M Series rack design feedback requested.........

rscecil007 · Post by **rscecil007** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 5:01 am

I'mma gonna have to say go with the Ti option. That would look totally badass if you carpted or covered the rack in dark material with all those blue LEDs.

HoseHead · Post by **HoseHead** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 5:04 am

Bfowler wrote:i really like that! and i think its the first time i have seen 2x4's successfully used in a install!

what if you made another slider that came out above the sub boxes in the trunk?

Had to use 2x4's. Needed the structural support. It's friggin' heavy.

Rear slider? Good idea. Will investigate that option. Thanks.

Bruce

eulogious · Post by **eulogious** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 5:05 am

You lucky, lucky man. An M AND a ti collection

I like the ti look as well and covering it with dark material would look killer!

The only bad part is you don't get to keep the "90's" feel for the car/stereo, so depending on how much you really wanted to keep it in the 90's... Even though the ti stuff was around in the 90's, it's just not the same.

HoseHead · Post by **HoseHead** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 5:15 am

Thanks again for the feedback.

Finished asthetics are looking to be black leather right now. I have collected much from wrecked car interiors by X-actoing out the larger panels.
Another option may be demin. It's blue, easy to work with and plentiful. My wife did a Honda Civic interior way back when using denim and it turned out very nice. It think it may work well with the M Series.

Looks like more mock ups ......

Bruce

Stryker · Post by **Stryker** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 1:52 pm

I like symetrical and the ti option.

tonym · Post by **tonym** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:36 pm

yup..Ti look much better....now you can sell me all them M's :O

I like the M setup you had there....

dvnt88 · Post by **dvnt88** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:56 pm

HoseHead wrote:Or I could go this Ti route ....

500.4 / 600.2
DEQ / DD10
1200.1 / BCube

Bruce

I think I need to be alone or 5 minutes, niiiiiiice.

Damo95 · Post by **Damo95** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:29 pm

Ti setup looks better in that rack...

better layout...

Misfire · Post by **Misfire** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 9:36 pm

I would stay with the M-series personally. Those shrouds are just knock outs! The Ti gear is great, but I just can't get over how sweet the shrouds are! Very unique in my eye.

Post by **Bfowler** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:28 pm

my vote...1 shrouded m on each of the 3 racks that slide into the cabin

then another rack above the sub boxes containing just the eq's that slides into the trunk.

(becasue it seems that climbing into the back seat to adjust the eq's is just as much, if not more of a pain, then walking to the trunk)

oldschoolfan · Post by **oldschoolfan** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 1:18 pm

I also like the 2x4's. Structural rigidity rules. I am all for the M series. It totally fits the era of the vehicle. My best friend had a 90 SC with 3 12W6's. It amazes me how much you can fit in that trunk with room to spare! MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!

Damo95 · Post by **Damo95** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 2:36 pm

Bfowler wrote:my vote...1 shrouded m on each of the 3 racks that slide into the cabin

then another rack above the sub boxes containing just the eq's that slides into the trunk.

Now that's a great idea!!

Post by **ttocs** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 2:53 pm

eq'ng a car in the trunk sucks............................... ask me how I know?

Post by **Eric D** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:09 pm

I have a 10.5LF in my truck right now and love it. Way more output than the Punch XLC it replaced.

Good luck with running the 6.53 active. Not to say it cannot be done, but Boston uses one of the most complex crossovers on the market, with some built in EQing, and phasing. Duplicating a Boston crossover actively is impossible, however, getting them to sound great without it is not impossible.

Post by **smgreen20** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 7:39 pm

I'm going to back B up on this one, I prefer the M setup better. Color contrast plays a part for me. To much of the same (dark colors) for the Ti setup. Although I would just put the 2 M44's on the same side (as stated for separate L/R) and the EQ's on the same side and use the R ch of 1 EQ for the tweets, the L ch of the EQ for the mid, sort of like having a 15 band eq per ch. IDK, sound corny in that manner I guess (the EQ thing I mean).

HoseHead · Post by **HoseHead** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:05 am

Eric D wrote:I have a 10.5LF in my truck right now and love it. Way more output than the Punch XLC it replaced.

Good luck with running the 6.53 active. Not to say it cannot be done, but Boston uses one of the most complex crossovers on the market, with some built in EQing, and phasing. Duplicating a Boston crossover actively is impossible, however, getting them to sound great without it is not impossible.

Eric,

1. So you're suggesting I drop the active/EQ and run the 6.53's passive with the BA Xovers? This would allow a rear shelf over subs as suggested by Fowler as EQ tuning would not be required. The front shelves would house an M100 and 2 M44's, all centered. This would also improve free" air" for the shrouds as each amp would have about 7 inches of clearance on each side. .

