cougarballa2k5

Yeh. I'm wondering if more airspace and a higher tuning will do a good job of increasing output, but retaining a somewhat flat response. Right now I like how it is, but I wouldn't mind it being louder at all.

My thoughts exacry. Volume and tuning wise, IDK.

Two RL-p 15s can do amazing things as well. You should see the looks on people's faces when I let er rip. I love it, I could demo my car all day long. Except the fact that it was totalled yesterday.....

I'm out to get the most from my pair of RL-p 15s. I am more than likely going to be acquiring a 1994 Explorer to replace my Cougar soon. Space is even more so, no longer an issue. I have around 800 - 1000 RMS on tap per 15. Depends on how proper the rating on my amp is. Currently, they are housed in 5.5 NET @ 33hz w/ 72in^ port area. I would like suggestions/personal experiences as to what would be louder. I personally would like to try 6.25 NET @ 32hz w/ 110in^2 port area. Thoughts/Random comments all welcome.

Just for sake of conversation, how much louder are we talking on the direct swap from an RL-p to an RL-s. Again with the 1000 RMS applied? Would it be reasonable to expect gains of 3+ dB across the board? Or better suited to expect marginal gains of 1+dB?

Well it isn't ghetto, its just not designed for this amount of current draw. The wiring is just fine for most systems people would install in a vehicle

Well, my box is not structurally as sound as it should be. Its built great, but these RL-ps are a definate need for bracing. I'm going to use threaded rod in my future box. In the low extremities (30hz and down) I get a strange humping noise, not sexual humping, but HUMP. I beleive the port is unloading something nasty due to the insufficient port area. I've got a few buzz areas that are annoying, but easily fixed. All in all, I love it. The setup is very musical, no nasty peaks -- if a song is meant to have loud bass, it'll have loud bass. On certain songs (Girl Gimme That for example) my throat is tickled and my eyes try to close. When I say tickled, I mean I have coughing fits. I know loud, I love loud, this is loud ladies and germs. Even has room for improvement. I cannot wait to replace them with RL-s drivers. Bring it.

Update on my thoughts later on. Maybe some pics :-D. Poor poor windsheild EDIT - Yeh I know its per driver, but I didn't realize you meant it as a minimum. Actually I did, I just didn't think about it :-p. Anyways, up to 500 RMS I'd say 35in^2 is fine. But I'm definately in need of more like 50in^2 per driver.

hahaha, I'll try to get some. My installs are never glamorous. I'm the bare MDF, amp just lying in there kind of guy.

My Planet Audio T2250D came today, and its purdy. Got it installed and wangin :-D. These babies are pretty damn loud. I have to upgrade my wiring for sure. I've got near 200amps of current draw through 15foot of 4 guage wire, that is chit down to 8 guage wire for another foot to the amp. Ground is all 8 guage. Big 3 hasn't been done yet. 130 amp alt. I figure once I get all the electrical done, I can crank it a tad more, get even louder. As it is now, its NICE. The box is not near braced enough. I'm planning a new box. 5.5 Cubes NET @ 32hz w/ 100in^2 port area and threaded rod bracing. IMO, 30 - 35in^2 port area isn't enough when talking about the kind of power some of us are throwing at these woofers.

Ti 15 and RL-p are similar drivers IIRC. Use the same motor and cone at least. I personally will bet on the Type Rs being louder, but not a huge difference. Though, none of those setups will give you the "I can't breathe" affect.

Good enough to keep my interest peaked mike :-D, thanks for the bit of info. I figure I have each RL-p in 2.75 NET right now, and can afford to push the enclosure to 3 NET per driver. So, I should be able to fit a pair of RL-s 15s :-D :-D. Hello 150s daily.

I've got a 12" version sitting right beside me. Still haven't gotten around to doing the box to test it :(.

I didn't read all of this but, two questions.... Will these work in the same enclosure as an RL-p? What I mean is, will they still be a small box driver -- the 15 happy in only 2.75 NET. Will the output be more than the RL-p w/ a drop in replacement 1000rms per driver? EDIT - Okay I read it all, and I still have both questions requesting to be answered.

Errrr, the RL-p is almost $100 more than an SE.

These aren't even SE they are RE. Rl-p wins, bout 2db louder across the board. No meter, just lots of experience. Box is flexing something sad in a certain spot. So threaded rod or some other form of bracing will be implemented.

Well, I screwed up the first test run. It didn't sound too great and it wasn't as loud as the 12s . Obviously I was disappointed. Then I noticed they were moving funny, so I took out the 9v to test polarity and BAM one speaker wasn't really moving. Just resonating off the other. Sure enough, one loose wire :-D. Just fixed it and demoed for 10 seconds. RL-p WINS!!! I can't say by how much as I only have 10 second of listening time thus far. I work a 5 hour shift today delivering food...so I'll have a comprehensive report soon!

Going from a 15 w/ 18mm excursion on 400 watts to Two 15s w/ 24mm excursion on 2000 watts

Coil Overs

So what does the TA pull in the quarter?

I'll be impressed if that happens. I'm just wondering if the limited power will give the REs a nice edge. I find out tomorrow morning. All I have left to do is cut mounting holes, wire, and screw the bishes in :-D. The port looks pretty damn good, I always like how slot ports turn out looking. TTIWWOP

The question would be; What do you think?

Just trying to reassure myself outloud.

I know that this new RL-p setup has got to be loud. I know it will be. In the back of my mind I can't quit thinking, oh my gosh what if it isn't?? I keep thinking that a small box woofer doesn't lend itself to getting too loud. I'm coming from a 15" Ascendant Audio Atlas in 4.8NET @ 31hz. What I am wanting out of this setup is the following.... Twice as loud as the Atlas. More authority in the 60-80hz region, where the atlas lacked. By the numbers, it should be at least twice as loud, but I keep thining...its audio, chit doesn't always happen how formulas say, I may be dissapointed. I've got twice the cone area, 6mm more linear excursion, and the output advantage of not being xbl^2 oriented.

(2) RL-p 15s sharing 400 RMS (5.5 NET @ 33hz) vs (2) RE RE 12s sharing 400 RMS (3.8 NET @ 35hz) Any guesses, bets, or wagers as to who will come out on top? This test will be performed by ear -- no meter used. So it may be an unnoticable change. New amp won't be here until next week, so I figured I would have some fun and put together a handicap match. Ding Ding Ding!!!! ROUND ONE