Impious

Keep in mind that you have to quadruple displacement to maintain the same SPL for every octave decrease in frequency. So that means, for example, that if your mids are moving 3mm at 50hz to produce a given SPL level, they must excurt 12mm at 25hz to output the same SPL. Given the generally limited excursion of the majority of mids...this isn't really a good situation to put your speakers in. It's certainly possible to listen to the stereo with no HPF, but you're mainly gambling that you have the self control to always keep the volume at a level where this doesn't become dangerous.

Plug 'em into an enclosure program and play around.

The bridge you are referring to (as pointed out by M5) failed not necessarily because it was excited at resonance, but because it was excited at resonance and driven beyond it's mechanical limitations. Just the same a subwoofer would be damaged if you drove it past it's mechanical limits. But going back to our weight on a spring...what happens when the weight is pulled downward and released? Does the spring oscillate until it self destructs, or does it oscillate until it's energy is expended? So, how do we determine the time it takes a subwoofer excited at resonance to dissipate it's energy and cease oscillation? By the Q factor. The Q of the driver describes the amount of damping provided at resonance, or for how long after the signal is removed the driver will continue to "ring". (The terms "overshoot" and "ringing" are commonly used to express the amount of damping a driver has.) Qms is mechanical damping (i.e. the suspension). Qes is the electrical damping (i.e. the motor). And Qts is the total Q of the driver (Qts = Qms * Qes/Qms + Qes). A high Q indicates a driver that is underdamped, meaning it will "ring" for a longer period of time or that it has more "overshoot". A low Q indicates a driver is more overdamped, meaning it will have less "ringing" or less "overshoot". So the Qts tells us how a driver will behave at Fs based on the damping provided by the motor and the suspension. And, in case you've never noticed...in the vast majority of drivers on the market, the Qms is much higher than the Qes. Likewise, the total Q of the driver (Qts) is typically just slightly lower than the Qes and significantly lower than Qms. So what does this mean? It tells us that the motor provides much more damping and control over the motion of the cone than the suspension. Well, the impedance does increase but I don't believe "rise" is typically the word used to express that idea as that's most associated with enclosure and heat effects, again as M5 pointed out.

My first question is, why do you think a speaker would be damaged by playing at it's Fs? The woofer doesn't self-destruct at Fs. Think of a weight at the end of a spring, with the spring being suspended vertically and the weight attached at the bottom of the spring. If you grab the weight, pull it down and then release it, the spring will rebound and continue oscillating up and down at a specific rate. In speaker terms, the mass of the soft parts would be the weight and the suspension would be the spring. At some specific frequency, the weight of the moving mass will be in balance with the compliance of the suspension and there will be a natural oscillation of the "weight on the spring" (the moving mass on the suspension). This is the Fs, and can be identified by a peak in the driver's impedance.

what should i look for in a good amp? The amplifier that has the most power within your budget, has the features you desire, cosmetics you can live with and a warranty that satisfies you.

You are confusing deadening/damping in general with specific sound deadening products. You don't even understand you said, apparently.

He was a world champion, but he didn't win his world championship with that setup. It was a single show, that he only entered because he didn't want to miss the show and miss out on points. So this wasn't his real competition setup. It was a one time thing. His name was Jason Ewing. He was at one time a member of Team Image Dynamics and according to those who know him, one of the most knowledgeable alarm install guys in the country. He was also on Pimp My Ride for a short period of time. Don't ask me why I remember so much about this guy, because I really don't know. I guess it's from the years he was a prominent member of ECA, back when I was first getting "hard core" into the SQ side of things and spent a shit load of time there...it was at that time that he won the show with the stock VW speakers. But to the point you are making; It's not necessarily the source, it's the processing and more importantly the proper tools and knowledge to use it correctly. Processing is still worthless if you don't know how to properly use it or the proper tools to utilize it.

So all those guys like Alan Dante who have lined their vehicle with concrete aren't sound deadening the vehicle ?? SPL isn't my forte, but most of the extreme competitors I've seen put a lot of time and effort into solidifying the "shell" of the vehicle...clamps to hold doors shut, concrete lining, bracing...all the way to friends sitting on roofs and windshields during scoring. I would say this contradicts the idea that sound deadening in SPL is a big no-no...it also fails the logic test; panels vibrating are absorbing/expending energy that could have otherwise been spent pressurizing the airspace. Why stopping this would be a bad thing simply doesn't make any sense.

