Need help picking the right sub
 

I recently purchased a polk 5000.1 amp which says it is rated at 200 rms bridged at 4 ohms (gonna get some wetsounds pro 80s or some rev10s) and 500 watts rms at 1 ohm for a sub. Now I was thinking about buying a dual voice coil 2 ohm sub and running it in series to get the impedance down to 1 ohm. Does this sound right?

I was thinking this sub. http://www.crutchfield.com/p_500SWR1...1#overview-tab

Sorry it's the 5000.5 amp.

First off, how many Pro 80s or Rev10s are you going to run? Also how are you going to have them wired? The way you have them wired on that amp affects your subwoofer output on the amp.
You have 3 options to hook up the speakers that all give you different power for your sub.
From what I'm reading the specs on the amp,
70 watts RMS x 4 + 200 watts RMS x 1 at 4 ohms
meaning you can run 4 speakers at 4 ohms, 70w a piece and you will have 200w for your sub, also wired at 4 ohms.
or
100 watts RMS x 4 + 400 watts RMS x 1 at 2 ohms
meaning you can run 4 speakers at 2 ohms, 100w a piece, and you will have 400w for your sub also at 2 ohms.
or
200 watts RMS x 2 in bridged mode at 4 ohms + 500 watts RMS x 1 at 1 ohm
meaning you can run 2 speakers bridged at 4 ohms, 200w a piece, and you will have 500w for your sub at 1 ohm.

I am assuming since you ware wanting to wire the sub at 1 ohm, that you are thinking the last configuration and running your speakers (2 of them) at 4 ohms each, bridged, and having 500w for your sub.
If that is indeed the case, I would think that the sub might be a tad under powered, as it is 300-1000w rms, and your amp would be putting out 500w rms at 100% cranked. Normally you would want to have the amp be more powerful than the sub and run the amp at lower gain. Now it would work, and you probably wouldn't get clipping, but you would be taxing the amp. In order to hit that 300W minimum to push the sub at all, you would be at 60% gain already.

If it were me running that setup, I would look for a little more efficient and less power hungry sub to put in.
A good choice to match that sub with the amp, since I see you like the Alpine line is to step down to the Type S version of that sub. It has a range of 150w-500w RMS, which means it wouldn't take as much to power and it matches it's max to your amps max perfectly.
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_500SWS1...D2.html?tp=111

Ben.

You would need to wire a 2 ohm DVC sub in parallel to net a 1 ohm load at the amp. Honestly, there is not going to be a huge difference that you would notice, between the same sub in the same enclosure at 400W rms and 500W rms. I would suggest a 4 ohm DVC wired to 2 ohm as opposed to 1 ohm. This lightens the load on the amp a little. The Type R is a great sub, but IMO, its net the best match for that amp. I would look into a more efficient sub, one with less mass that will be easier to drive and that has an RMS in the 300-400 watt range. Also consider doing a ported enclosure, providing space is available. This would net you more output over a sealed enclosure with no more amp power

Phantom,

Where are you getting that the wiring configuration of the 4 full-range chnls effects the output of chnl 5?

Firstly, phathom, like measuring depths of water (6ft same as my height) not phantom like a ghost.

Secondly I am getting the info for the configurations from the spec page for the amp on Crutchfield's site.

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_107PAD5...+5000.5&tp=115

Full quote from the page is,

"5-channel car amplifier
70 watts RMS x 4 + 200 watts RMS x 1 at 4 ohms
100 watts RMS x 4 + 400 watts RMS x 1 at 2 ohms
200 watts RMS x 2 in bridged mode at 4 ohms + 500 watts RMS x 1 at 1 ohm
variable gain, high-pass filter (40-400 Hz 12 dB/octave), and low-pass filter (80-4000 Hz, 12 dB per octave) for front channels
variable gain and high-pass filter (40-4000 Hz 12 dB/octave) for rear channels
variable gain, low-pass filter (40-220 Hz, 12 dB/octave) and subsonic filter (20-38 Hz) for subwoofer channel
wired remote subwoofer level control
preamp inputs
fuse rating: 40A x 2
4-gauge power and ground leads recommended — wiring and hardware not included with amplifier
14-1/8"W x 1-13/16"H x 6-3/4"D
warranty: 1 year
Our 60-day money-back guarantee"

Um, yeah. Thats not what that means.

