RSD 500.4 bridged power?

slc72005 · Post by **slc72005** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 9:11 pm

the RSD 500.4 is rated at 85rms X 4@4 ohms and 134rms X4@2ohms

so how much rms power would it make when it you bridge all 4 channels down to 2 channels?

im thinking that it would make 134rms X 2@4ohms when bridged

also how under rated are these amps?

i remember zfactor bench tested his RSD 1200.1 to be putting out just shy of 1400rms @2ohms, the amp is only rated at 1200rms@2ohms (by CEA specs it is 1000rms@2ohms) so that amp is highly underrated, about 15% underrated

so if the RSD 500.4 is under rated by about the same that would mean it would put out about 98rms X 4@4ohms and about 154rms X 4@2ohms

but for some reason i think the RSD 500.4 is underrated by alot more then 15%, i have no facts to back that up but from what little i have heard said about the RSD 500.4 that it is underrated by a good amount, and is on par with the x200.4, whihc the RSD 500.4 replaced

i plan on running this amp to the Ti Elite comp set i have upfront

or option B:

i dont know how feasable this is, but from what i have been told the RSd 300.1 is a class A/B amp and not a class D amp.

2 thing that concern me about the posibility of running 2 RSD 300.1's:

1) is on PG's website it says the operating freq range is 10hz-300hz, obviously not the freq range i would want to use the amp at

2) the rated power is only 180rms X 1@4ohms, and when i compare the rms rating of 2 RSD 300.1's VS 1 RSD 500.4 ther isnt much of a power differnce there

plus if i ran the RSD 1200.1 and the RSd 500.4 both amps would have the exact same footprint so the install would "flow" better then if i had 2 RSd 300.1's

i know its alot of questions but im really looking to see what kind of rms power i can expect out of the RSD 500.4 when its bridged to sown to 2 channels

thanks guys

:)

Post by **bdubs767** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 9:20 pm

dude you could of written a disertation, w/ how much you written about changing amps.

slc72005 · Post by **slc72005** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 9:33 pm

bdubs767 wrote:dude you could of written a disertation, w/ how much you written about changing amps.

the main reason here is cost for what i want to accomplish in the end, i have heard from several people that the RSd amps are on par SQ wise with the MS series amps

and since it would be alot cheaper for me to get the RSD 1200.1 and RSd 500.4then it would be to get another MS275 and another MS2125 and get my blown <S2125 fixed, then I would have to take in account the foot print of all those big amps and where to install them in a way to make it look good

its just alot cheaper to sell my MS275 and blown MS2125 and pick up a RSD 1200.1 and RSd 500.4, and with the RSD amps i would have more headroom power wise, so its better all the way around for me, plus i have been wanting to test out the RSd series amps.

plus if i get the RSD amps i plan on taking the case's off and have them painted white to match all my other white gear, i think the RSD with the mesh grill cases would look kickass when painted white, as you can still see the guts of the amp and the white color would actually be in contrast with the guts and make the guts stand out more and be noticed

Post by **mr tibbs** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 9:35 pm

This is the reason I never want to change amps again. (After one more change that is).

It sucks trying to find matching amps, for your app, in your price range. I feel ya dude, even if I can't help you out!

slc72005 · Post by **slc72005** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 9:46 pm

mr tibbs wrote:This is the reason I never want to change amps again. (After one more change that is). It sucks trying to find matching amps, for your app, in your price range. I feel ya dude, even if I can't help you out!

i really like the fact that PG makes the mono block foot print the same as the multi channel's footprint

like this

RSD 1200.1 and the RSD 500.4

RSD 600.1 and RSD 300.4

RSD 300.1 and RSD 250.2

they are set to match each other in size and power, it's a good sales ploy really, you can have matching low power mono block and multi channels (RSD 300.1 and RSD 250.2), and medium power matching mono block and multi channel (RSD 600.1 and RSD 300.4), and high power mono block and multi channel (RSD 1200.1 and the RSD 500.4)
the concept really makes the installation look clean and flowing

Post by **stipud** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 10:10 pm

134rms X4@2ohms

means...

