doesn't mean it will do the same power over every freqeuncy, in his case he did get a gain. Other may not. There are to many variables to be able to say the amp is better then the other one, because in YOUR situation it's better.

This really comes down to your definition of "deadener" and "works". The license plate test doesn't prove your point. Anything that's softer than the plate and the back of the mounting surface will solve that problem - 10 cents worth of CCF or even some chewed gum would be more effective and easier. Decoupling the surfaces is the key here, not vibration damping. Gaining SPL after applying the material is almost certainly the result of sealing air leaks. Again, many things will accomplish the same thing. That's really not "deadening" by any definition. It's possible that you got some panel stiffening in the process. That's an advantage asphalt has, since it isn't a vibration damper, you don't get the offsetting conversion of vibration to heat. You also don't get a reliably durable product that can be counted on to last for several years and may result in a serious mess. If you don't care about that and are happy to address the issues indirectly and inefficiently, I guess it could make sense. None of that supports the idea that it works as a deadener.

OMG that is the funniest thing I've seen in awhile. Nick you guys should post that up on the website somewhere, maybe make a FAQ section with the question on how the name is pronounced as the first line item, this video as the answer!

when you strip 0 guage wire ...........with your teeth

whats going on . I have to make these stupid post . So I saying whats up and Bass Da Nation Fool!

Ha, do you work for them or something? Either brainwashed or uneducated. It deadens some sure, but only while it is stuck on and what it does do it is not very effective at doing. Your opinion is wrong and not based on any scientific fact or understanding. Just because you think it works does not make it work. Per dollar it is not a good buy and therefore a waste of money. No i don't work for them man. I have used it and had higher numbers + deadening. I have looked at all the different deadeners and the normal FatMat is asphalt but the Rattle Trap is different. I honestly have used Peel and Seal, it all fell off of my doors. Used Fatmat Rattle Trap and nothing fell off. But everyone here is trying to say that Fatmat doesn't work but in reality is cheaper and it works just fine. Your opinion is wrong and not based on any scientific fact. The only thing i have read is that people have talked to other company's and been to the factory and they wouldn't buy it. It works just as good.

That is for damn sure with these guys.

careful. This thread seems to require tests to certain standards. head to head isnt accurate enough for some people.

I asked cause i wanted a simple answer. not a long drawn out gettin way to deep into the technical shit argument. not tryin to be a dick but y do u smart guys & SQ guys like to argue so much?