CalsonicSE

iTrader: (3)

I went to a shop today looking to replace my single "budget-oriented" Rockford 12" sub. The guy there hooked up a JL Audio Prowedge subwoofer enclosure that contained one 12W3-D2 (a 12" 2ohm DVC woofer that is wired for 4ohms) to my car. My initial impression was...Wow!!! I love the way it sounds! & to top it off, the JL box is smaller than the one I used to house my old Rockford sub. Anyway, here's my problem. The thing is that the 12W3 is rated at 250 continuous watts, but my amp (Rockford 45.2) is rated "on paper" at only RMS 90 watts 4ohm bridged mono. I wish I had more power to push the sub but don't want to buy a new amp. The 12W3 does sounds wonderful with only 90 watts but do you think having a $300 12W3 Prowedge is overdoing it for my amp? Perhaps a much less expensive JL Audio 12W0 (SVC 125 continuous watts) would suffice & better "match" my amp? Unfortunately they didn't have a 12W0 for me to listen to. However, I'm sure the 12W0 is still better than my cheapo Rockford. Is the 12W3 really that much better than the 12W0 in terms of sound quality - even at only 90 watts? Thank you for reading my post and bearing with me. =)

mingo

iTrader: (4)

imo 12w0 is garbage. i had one. now it's in my bro's trunk.. i like the alpine subs for it's price. but as long as the lights aren't dimming adn you dont' hear distortion then you're fine.

breaux124

iTrader: (1)

You listened to a 12w3 with alot of power, of course it sounded great. The only way to find out is to listen to a 12w0 with your amp. Make sure you have a good box, because that can also make a big difference. Listen to the 12w3 with your amp also, cause maybe in the future you'll get a bigger amp and then you'll have to buy a stronger sub.
Decisions....

Whitemax

And it's a great match. But she doesn't play it painfully loud either. She uses it to balance out the sound. I'd say that your amp and a 12W0 would be a good match only if you aren't going to try to extract too much bass from it. Actually until my wife finally lets me get my stealthbox, I'm using a 6 year old Pioneer 10" in a Q-Logic bandpass box. You know what, It doesn't sound half bad....

deathwish

That's not a lot of power... I sound like a broken record, I know, but an Image Dynamics IDQ 10" will run pretty well on that power in a .65 box. Actually, I'd go a little smaller on the box, you'll get more volume, maybe down to .6 or .55. You can call ID and ask what size they'd recommend with that much power, the president of the company answers the phone sometimes

Whatever you get, you're not going to be booming with that little power... The nice thing about the ID is that it will grow with you, you can do 90 RMS and it will be ok and then when you get a more powerful amp, it will love you for it.

Whitemax

The way you keep going on, and on, and on, and on, and on, about those damn things, may have to check them out.

CalsonicSE

iTrader: (3)

The person at the store DID hook up the subwoofer to my car - hence, running off my amp! I sat inside my car & it sounded great! but $300?...=( I just wanna know whether with only 90 watts, will the 12W3 & 12W0 sound that much different.

breaux124

iTrader: (1)

Most likely not much of a difference between the w0 and w3, especially with subs in the trunk. The w3 is going to give you the ability to run more power through the sub, hence more bass. If you don't intend on ever getting a bigger amp then go with the 12w0 and save some money, but if a bigger amp in the future is an option then get the 12w3. I had two 10w1's and I am replacing that with a JL stealthbox with a single 10w6, and it sounds awesome (he had a floor model to let me hear). So if your going to feed it power then go with the 12w3 but if you never intend on getting a stronger amp then go with the w0.
Also, JL subs can handle more than they recommend, they underrate them to be safe.

Micah95GLE

The Punch 45.2 is actually putting out close to 200 watts, so that's why it sounds decent. I say you should just keep the current setup if it sounds good.

deathwish

I don't have ID's I just like them, for their price range they are hard to beat.

CalsonicSE

iTrader: (3)

Maybe that's why my cheapo 100 watt sub blew...I know Rockford among many other companies underrate their amps & also people have told me that my punch amp (1998 series?) is better than the newer punches...but how can it push so much when "on paper" it's 90 watts RMS 4 ohm mono. I thnk I can understand it pushing more power if it was 2 ohms ...but the speaker itself is set up at 4 ohms, not 2 ohms. Does the DVC make a difference? IIRC, the "birth certificate" said total power is 162 watts (all channels driven at 2 ohms). Nevertheless, I think you're right - why risk getting a sub (namely the 12W0) that may not sound good? I should just stick with whatever sounds good.

Micah95GLE

Yeah, 162x1 @ 4ohms sounds right (that's nearly 200 watts!). The older RF amps are definetly way underrated. The Punch 60DSM (rated at 30x2 @ 4ohms) had an actual output of 71x2 and 210x1 @ 4ohms. So you should have a decent setup there. Hell, I don't even use all of the wattage that I have.

CalsonicSE

iTrader: (3)

Cool! Now I have a big grin on my face..hehe...to be fair, 162 isn't really CLOSE to 200 but hey, if it's way more than 90, then I'm happy. Yeah, the 12W3 did sound pretty good! Maybe in the future I'll get a new punch g250a2 which is 250x1 "on paper". Even though it may not be as underrated as the older punch, it's at least 250 watts which is the same as the 12W3 "on paper". Anyway, thanks to everyone who responded to my question, especially Micah - you are very knowledgeable and helpful in this department. I along with many others appreciate all your help.

ngthing

You don't want to underrate your subwoofers, or they'll get damaged.