SNR (signal-to-noise ratio) is one of those relatively unimportant specifications. Any amp worth owning will have a sufficient enough SNR to not cause an audible difference. Though it is worth mentioning that not all SNR is the same. It's only "meaningful" for comparison if you know the parameters of the measurement. So two amp's SNR are not inherently comparable at a face value. They may not have "rated" SNR at equivalent power output, which would severely skew the comparison based on "rated" numbers. But regardless...as I said before, any amp worth owning will have sufficient SNR as to not cause an audible difference. So don't worry about it and focus instead on the things that do matter when selecting an amplifier. To be perfectly honest, I couldn't even tell you what the SNR is of my current amps, or any of my previous amps, as I don't even glance at that specification.

You guys will have to bring it by some time so I can listen to it

It sounds like you pretty much have the general jist of things. From my understanding, the issue is that as you decrease further below tuning the port and driver begin increasingly moving out of phase...meaning as the driver is moving "in" the air in the port is moving "out" and vise versa. Thus it's no longer providing any active damping to the driver. The port is now basically acting like a hole in the box as far as the driver is concerned. This out-of-phase condition also explains the sharp roll-off in the frequency response of a ported enclosure as you decrease frequency below tuning. Does that help?

Looks good Dave!

That could be the result of a subwoofer in a ported enclosure unloading. But that's not "unloading". OP: You definition of "unloading" seems to be reasonably accurate. I probably wouldn't call it's movement below tuning "uncontrollable", as the driver is still "controlled" by the motor and it's own suspension (and input signal). It's mechanical power handling is reduced, which makes it easier to overdrive the speaker. You could run a driver well under the tuning of an enclosure without issue as long as you kept power levels to low enough levels not overexcurt the driver. Do you understand how a ported enclosure operates? yes i understand how ported boxes work, I also understand that keeping the power level low enough would not hurt the speaker while playing below tuning. the point i was making was doing that at higher levels. The rest of the post wasn't directed at you. Hence the reason it started with "OP:". It was directed towards the original poster.

I would have to say this is one of those particular cases where the OP probably would be better off upgrading his source and speakers before worrying about amplifying. The cheapy VR3 headunit and Xplod speakers are pretty worthless. Beyond this particular scenario, mrd's argument wouldn't hold an ounce of water.

That could be the result of a subwoofer in a ported enclosure unloading. But that's not "unloading". OP: You definition of "unloading" seems to be reasonably accurate. I probably wouldn't call it's movement below tuning "uncontrollable", as the driver is still "controlled" by the motor and it's own suspension (and input signal). It's mechanical power handling is reduced, which makes it easier to overdrive the speaker. You could run a driver well under the tuning of an enclosure without issue as long as you kept power levels to low enough levels not overexcurt the driver. Do you understand how a ported enclosure operates?

You mean you don't lube your subs Qtc is a little on the lower side for IB, but they have a low Fs to match so results could be acceptable in a car. Depends on what type of response you're looking for.

An external crossover really isn't necessary in most basic systems. Back when products like that Audiocontrol came out, a lot of amps didn't have any built in crossovers. Anymore a lot of products you will have installed already have crossovers built in; i.e. headunits and amplifiers. Unless you were planning to get a little more advanced and run "active" (do a search if you don't know what that is), an external crossover isn't necessary. Even then, that Audiocontrol piece is archaic and outdated. Not worth $220, and not worth purchasing compared to other products available on the market.

Sooo not old school. Nice chandelier.

Is your current battery top-post or side-post?

No line of reasoning could support that statement. To the original question, 2.8cuft is probably a little small for a Fi Q. From what I've calculated, the Qtc would end up around 1.2 which is unacceptably high.

Too many speakers. You don't need a 3-way and 2-way. That and I wouldn't do midrange in the pillars and midbass in doors unless you would be able to independently time align them. Even then it's less than ideal.

Why not get a larger Kinetik for under the hood ? I was told they not good bats for under-the-hood-. because of the heat... That would be incorrect. I've had an HC1800 under my hood for a few years now.

Looks like they offer nothing new nor interesting.

CDT isn't anything special. Then they come up with marketing ploys to sell consumers a bunch of "accessories" that they don't need. There are better products on the market to be looking at other than CDT.

Why not get a larger Kinetik for under the hood ?