Fi Car Audio

In all honesty, I wouldnt worry too much about it. Id simply keep beating on them until you get something to fail. Having cracks, tears, or rips in spiders often occurs with overexcursion. But even at that I have seen subs continue on without issue. How old are the subs? Thanks, Scott

Pricing can be found on the site with only differences in shipping between the 2 and 3 magnet versions. 2 magnet shipping: $58.70 via USPS priority 3 magnet shipping: $44.60 via USPS priority Since this is for a daily driver that with see some contests, I would definitely get the "daily" version and NOT the SPL. Thanks, Scott

Everyone about summed it up. For less money you can keep the same sub in a new system... just change the size and softparts to match the new needs.

Nope, didnt see it. Ill go ahead and check through all my proto coils tomorrow and see what I can find. But just measuring the couple I have on the desk, Id have to wind a 4 layer down to a 2 layer to get the OD acceptable. I think Ive got some others that might be a better fit though. Main issue is the smaller ID than standard... in order to ensure that the OD of the coil doesnt rub, you would need a really small coil... Ill post back later. Thanks, Scott

Sorry... I dont have any. But I normally just cut back about 20% of the wire and twist. There is no loss in doing so as it is only over 1/2" of length

We started production on them today. We will have a good portion of them built by the end of the week and probably begin shipping early next week. Thanks, Scott

Yes we can recone them. We only made a handful of them and we ahve all the parts for them in stock. Please go ahead and send an email to [email protected] and we will get you taken care of. Thanks, Scott

You are definitely small for a pair of SSD18s, but still doable. Im hoping that you have the copper coils as it will help some with the smaller space. You have 13.35 cuft to work with... so honestly this is going to be a tough one to fit. Trying to keep things around 12 cuft total really limits port sizing. You will absolutely have to radius all port edges to keep noise down. For port forward you could do 4" X 25.5" X 16" long or with port up you could do 4.5" X 23.5" X 17.5" long. Aeroports are another option you coild try as well. Approx (6) 4" aeroports ((3) per side) that are about 17" long in the center section would work well.

This is going into an SUV? How tall is it to the back of the seats? Ill shoot for (4)18s as you are sitting at 28 cuft right now, but if you only have 20" to the seats youll be down to (4)15" territory. Also is 33" high to the roof?

lol...

Thanks for the order. Please keep us posted on how it sounds

Marshal????!?!? Is that you? Give me a call! Id look to (4)SSD 15s with that power. Should make for a solid setup with 3kW. And if Marshal is behind it, it will be loud.

Just copying and pasting from another thread to here as well to save a wee bit o time. After having read through all of this... Im not saying what the RF tech said is incorrect, but it isnt telling the whole story either. Just because a driver is the same size, same nominal impedance, and in separate but equal enclosures/chambers, does not mean it will work properly or optimally. Yes, it will work. But not as good as it could. To me it is like taking a 35" tire off my jeep (15" wheel with a 35" off road tire) and replacing it with a 30" bling wheel with an ultra low profile tire with an overall tire diameter of 35" as well. Now if the bolt pattern fits, you have similar offset so it wont rub, and the same OD... it will work. I can drive it... But when I try to hit the rocks or dirt, problems will arise. There are MANY different aspects to a sub and how it reacts in the same enclosure with power. Its all of these other things, suspension, impedance rise, Q values, and on and on that will determine how well things will work together. My answer is if you want to build a dual chamber box that seems optimal for either sub, then put both in and wire them separately to try them 1 at a time to see which you like better... then pull the other out and replace it with what you prefered. Doing this simply to see which sounds/works better for your application is fine. But I wouldnt run them at the same time. Odd things happen with different back EMF screwing with eachother at different frequencies as well as with the amp. Its simply not good practice. Will it work? Yes. Should you do it? No. Thanks, Scott

