May 30, 2004 - 6:54 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Joined Oct 3, '02 From Va Team 6gc Currently Offline Reputation: 1 (100%) |
I'm looking for 1 amp that puts out between 120-180watts RMS. Please help me find a cheap one
THanx. -------------------- ![]() All I have in this world is my Balls and my Word and I'm not breaking em for no one,- Tony Montana Team 6gc 2005 |
![]() |
May 31, 2004 - 3:37 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast ![]() ![]() ![]() Joined Sep 22, '03 Currently Offline Reputation: 0 (0%) |
Actually if you took apart RF amps and compare them to decent amps that cost less or about the same like Hifonics, PG, or even profile, THEN you would see HOW bad they are.
They are not bad like companies: pyle, legacy, pyramid, etc...but they are bad because they don't use high quality stuff like they used to. The stuff in the amp is what really matters and if its only decent then it shouldn't be in the upper or even middle class of amps. RF used to be good because they used good stuff. PPI, DEI, Viper, and Orion all use same boards but have little differences. They always used good stuff and are in the upper class of amps. PPI, DEI, Viper, Directed, and Orion are true top of the line, upper class amps. Hifonics, PG, Ultimate, JL, and Alpine would be in the mid upper class. Profile, RF, Visonik, and soundstorm are possibly in the middle. Kenwood, Audiobahn, Pioneer, and JBL are in the mid lower. At the bottom of amps are Sony, Lanzar, Kole, and Power acoustik. There are different variations on how you can categorize amps, but basically its up to the internals of the amp. Upper have similar insides. Upper Mid have boards that are totally different but similarily made. Middle class is just an average amp. However, RF is not put in the mid upper because they don't use the internals that are of above average quality and decency. Comparing the newer RF amps, I actually found that Profile are similar or even better in SQ and have similar internals. Honestly I would go Profile over RF. Profile seems to be better rated among sound competion enthusiasts and cost 60%-75% less than RF. If a RF amp costs $350 then a profile would cost $120. Aren't things usually worth what you pay for. RF is just not worth it when comparing to something much miuch more cheaper and similar in quality. RF is an amp that "Best Buy" sells, and most of the stuff in best buy for SPL or SQ is not that great. Amps that are not sold in best buy are probably better. |
Drocay Which Amp? May 30, 2004 - 6:54 PM
shid There are a lot more factors than that. How many c... May 30, 2004 - 7:05 PM
macavely i got an audiovox one that puts out 240... thats t... May 30, 2004 - 7:06 PM
Jabberwock Well no matter what factors there are go with ppi,... May 30, 2004 - 8:28 PM
CelicaDEATHdie QUOTE (Jabberwock @ May 31, 2004 - 1:28 AM) RF, Ke... May 30, 2004 - 8:44 PM
blkGT QUOTE (Jabberwock @ May 30, 2004 - 6:28 PM) Well n... May 30, 2004 - 9:12 PM
Drocay i'm sorry i forgot the most important part it ... May 30, 2004 - 10:01 PM
Jabberwock Nowadays RF is over "rated"...They aren... May 30, 2004 - 11:34 PM
Jabberwock Drocay 120-180watts RMS per channel or total?
Or 1... May 30, 2004 - 11:42 PM
Drocay per channel.
thanx. May 30, 2004 - 11:55 PM
titaniumkid nobody can beat an oldschool fosgate amp. they wir... May 31, 2004 - 12:23 AM
Jabberwock yep yep, too bad they can't do that anymore...... May 31, 2004 - 12:41 AM
shid Look, RF amps aren't THAT bad. They're sti... May 31, 2004 - 1:49 AM![]() ![]() |
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: December 8th, 2025 - 6:40 AM |