Would you care to enlighten us what that means, because that's how I'm reading it. From how I understand it the amp has a certain amount of power it can distribute and based on your impedance you put on it, affects how much power it will deliver .

Then again I am a little unfamiliar with 5 channel amps. Normally I will run just a 4 channel and a dedicated monoblock for the sub.
If this was a 4 channel and a mono block separate, which from my understanding is what a 5 channel is, just in one package. Then the readings of:
70w RMS x 4 @ 4 ohm
100w RMS x 4 @ 2 ohm
200w RMS x 2 @ 4 ohm bridged
for the 4 channel
and then the sub amp being something like
200w RMS @ 4 ohm
400w RMS @ 2 ohm
500w RMS @ 1 ohm

would mean, that depending on your impedance, that's how much power it will deliver.

What is it supposed to mean on a 5 channel, that has them on the same line? How is it different from a regular 4 channel, 2 channel, or monoblock? I'm not trying to argue about it at all. I am just wondering because I've been doing car stereo including competitions for about 10 years and if a 5 channel is read different than other amps, it is news to me. I would honestly like to know how it is meant to be interpreted and correct the way I am understanding this.

Mikes right Phathom...
That's not what that means...
Each individual channel can be ran at EITHER the 4 ohm rating or the 2 ohm ratting for the first 4 channels.. The third can be used 3 different ways ohm wise... One channel doesn't dictate the next on ANY amplifier. The exception is only when combining two channels, then it uses each channels 2 ohm rating and combines it to a 4 ohm output..

For example.. You can run a 4 channel amp using the first channel on two speakers @ 2 ohms ( this will split the total 2 ohm output to each speaker) . Then channel 2 with one speaker at 4 ohms ( this will net the totoal 4 ohm output to 1 speaker).. Then channels 3&4 bridged to net the total of each channels 2 ohm output... Just sayin...

Oh nice! As I said I wasn't too familiar with 5 channel amps. It's awesome that it's basically 2 amps in 1 housing and a lot more flexible than I thought. I have previously thought the two were related and have such avoided them in favor of a 4 channel and a monoblock for my setups. I think I'll look into 5 channels more for any future setups. Thank you for informing me of this. :)

Fwiw I'm running the 5000.5 bridged to two towers and a 12-2 sundown sa at 1 Ohm.

Either way aside from that I'd still look into a more efficient sub like that Type S or similar. JLs are nice. Kickers are loud, but can be muddy. I've never gone wrong with Phoenix Gold, especially older ones.

David,
That's light power for the sub ( 600w RMS) and alot of work for the amp (500w X1 @ 1 ohm)... Step your sub down to a 200 to 400 watt RMS sub that's 2 ohm like Mike suggests.. Or rock what ya got and know the sub is not gonna perform like it should... Your decision brother :). It's not wrong, just not as efficient as you may want it.... Longevity is better for any system and battery source...

With a five channel amplifier there are FIVE discrete channels operating totally independently of one another. Until you bridge, one channel has no impact on another for the most part.
There are conditions however. If you load an amplifier down to the minimum acceptable impedance on ALL channels then the shared power supply (which is a fixed resource regardless of the impedance load) will hit the wall hard. So I agree with Mike above, to run the sub channel at a 2-ohm load, rather than a 1-ohm load, leaving a bit of headroom and not taxing the power supply so heavily that is shared by the highpass channels. I might feel differently about squeezing out the max power with separate amplifiers.
Usually an upgrade woofer delivers more excursion resulting in greater output. The greater excursion IS the upgrade. The greater power handling is not the real upgrade. But to deliver twice the excursion it requires twice the power. And woofers capable of greater excursion have a little less internal efficiency due to greater moving mass, longer voice coil, etc. The power handling is simply a byproduct and becomes a necessity. So again, I agree with Mike to step down in the woofer series and get a woofer that is a bit more responsive and a better power match.

