Thunder vs. Rockford - Audio & Electronics Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Thunder vs. Rockford
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 11:03 AM
For all you that think that Rockford Fosgate is better then MTX take a look. Clicky Clicky.


Travis Nobert
Travis Enterprise
Come on down to Evolution Audio in Edmonton Alberta, and I can HOOK YOU UP.

Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 11:54 AM
I've always preffered MTX. I'm not very well versed in their subs, but their amps kick the llama's as$. I use an Infinity sub, and I like it pretty well, so I'm not complaining.


______________________________________
Hell hath no fury like a pissed off balloon animal.
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:02 PM
Or you could just get kickers.......


































*Waits for someone to diss kickers....*shrugs










Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:12 PM
See, you have to have money for that.


______________________________________
Hell hath no fury like a pissed off balloon animal.

"Sup, G?"
"Aren't you white?"
"Only on the outside, craka."
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:13 PM
i knew rockford amps were @!#$ when i went and blew 2 Power 1001BD's in 2 weeks.... when i opened it up, it was those small FET's they show in that article that were blown...
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:21 PM
As said above, a couple years ago I tried a Kicker amp and have been very happy with the three I've had.


-Chris
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:26 PM
college freshman between jobs, kicker is out of the question.


______________________________________
Hell hath no fury like a pissed off balloon animal.

"Sup, G?"
"Aren't you white?"
"Only on the outside, craka."
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:29 PM
1 kicker is cheaper than 3 mtx/fozzy's hint hint. Buy once, replace never.



Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 1:20 PM
my sub only needs one mtx. I got it for $80 off ebay brand new


______________________________________
Hell hath no fury like a pissed off balloon animal.

"Sup, G?"
"Aren't you white?"
"Only on the outside, craka."
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Thursday, February 24, 2005 4:59 AM
that site really isnt telling you much. max temperature for one amp may not be the same as max temp for another amp. so u really can't compare them. diffrent power supplies can still put out clean power,i beleive both compans are involved with the new wattage ratings system. its really not that much of a deal. ive seen both companies have blown products and i still see allot of guys running both types of equipment on stage at the world finals in most orginasations picking up their trophy's. if u want to find out wich is better it would be allot more beleivable if the test was conducted by an impartial panel, not by mtx.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Thursday, February 24, 2005 6:14 AM
throw in the ohm load each amp is seeing too. If an amp is design to run a two ohm load and you give it an 8 ohm load, I bet it runs really cool. and opening up the gains will do the same thing. Clever advertising.

Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Thursday, February 24, 2005 12:48 PM
It took me a minute to find the flaw in that ad, but anyways Rockford is better
250 rockford watts = 1000 other brand watts
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Thursday, February 24, 2005 12:57 PM
sndsgood is right...
its not like mtx is going to say rockford is better
its too biased
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Thursday, February 24, 2005 1:09 PM
Facts:


Look at this pic, the paper is for a model 301s
This is from RF webby

Channels 2
Per channel power 75 W X 2 @ 4 Ohms RMS

150 W X 2 @ 2 Ohms RMS

300 W X 1 @ 4 Ohms Bridged RMS
Total power 300 Watts
900 Watts Peak/Max

Paper said power ran at ( all channel at full power) is 309 - right
If it were wired differently you could get the full 900 peak not 300
Such as 300w@1 @4ohms

More
1st they compare the Punch 201s to the Thunder 202
Lets see here..
Punch 201s
50 W X 2 @ 4 Ohms RMS

100 W X 2 @ 2 Ohms RMS

200 W X 1 @ 4 Ohms Bridged RMS
Total power 200 Watts 600 Watts Peak/Max
Thunder202
All RMS
2 Ohm Load 75 w x 2
4 Ohm Load 37.5 w x 2
Bridged 4 Ohm Load 150 w

Then
Road Thunder 251D Class-D Amplifier to a Punch 301m
1st of all the 251D is a class D amp of course the circuitry is going to be bigger than a non class D amp such as the Punch 301m

They should at least compare amps that are the same level and close to the same output!!










<img src=http://www.mclonedogmcwad.com/sig3.jpg>
Please visit <a href="http://www.abstractcarclub.com">Abstract car club</a> & <a href="http://www.mclonedogmcwad.com">mclonedogmcwad.com</a>
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Friday, February 25, 2005 4:52 AM
I bet htat amp does 900 MAX watts. again clever adviertising.
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Friday, February 25, 2005 7:17 AM
Have you heard about CEA-2006? They test all the amps that are coming out at a continous power rating under different loads. When your looking for a new amp you might want to check the CEA rating.
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Friday, February 25, 2005 11:20 AM
not all amps are cea rated. US Amps. Orion PPI helix brax mcintosh are all not CEA rated and would spank the ass off almost all of the ones who do that
Re: Thunder vs. Rockford
Friday, February 25, 2005 6:59 PM
okay, lest stop this topic, both amps are good, but it all comes down to personal perference in the end. am i right? what the power ratting is for the amps is imiteral, it is wheather or not it will work for that person's application. i started this post and after mclonedogmcwad increased the photo for me, i realize i was wrong to post this topic.


Travis Nobert
Travis Enterprise
Come on down to Evolution Audio in Edmonton Alberta, and I can HOOK YOU UP.
Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search