We got the first prototype in here to test and I LOVE IT !!!

Cannot wait to get rolling with this project

They should cost $130 MAP from an authorized dealer.

* With Blackberry Z-10

Might be time to redisign a tube for tight applications with this?

Interested

Do you have box, tuning, and rms on these?sorry if I missed it in another thread.

Our life-test at the factory passed 300-watts RMS for 12-hours full bandwidth in a sealed box -- so I will probably rate it around that.<br /><br />JUST got the e-mail in confirming that -- we'll also do our own tests.

Perfect for what I have planned. Thanks

-ps I found the other thread.

Spec sheet from factory LMS :

I measured Le on my Woofer Tester II as that was not included at 1.81 mH

When can I get them?

nice

is there anyway to get a dustcao of one of those on the component set for sa

No there is not. It would not glue to the cone properly as it glues to a flat diaphragm.

I understand the Idea behind smaller diameter subs.

There is a market for them.

The thing that I don't understand is the the motor is to big to fit the possible application the driver could be used in.

 

I know it's been stated that neo is more expensive, but if people are looking for a smaller driver to fit the application the size of the motor will negate the application most of the time.

At least that's my opion.

 

I would love to kick/door mount some of these smaller subs, but can't due to the motor size.

I believe someone looking in this market would pay for the smaller driver (mounting depth and width) and you'd have a more versitile product that more serious buyers would jump on.

 

I'm courious what your thoughts are on my observations.

You are the designer/builder and have better understanding on the topic.

I would like to hear you thoughts as well as others.

Based on the market segment I am hitting on -- a true sub-woofer -- the motor size isn't much of an issue.

-----

When you move on to something that is, by design, also a midbass / midrange the smaller motor is a consideration; see NS-6.5CS :

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/1721077-post10.html

Even then the motor is still fairly large (for reference the NS-6.5CS set has about 12mm linear). Obviously alot smaller than the X-6.5SW but not a tiny motor at all.

For reference; the NS-6.5CS midrange costs ~2x to produce than what the X-6.5SW does -- I don't see that hitting the market niche of the X-6.5SW.

TY for the response Jacob.

Do I see carbon fiber cones in the background? New project for the future?

any update on these?

Or tweets?

These would be great to replace my factory "subwoofers" with in the GTO. Too bad they are only a S4. My factory speakers are all S2ohm and I don't want to put a real sub in there and add weight. Any chance of a single 2ohm 6"?

Revised prototype is on the way -- suspension is a little stiffer (ported F3 is nearly identical) with re-enforced glue joint and a few other modifications as well.

I will post up testing on it when it's here

Rev.2 Prototype is here -- not 100% where I want it but closer

Third prototype is done -- specs coming in between the first two prototypes. The box model graph is essentially identical to the original. Hopefully I have reached the perfect balance of mechanical durability and response -- should have it after new year some time in my hands

Gray is the first prototype I published spec on which was a bit too soft.

Yellow is the 2nd prototype that was way too stiff.

Green is the 3rd prototype that I hope achieves the best balance.

Pre orders open when???

The reference component set looks very impressive, those crossovers...

Third revision prototype is in :

** Free air test **

** Test Bench test in-box **

has anyone used these? i have a project that has limited space and i'm curious as to how they perform before I spend the money on a couple of these subs.