# Opinions on GT-R stereo upgrades...?



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

The vehicle is a 2009 Nissan GT-R with "Premium Bose" system. The 2 9" so called subwoofers are a complete joke. For those not familiar with the car, they sit in-between the rear seats and vent into the trunk.

My goals for the system are to improve the SQ, while keeping the weight added as low as possible. I decided to experiment with 2 6 1/2" subs. For my first test, I'm going to use Elemental Designs. They are blowing out their 7Kv.2's for $75/pair. I'll create a sealed enclosure for them in the existing location of the Bose speakers. I may also try swapping in the JL 6w3's to compare.

For amps, I'm again looking for small and light which leads me to amps like the PDX and JL HD's. Would I be leaving anything on the table buying a HD 600/4 and running 2 of the channels mono on the subs? 300x1 would appear to be the right amount for either 6 1/2" option, but I'm open to other options. If the 800/5 was shipping today, I'd probably buy it just to have the extra headroom.

Door speakers - I'm leaning toward Focal 165K2P's and I'll take some weight hit to sound deaden the doors. 

Otherwise the OEM source stays and I'll need to figure out the best option for integrating with it.

Any opinions would be appreciated.

-Mark


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

drool...


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

Sounds like a good plan to me... 

How's that tranny holding up... ? Saving for a new one yet? lol.. (like I should talk, my 5MT is the "glass jaw" of my car...lol)


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

As long as he doesn't use launch control every time he takes off like other idiots he will probably be fine.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

ItalynStylion said:


> As long as he doesn't use launch control every time he takes off like other idiots he will probably be fine.


1100 miles on the car and haven't tried it. Like most owners, I'll probably try it a few times, but we didn't buy this car for 1/4 mile racing or to show off on the streets.

Now, back to the audio questions


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

I would forget the 2 6.5's and go with a single or dual 10, something with a neo magnet that would work IB'd....not sure if the Aura NS10 can do IB, but that sub gets great reviews.

PDX or JL would be your best bet for size and weight so far, but CES is this week.... I would go with a 5 channel, give you more options down the road and with IB either PDX or HD will have more than enough power for the sub. And you could go active if you wanted or just bridge for more power

spend time trying to find the "light" spots on the door so you can strategically add deadening in order to save some weight.

I haven't heard those focals, but personally I would consider something like the ID X drivers or B&C ND's - both have small ligthweight neo motors, can handle a ton of power and sound great.... I own the IDX6's and love them and have heard several X69's and love them too

for tweeters lots of options, not sure what you have for locations

that would be my weight saving system.... on difference I might change would be going two amps to get more power in the midbass


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

I have been helping a friend of mine who has a Nissan 350z Grand Touring edition with all the Nismo options design his setup. He HAS to keep the HU because replacing one component pretty much renders everything useless. As a result, he decided on the AudioControl DQL-8 to keep the factory HU.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

fredridge said:


> I would forget the 2 6.5's and go with a single or dual 10, something with a neo magnet that would work IB'd....not sure if the Aura NS10 can do IB, but that sub gets great reviews.


More than likely, a single 10" sub could be done IB using the current vent as the "portal" into the trunk. My question is, why do you feel this is superior? It could weigh a little less and be easier to install, but will it perform as well?

-Mark


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

06BLMUSTANGGT said:


> I have been helping a friend of mine who has a Nissan 350z Grand Touring edition with all the Nismo options design his setup. He HAS to keep the HU because replacing one component pretty much renders everything useless. As a result, he decided on the AudioControl DQL-8 to keep the factory HU.


I just became aware of the DQL-8 and will be doing more research on it. Does anyone know offhand how much Nissan typically equalizes the signal at upper volumes?


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

MMC Racing said:


> I just became aware of the DQL-8 and will be doing more research on it. Does anyone know offhand how much Nissan typically equalizes the signal at upper volumes?


Someone correct me if I am wrong on this, but, I think the equalization takes place at the actual speakers with the Bose setup. IIRC, many of the speaker enclosures contain the amplifiers too and many of the Bose setups perform the equalization in the amplifiers.


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

I think it is a win any way you look at it.... better sq and lighter weight as well as less needed power .... 

what size mids in the door?



MMC Racing said:


> More than likely, a single 10" sub could be done IB using the current vent as the "portal" into the trunk. My question is, why do you feel this is superior? It could weigh a little less and be easier to install, but will it perform as well?
> 
> -Mark


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

fredridge said:


> I think it is a win any way you look at it.... better sq and lighter weight as well as less needed power ....
> 
> what size mids in the door?


Each door has a 6 1/2 down low, a 3" mid-way up, and a 1" tweeter in the upper triangle. That is the OEM config.


----------



## Knobby Digital (Aug 17, 2008)

06BLMUSTANGGT said:


> Someone correct me if I am wrong on this, but, I think the equalization takes place at the actual speakers with the Bose setup. IIRC, many of the speaker enclosures contain the amplifiers too and many of the Bose setups perform the equalization in the amplifiers.


That was the case on the Maxima I used to own.

Also FWIW, I added preouts to the stock amp on my IS300 which were flat all the way around, but the front speakers did have an HPF on them.