2. Does a bridged shrouded M100 have the nuts to drive 3 10LF's @ 1.3 ohms? Or 2 LF's @ 2 ohms?

3. BA 6.53's are rated to handle up to 500W @ 3 ohms. Each Xover has seperate inputs for LF and HF. Would using each side (bridged) of a shrouded M44 do them justice? In other words, with twin M44's bridged, I have 4 channels available - left LF, left HF, right LF, right HF. Comments?

4. Is bass enhancement beyond an LPL on the M100 required? I'll be using either a PG TEq6 or AC Four.1 for master control.

Thanks for your time.

Bruce

HoseHead · Post by **HoseHead** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:09 am

Tantrum is another option. Also a look with M Series on black.....

Post by **Bfowler** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:54 am

ttocs wrote:eq'ng a car in the trunk sucks............................... ask me how I know?

does its suck more then climbing into the back seat? (That wasnt supposed to sound snarky, i was really asking)
seems like you couldn't get real ear on it in the back seat and would have to keep going back around to the front to listen to you adjustments

Post by **Bfowler** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:55 am

hmm, tantrum in this case just isnt doing it for me.

Post by **Eric D** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:39 am

Bruce,

You can go active it you like, but the 6.53 crossover is a testament to great audio engineering, and I really think it would be a shame to skip it.

A M100 has only 6 power supply MOSFETs, and if yours is factory stock (I assume it is), they are pretty primitive MOSFETs by today's standards. When it comes to comparing Class A/B amps, it pretty much all boils down to how stout the power supply is. With only 6 MOSFETs, I think you would fry the amp in time on 1.3 ohms. Even with the shroud, 2 ohms mono will be hard on it, unless you run it at or below clipping (which is easy to find, as the built in clip lights are accurate).

I know you have a lot of these amps, do you have 3 M100s? How about some M50s? I personally would put at least an M50 bridged into each side of a 6.53 set (two amps needed). A pair of M100s would be better still. Then use what you have left over on the subs.

What are your personal preferences for this setup? If I remember right you never considered yourself much of a "bass head", and I think you preferred hard rock, metal, etc? If so, I really think you will be pleased with the most power you can muster into those components, and a more conservative amount of power into the subs.

As far as using the tantrum stuff, you might have a better setup there. A T600.4 on the components bridged would be a great start, a pair of T500.2s would be even better.

Do you have the components installed in the vehicle? I think you should get the components in there, and two subs. Then setup a temporary space in the trunk to try different configurations of amps. When you have as many amps to choose from as you do, it is hard to settle on anything. A M100 on the subs, and a M44 bridged into the components may be everything you want it to be. If you find you need some more bass, work on that side of it. If you need more power on the components, then you can fiddle with that.

I personally always had an idea to use 3 M50s in an installation. I like the M50 as it has the most power per square inch of size (no crossover to take up space internally). I would put one on my left component, one on the right, and one on what ever sub setup I had.

ZTwenty8SSR · Post by **ZTwenty8SSR** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:14 pm

Use the ti setup and sell me the M'S.
Ok seriously I would use the m series I think they look much better.
I have used m series amps before and like them but I can not compare them to the ti stuff I have not used any ti amps.

gridracer · Post by **gridracer** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:30 pm

I ran an M100 for years running 3 12" XS124's amp only went into thermal once after a 3 hour highway drive with it pounding hard. But in your case you should use the tantrum setup and sell me all your M100's and M50's
I agree on the 6.53 set those crossovers make them sound great I had that setup at one time and would never had gone active instead of those crossovers.

Damo95 · Post by **Damo95** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:28 pm

M series on black looks hot!!

thedeal7235 · Post by **thedeal7235** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:31 pm

Bruce, personally i love both the m & ti-the m shows more of the gold, which i have always loved about pg, having said that& ive always been a 'match the vehiclecolor to amp color' guy- they for me would be waitn for a white vehicle,or much lighter interior- your coupe appears to be blue, so ti wins for me & imho, id use the ti(im in my ti phase- my newused A4 is silver, as wasz my02, i like my gear to b added in as a 'factory look'- sound quality; any of the series you have i beleive will work PERFECT!(uve given me a new idea for my amp rack- btw, how ru?-C

Post by **ttocs** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:57 am

Bfowler wrote:
ttocs wrote:eq'ng a car in the trunk sucks............................... ask me how I know?
does its suck more then climbing into the back seat? (That wasnt supposed to sound snarky, i was really asking)
seems like you couldn't get real ear on it in the back seat and would have to keep going back around to the front to listen to you adjustments

not to sound snarky right back but yes.

When eq'ing from the trunk alone for example you decide you want to add 1.5 to 16 khz, you get to open your door, run back and open the trunk, find and adjust 16k, shut the trunk then your door and listen again and then repeat until you think you are satisfied. This of course can last for hours depending on if you are ever happy and I never am. If you could make the eq reachable from the back seat he could probably just lean his seat back, make a quick adj and then be done. I personaly can almost never keep myself from making small adjustments(I am a tweeker) so I need to have it easy to reach.