268 x 2 @ 4 ohms bridged

Post by **mr tibbs** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 10:15 pm

slc72005 wrote:
mr tibbs wrote:This is the reason I never want to change amps again. (After one more change that is). It sucks trying to find matching amps, for your app, in your price range. I feel ya dude, even if I can't help you out!
i really like the fact that PG makes the mono block foot print the same as the multi channel's footprint

like this

RSD 1200.1 and the RSD 500.4

RSD 600.1 and RSD 300.4

RSD 300.1 and RSD 250.2

they are set to match each other in size and power, it's a good sales ploy really, you can have matching low power mono block and multi channels (RSD 300.1 and RSD 250.2), and medium power matching mono block and multi channel (RSD 600.1 and RSD 300.4), and high power mono block and multi channel (RSD 1200.1 and the RSD 500.4)
the concept really makes the installation look clean and flowing

I agree 100%, when I first set out to find my new set of amps it was sheer hell. I was looking for a matching set of a mono and a 4 channel, with enough power for what I was looking for, with great SQ, but I didn't want to spend an arm and a leg. Most amps were just out of my set price range, then when I decided on the Xenons I couldn't find a set, they just disappeared for a while!!

I'm tellin' ya, I really feel your pain if this setup dosen't work for you.

Post by **VW337** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 8:47 am

RSd300.1 has a non-defeatable XO sadly. However with a little inspiration you can circumvent the preamp stage entirely and be happy. However a better easier option would be to use the RSd250.2 instead.

slc72005 · Post by **slc72005** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 8:56 am

VW337 wrote: However a better easier option would be to use the RSd250.2 instead.

mmmmm or just a RSD 500.4, instead of 2 amps, its for the Ti Elites up front errin, was going to bridge it to 2 channels

also errin what have the RSD 500.4 birthsheets said as power bridged ? i know you have seen one of the birthsheets

Post by **Bfowler** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:12 am

i dont know if they actually have birthsheets.....the ones i have gotten didnt anyway

slc72005 · Post by **slc72005** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:20 am

Bfowler wrote:i dont know if they actually have birthsheets.....the ones i have gotten didnt anyway

Actually all im looking for is a little reasurance that the RSD 500.4 when ran bridged to 2 channels that i will have plenty of power for the Ti Elite comp set and also have a decient amount of headroom

Post by **VW337** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:21 am

slc72005 wrote:
Bfowler wrote:i dont know if they actually have birthsheets.....the ones i have gotten didnt anyway
Actually all im looking for is a little reasurance that the RSD 500.4 when ran bridged to 2 channels that i will have plenty of power for the Ti Elite comp set and also have a decient amount of headroom

No question that the RSd500.4 will beat the snot outta the Elites.

Post by **stipud** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:29 am

I don't know why PG rated the RMS of the Elites at 300, because it just isn't, unless you cross the speakers over at ~150Hz. All that you do at that point is make the crossover LEDs flash because of the excess power. I agree with Errin, the 250.2 should be more than enough.

Post by **Bfowler** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:37 am

stipud wrote:I don't know why PG rated the RMS of the Elites at 300, because it just isn't, unless you cross the speakers over at ~150Hz. All that you do at that point is make the crossover LEDs flash because of the excess power. I agree with Errin, the 250.2 should be more than enough.

yeah....im gonna have to sort...disagree with you there....

i have powered mine off x100.2, xs2300, ti400.2, and my current x200.2

to get the full midbass that they are capable of, mine certainly needed more then the first 3.

a duel bridged rsd500.4 might be overkill....but i don't think the 250.2 will cut the mustard

maybe a duel bridged 300.4 would be a good happy medium

Post by **stipud** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:43 am

You run yours sealed right?

Bet you that's my problem right there. Mine are free air. They sound just as good now off of the 500.4 front channels (100x2) as they did on my 900.7 bridged (300x2)

Post by **Bfowler** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:02 am

i do reccomend sealing them if you are able!

i sealed them long after i decided that i needed the 200.2

it could also be my crossover point. since using the 200.2 and with a little coaxing from errin i have discovered that can run them full range and they still play clearly and i can turn them retarded loud.

cliff notes: running them IB and crossed over at ~60+ you could probably get away with less power. sealed and no HP crossover=more power!

so i still stand by getting more than a 250.2 to get their full potential

slc72005 · Post by **slc72005** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:07 am

stipud wrote: I agree with Errin, the 250.2 should be more than enough.