ETA: I feel for the OP. He's forging new ground with a car that just came to the market. This is just one of the reasons I like to buy cars that have a bit of history.


----------



## 03blueSI (Feb 5, 2006)

I would keep the factory HU, use an Audison Bit One to flatten the factory output and allow 3-way + sub, time alignment, crossover, and EQ.

Get some mice 6.5"-7" midbass, 3-5.25" mid and a 1" tweet.

For amps I would look at either the JL HD series or the Alpine PDX, they are both small and have good power. Also, I think the new Kenwoods announced at CES may fit the bill as well.

A pair of 10s or 12s IB would be perfect as well. This setup would sound awesome, not weigh too much in a sports car and not take up too much space.

I have the JL Amp and I am currently running the front channels to a pair of Boston SPZ 60s and the rear bridged to an IDQ15 at 8 ohms and it is perfect at 150x2 and 300x1. Keep in mind Auto Sound and Performance tested this amp in this months issue and it did put out just over 500 bridged to 4 ohms.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

So everyone is familiar with the space and equipment:

























Also, here is a GT-R owner that did a IB setup:


----------



## AceX (Dec 15, 2008)

As far as amps, I think alot of people are forgetting about the Arc Audio KS125.2, KS125.4, and KS500.1 Mini amps. Smallest and lightest out there pretty much.


----------



## thephallicphantom (Jan 11, 2009)

If it's anything like the Bose setup in most nissans the head unit should be giving out a balanced signal of around 2 volts. an LOC will not be necessary in most cases, but if it happens to be incorporated with whatever you use for processing thats another story 

Since you are set up for 3 way in the front, i would look into the DLS Iridium 6.3 or possibly the Hybrid Audio Legatia L631-3. Also the Dynaudio Esotec 362 would be worth considering (i love the sound of soft dome mids)

I Would look into the DD 8" subs, they are very nice and will provide good sound and great output within the limitations of the install

As for amps, all i can say is that the PDX is very impressive for it's size and weight

Good luck and i can't wait to see the results


----------



## filtor1 (Apr 24, 2008)

You may also want to consider the Ascwndant Audio 7" Havoc mid. They are neo and super light. Great mid IMO.

I will also second the single 10" IB idea. This is just a guess, but I would think the 10" would have roughly the same cone area as the two 6.5"s and have the weight of just one motor instead of two. I have used the DLS OA10 with great results in trunk cars before if you needed a starting point for that configuration. 

Either of these options will keep the weight down and give a significant increase in output and SQ while also keeping the cost down. I think the AA mids can be had for around $200 and the DLS OA10 for a shade over $120. Just my .02 considering your goals. GL with the build.


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 12, 2008)

filtor1 said:


> You may also want to consider the Ascwndant Audio 7" Havoc mid. They are neo and super light. Great mid IMO.
> 
> I will also second the single 10" IB idea. This is just a guess, but I would think the 10" would have roughly the same cone area as the two 6.5"s and have the weight of just one motor instead of two. I have used the DLS OA10 with great results in trunk cars before if you needed a starting point for that configuration.
> 
> Either of these options will keep the weight down and give a significant increase in output and SQ while also keeping the cost down. I think the AA mids can be had for around $200 and the DLS OA10 for a shade over $120. Just my .02 considering your goals. GL with the build.


I dont think the AA mids are available anymore


http://www.creativesound.ca/pdf/CSS-SDX7-data-261207.pdf


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

nice, pics help

ok, here are 2 scenarios based 1 on weight saving as highest priority and 2 sound quality as higher priority - both are focusing on weight saving and sound just swapping which one is a higher priority

both factory H/U using bitone

1. a PDX5, Aura NS10 IB and 3 way passive - morel, Dynaudio etc 

2. A PDX5 and pdx4.100 Aura NS10/12 IB'd, SLS midbass, and take your choice mids and tweeters


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

nice, pics help

ok, here are 2 scenarios based 1 on weight saving as highest priority and 2 sound quality as higher priority - both are focusing on weight saving and sound just swapping which one is a higher priority

both factory H/U using bitone

1. a PDX5, Aura NS10 IB and 3 way passive - morel, Dynaudio etc 

2. A PDX5 and pdx4.100 Aura NS10/12 IB'd, SLS midbass, and take your choice mids and tweeters


----------



## filtor1 (Apr 24, 2008)

BeatsDownLow said:


> I dont think the AA mids are available anymore
> 
> 
> http://www.creativesound.ca/pdf/CSS-SDX7-data-261207.pdf


I ordered them through my local AA dealer a few weeks ago.


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 12, 2008)

filtor1 said:


> I ordered them through my local AA dealer a few weeks ago.


Are they old stock? According to what I have read on the net and on Zaphs website these have been discontinued for while. They also are not on their wesite. 

