DiyMobileAudio.com Car Stereo Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
989 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I don't think I've seen it posted somewhere here, but what would be the optimal amount of power for the CA18RNX/G18RNX

Would 50, 75 or 150 watts rms @ 4 ohms be best?

I'm debating whether or not I should use the PPI A300 that I have. Or just run the 2 way setup off of the 4 x 50 watts rms I have using the Helix HXA500Q.

Would 50 watts rms be ok?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
the more the marrier!

your amps will be making about half the rated power at 8 ohms.

i should be having about 250+ RMS @ 8 ohms on my L18RNX soon although i know i wont be using most of that.. right now, i have 150 @ 8 ohms and im extreamly happy with them!

IMHO, i personally think youll be extreamly happy if you had the more power to them.

^although, i had about 35 availiable watts to them @ 8 ohms and i was fairly happy.

so to answer you question, 150 @ 4 ohms / 75 @ 8 ohms would be My choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
989 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I think what I'll probably end up doing is bridging the 4 channels of the Helix to 150 watts rms x 2 @ 4 ohms for the Seas, then run the lpg 25NFA's off the PPI A300 rated for 75 watts rms x 2 @ 4 ohms.
:twisted:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
397 Posts
hey there!

im currently using my PPi a404 to power my CA18RNX - 2 channels with 50w per channel power each of the Seas.. And what can i say? they pound! I was using DLS R6a drivers before i switched to the Seas and there was almost no power difference (volume-wise). The other 2 channels of the amp power my DLS UR1 tweeter - im running em' full active.

at first i was apprehensive, but when i hooked them up i was all smiles. I guess your a300 will supply the CA18RNX with ample power :D

of course its always better to give em more power to provide better headroom and flexibility.

HTH
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
I tried out my CA18's last night on my studio 150([email protected]) and ran my 25nfa's on my studio 50([email protected]) and the mids sound great, but were a little quiet with the gains flat compared to the tweets with the gains flat. I also had to EQ in a hair of midbass.

I just got home from work right now and tried an experiment. I have another studio 150 and I tried using one of each bridged to each mid at [email protected] ohms. I didn't notice a substantial increase in the overall character of their sound but I did notice a huge increase in bass and low mid output and was able to set my EQ back to flat. I also have to be careful not to overpower the mids since they are getting a lot more power now. I also had to notch the up the gain a little on the studio 50 for the tweets for them to match well with the mids running with their gains set flat. I am still on the fence as to whether I want to keep it this way and will do a little more playing around to decide. I'll post again in this thread when I play with things some more and have a better idea of whther I like it or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Ok, I did a little more listening, and I think I'm going to stay with one amp per mid. I love the way these mids sound with 150W going to each. I like how they sound with no EQ at 150W, and with 37.5W they still sounded pretty darn nice, but required a little EQ to make up in ares they were lacking.

I wouldn't discourage anybody from running these low power because I was quite happy with them that way but I really like them a bit more now. If you've got the extra power on hand, use it, if not don't stress yourself out about it because they'll still sound good. :)
 

·
****ty D.I.Y. installer
Joined
·
71 Posts
My Ca18RNX's are being run off an ESX 175.2, so approximately 75-100 watts each at 8 ohms avaliable to them. They pound....period. Guy at the car audio store didn't believe me when I told them they were 8 ohm mids :)
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top