2 reasons why i dont want to get the RSD 250.2

1) the RSD 500.4 has the same foor exact footprint as the RSD 1200.1, looks good to have matching amps

2) the RSD 250.2 wont give me the excess headroom im looking to get.

since the RSD 1200.1 will be run at 2ohms it can produce about 1400rms, but i will tune it down a bit to about 1000rms, that way there is more then enought headroom and wont be getting close to the limits of the amp

i want to do the same thing with the RSD 500.4 so i have more then enough headroom and if i ran the RSD 250.2 i would be runing it closer to the amps limits.

so tomake the install that much cleaner looking and to have that buffer zone of power there it would be better all the way around if i got the RSD 500.4.

also there arent too many people on here that have RSD amps, and if they do they dont talk about it, so ill be able to give a litle review of how they are. the only real world review of the RSD amps was the one zfactor did on SB, and that was only for the RSD 1200.1 mono block, havent heard much about hte multi channel amps

Post by **Bfowler** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:11 am

why not just run the RSD 1200 at 4ohms? that would give you lots of extra headroom and still pound the bejesus out of it, and also you would have a higher damping factor (over-rated, but still....)

i guess it wouldnt be to hard to swap the 4 and 2 ohm versions and see

Post by **VW337** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:44 am

slc72005 wrote:
stipud wrote: I agree with Errin, the 250.2 should be more than enough.
2 reasons why i dont want to get the RSD 250.2

1) the RSD 500.4 has the same foor exact footprint as the RSD 1200.1, looks good to have matching amps

2) the RSD 250.2 wont give me the excess headroom im looking to get.

since the RSD 1200.1 will be run at 2ohms it can produce about 1400rms, but i will tune it down a bit to about 1000rms, that way there is more then enought headroom and wont be getting close to the limits of the amp

i want to do the same thing with the RSD 500.4 so i have more then enough headroom and if i ran the RSD 250.2 i would be runing it closer to the amps limits.

FWIW- I was suggesting 2 x RSd250.2 instead of 2 x RSd300.1.

Post by **bdubs767** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:54 am

VW337 wrote:RSd300.1 has a non-defeatable XO sadly. However with a little inspiration you can circumvent the preamp stage entirely and be happy. However a better easier option would be to use the RSd250.2 instead.

i want...entire mono systems

slc72005 · Post by **slc72005** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 11:47 am

bdubs767 wrote:
i want...entire mono systems

hey dumb ass you do.

your MS amps are dual MONO, remember?

Post by **VW337** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 12:04 pm

slc72005 wrote:
bdubs767 wrote:
i want...entire mono systems
hey dumb ass you do.

your MS amps are dual MONO, remember?

ROFLMAO

Dubs =

slc72005 · Post by **slc72005** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 6:37 pm

VW337 wrote:

FWIW- I was suggesting 2 x RSd250.2 instead of 2 x RSd300.1.[/quote]

i see that but isnt

2 RSD 250.2 = 1 RSD 500.4 ?

i would think that they would put out about the same power, and also im not positive but wouldnt 2 RSD 250.2 have more current draw then 1 RSD 500.4? (if im correct im sure it wouldnt be too much more thou) and also the fact that 1 RSD 500.4 has the same foot print as 1 RSD 1200.1 so they will match great together

Post by **bdubs767** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:52 pm

slc72005 wrote:
bdubs767 wrote:
i want...entire mono systems
hey dumb ass you do.

your MS amps are dual MONO, remember?

yea my ms275...dumbass go work on that smiley face

and you can argue for far far better results from each channel being completely seperated, even though I am willing to bet 99/9% of people can't hear the difference.

slc72005 · Post by **slc72005** » Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:22 am

bdubs767 wrote:
slc72005 wrote:
bdubs767 wrote:
i want...entire mono systems
hey dumb ass you do.

your MS amps are dual MONO, remember?
yea my ms275...dumbass go work on that smiley face

good come back, but not good enough, arent you using them BRIDGED MONO??

so you do have all your amps mono then?

here is your smiley face:):):)

theres your smiley face