After having read through all of this... Im not saying what the RF tech said is incorrect, but it isnt telling the whole story either. Just because a driver is the same size, same nominal impedance, and in separate but equal enclosures/chambers, does not mean it will work properly or optimally. Yes, it will work. But not as good as it could. To me it is like taking a 35" tire off my jeep (15" wheel with a 35" off road tire) and replacing it with a 30" bling wheel with an ultra low profile tire with an overall tire diameter of 35" as well. Now if the bolt pattern fits, you have similar offset so it wont rub, and the same OD... it will work. I can drive it... But when I try to hit the rocks or dirt, problems will arise. There are MANY different aspects to a sub and how it reacts in the same enclosure with power. Its all of these other things, suspension, impedance rise, Q values, and on and on that will determine how well things will work together. My answer is if you want to build a dual chamber box that seems optimal for either sub, then put both in and wire them separately to try them 1 at a time to see which you like better... then pull the other out and replace it with what you prefered. Doing this simply to see which sounds/works better for your application is fine. But I wouldnt run them at the same time. Odd things happen with different back EMF screwing with eachother at different frequencies as well as with the amp. Its simply not good practice. Will it work? Yes. Should you do it? No. Thanks, Scott

The surrounds are fairly similar. They are what I call a "mid" surround... not ultra skinny, but not a wide half roll either.

The surrounds are fairly similar. They are what I call a "mid" surround... not ultra skinny, but not a wide half roll either.

ARSENAL SPECS 10" D4 R 3.35 Ohms per coil (6.7 Ohms measured in series) Fs 33.8 Hz Qms 4.68 Qes .43 Qts .39 Mms 123 g Sd 310 cm^2 Vas 24.24 l SPL 85.2 1W/1m BL 20.2 Xmax 18mm RMS 500W 12" D4 Re 3.35 Ohms per coil (6.7 Ohms measured in series) Fs 28.1 Hz Qms 5.24 Qes .45 Qts .41 Mms 156 g SD 480 cm^2 Vas 66.27 l SPL 87.0 1W/1m BL 20.2 Xmax 18mm RMS 500 15" D4 Re 3.35 Ohms per coil (6.7 Ohms measured in series) Fs 27.1 Hz Qms 6.15 Qes .53 Qts .49 Mms 188 g Sd 810 cm^2 Vas 168.9 l SPL 89.9 1W/1m Bl 20.2 Xmax 18mm RMS 500W

lol.. no worries. I wont get into the implications of selling motors or kits for products. Just that we wont piece out a sub like that.

To be honest, I have no idea. If its a US standard sized ID coil, then Im sure we can. But with MA, you never know what China is using About the only way is for you to measure with calipers the ID of the coil, then Id know if I could... but youd still need to send it in for me to test fit and find the best parts for it. Always best to have a new sub in house before I do a recone.

Depends on which version of the TC9 it is. The older shallow ones wont take Q parts as the coils are too long. The newer version will.

Well, Noah, head on down to Shawns... theres 8 of them waiting for you Type R 0149... I think itll make a really solid SQ setup given the components and balance of the system. While its not going to rip heads off, itll be clean and still have room for the groceries or golf clubs

Thats a real tough one... 50sqin isnt much at all and with any real power to those subs, the port would compress like crazy. Any way to add more aeroports on the outside of the enclosure for the pair of MTs?

tRiGgEr... glad you got it. We had typed the street# in incorrectly and by the time I had read this and called UPS, they had said that it had already been corrected. Sorry for the inconvenience. Please let me know if I can help with anything else. Thanks, Scott

lol... something like that I figured thats what "dead" is for. Ive got plenty of time to do that when Im 103.

I do not like the BTL10 as mentioned above... the space and geometry of the basket and cone combination is simply to tight to allow for what the motor and coil combination can do. Id need another 1" of space between the spider landing and mounting flange to clear everything properly. As there simply isnt much of a demand (next to none) for a fully loaded BTL10, I wont spend the money on tooling at new basket for it. Id rather modify a BL even further than make a BTL10". Thanks, Scott