David

Unit of measuring for water depth,

Even your assumption of a typical 4 chnl is not accurate. they do not pick and choose where or how much power is distributed, up to their peak. If that was true, then in theory, with the right load, we could get full amp wattage out of just one chnl.

Yes, amps do a max RMS wattage and Peak (when lightning strikes) wattage, but it takes all chnls driven at the minimum safe impedance, to see that. Running 2 chnls of a 4 chnl amp at 2 ohm and the other 2 @ 4 ohm, doesnt take away power from the 2 chnls running @ 4. The first two chnls will deliver their 2 ohm power and the other 2 will deliver their 4 ohm power.

Thanks for all the responses guys! Ya I plan on running two rev10s or 8s bridged across the four channels and I'm gonna take your word on getting a 4 ohm DVC and wire in parallel to get it down to two ohms. Now to get to the real question. What sub?

Sony?
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_158GS12...LD.html?tp=111

Alpine?
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_500SWS1...D4.html?tp=111

Rockford?
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_5751P2D...12.html?tp=111


I'm leaning alpine. But I like all three

I would honestly rather have a 10" Type R than a 12" type S. I had 2 10" Type R's on 300 watts each and they hit hard hidden in a trunk. 400 watts on a single will give you really clean and loud bass. I personally feel 10's provide tighter bass response than 12's until you get into the $400-ish price range.

I sadly already am in the process of making an enclosed box for the kick panel and its already cut for 12" sub.

Youve kinda got the cart before the horse. You need to choose the woofer, then build the enclosure to suit that woofer, as opposed to finding a woofer that works with the box.

Ported or sealed and whats the net volume?

Yea not ideal, but there's more work to be done for the entire setup, like another new amp or two - in the off season. The plan was/is this setup was a stepping stone last spring and seems better than I expected actually.

-- perhaps I should have noted that in my original post here, to not indicate an ideal setup.

I haven't built the enclosure yet, just replaced my kick panel with 3/4" mdf and cut out the hole for the 12

Also is the 200rms at 4 ohms gonna be enough power for a pair of pro 80s or rev 8s or 10s?

IMO 200 is low for either Rev. They seem to do well with 300.

What about an XS-12?

Although I like the wetsounds sub, I can't justify the price when I know one of the other subs will perform to my expectations. Cheapest I've seen on the xs is 200 and I can get that alpine type s for 100 on eBay.

I just got done redoing my whole stereo at the beginning of this summer doing almost exactly what you are doing adding a sub, enclosure, rebuilt the kick panel, and added Rev 10s. I have a 5 channel jl audio amp with 4 of the channels bridged to a pair of rev 10s and the 5th channel powering a JL 12W3 in a ported enclosure custom built to the exact specs given by JL. The amp is the JL 700/5, at first I was worried only sending 200 watts RMS to the Rev 10s and 300rms to the sub but after putting it all in I could not be happier with the setup. The sub sounds way better than I imagined it would and although I know the Revs could handle more power, they sound incredible with the power I am sending to them especially at wakeboarding length.

Ben,

the answer to the question, is 200W rms going to be enough, will depend on your expectations of the tower setup. keep in mind that that 200W bridged is 1) @ 14.5 volt. With the engine off, you might see 15%-25% drop in wattage with the battery at static voltage. 2) you will have both chnls @ 2 ohm to get that 200W to a speaker, so as Scottie says, Im given all she got captain! With the 8" HLCD, you are hitting the the recommended RMS, but its taking 2 amp chnls per speaker to do it. This leaves no head-room power wise.

You may want to invest in a 4 chnl that will deliver more watts rms when bridged, or a 2 chnl that will deliver 200W + x 2 @ 4 ohm if you are looking to reach wake range with strong projection. If you are just looking for a surf/party cove setup, 200W rms is perfect, but I would suggest something other then an 8" HLCD. Look at the Wet Sounds Icon-8 or stick with the Rev-10 and budget for an amp upgrade later.