And they cost you $100 apiece or for both? Because when they were tested by Zaph they only cost $35 but it looks like your cone is different than the ones Zaph tested. Your look like the CSS one, the AA poly had a smooth cone to them

Zaph|Audio
scroll down near the bottom to check it out

So I would have to tghink that the ones you have are the CSS version if you paid $100 apice because thats what CSS sells theirs for


----------



## mikey7182 (Jan 16, 2008)

I'm not sure about a solution for your subs, but if it hasn't been recommended already, the older MB Quart stuff used some sort of ABS/composite material for their baskets instead of metal. The mids are very light and performed well. I ran the Premium series for awhile, along with the QSD-216. I think I saw a set FS recently in the classifieds. Might be worth looking into.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

Jesus Christ...I almost want to drop the $78K for a GT-R right now just to have a car that easy to work on...holy ****...

Oh, and PDX5 or Arc125.4/500.1 Minis powering Dyn 362s and a TC OEM10 or IDMAX10 would be how I'd go.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

Is it correct to say that most people feel the JL HD amps are superior to the PDX's, but the PDX's are a great amp for the price?


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

You know, considering the space you have to work with for the sub, you might try maximizing cone area by going with the Boston SPG555... Boston Acoustics - Mobile Audio - Products

I know you most likely aren't interested in high output, BUT if you were to run IB, the general rule of thumb is to you as large of sub as possible to get back some output lost due to the lack of box.. (no bumps in output like that of a sealed or ported box)

Run it IB and you don't have to worry about box, you get REALLY low, with little power.. (meaning easily run from a PDX.5 or similar)


----------



## filtor1 (Apr 24, 2008)

BeatsDownLow said:


> Are they old stock? According to what I have read on the net and on Zaphs website these have been discontinued for while. They also are not on their wesite.
> 
> And they cost you $100 apiece or for both? Because when they were tested by Zaph they only cost $35 but it looks like your cone is different than the ones Zaph tested. Your look like the CSS one, the AA poly had a smooth cone to them
> 
> ...


From my understanding through reading the AA ploy's are no longer in production.


These were listed as Ascendant Audio Havoc mids and from what I understand are Poly's with cf cones. The SDX 7 that CCS sells looks different in that the terminals (+,-) are on one side and the phase plug is copper. On the Havoc mid, the terminals are on opposite sides and the phase plug isn't copper. A couple other things I noticed too when comparing the pics from the CSS link you provided was the basket is different. The supports on the SDX 7 are seperated by breaks (you can see the cone through them). The Havoc mids are closed. The vents between the spider and where the basket meets the motor are verticle on the SDX7 and the Havoc mids are horizontal. And the last thing I really noticed was the mounting holes for the screws. On the SDX 7 they are on the same landing as the srround is, but on the Havoc they are raised. 

These are just some outward differences I noticed. These don't seem to be anything like the SDX 7's. Maybe someone from AA could inform you better than I could, but these seem to be very different. And from what I understand are available from the closest AA retailer to you. 

Sorry to the OP for the thread jack. Just throwing some other options out for ya.


----------



## filtor1 (Apr 24, 2008)

Any updates on this build?I have been thinking about it since I first read the thread.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

filtor1 said:


> Any updates on this build?I have been thinking about it since I first read the thread.


The ED 7Kv.2's are set to arrive tomorrow. I'm going to see how they work out. I'm going to hit up a couple JL dealers tomorrow and see what I can work out on a HD 600/4. I work out of town almost every week, so don't expect things to happen very fast, but I'll keep the thread updated. 

-Mark


----------



## filtor1 (Apr 24, 2008)

MMC Racing said:


> The ED 7Kv.2's are set to arrive tomorrow. I'm going to see how they work out. I'm going to hit up a couple JL dealers tomorrow and see what I can work out on a HD 600/4. I work out of town almost every week, so don't expect things to happen very fast, but I'll keep the thread updated.
> 
> -Mark


Thanks for the update. I look forward to seeing how this turns out.  On a side note, I am set to graduate this semester and have been flirting with getting a GTR. As long as I get a decent job I am going to try and make it happen. Thus my interest and curiosity. :


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

Interesting and yet as mentioned such an easy vehicle to work on.

1. No LOC or summing device is needed. Pulling straight from the HU or anywhere prior to the amp is flat and unamplified. A simple splice works wonders.

2. There are two amps, in the trunk. Mentioned above where there is an amp at each speakers only dates up to '99.

3. You could even fit a pair of IB 12s back there. Dyn MW190s come to mind. 

4. Dyn System 362, but with the 182s in place of the 172s. Yes, it will fit and with ease. Hardest part is a tad bit of cutting for the midrange to fit the OEM location. Ones the panels are back on, no one is the wiser.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

Interesting and yet as mentioned such an easy vehicle to work on.

1. No LOC or summing device is needed. Pulling straight from the HU or anywhere prior to the amp is flat and unamplified. A simple splice works wonders.

2. There are two amps, in the trunk. Mentioned above where there is an amp at each speakers only dates up to '99.

3. You could even fit a pair of IB 12s back there. Dyn MW190s come to mind. 

4. Dyn System 362, but with the 182s in place of the 172s. Yes, it will fit and with ease. Hardest part is a tad bit of cutting for the midrange to fit the OEM location. Ones the panels are back on, no one is the wiser.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

6spdcoupe said:


> Interesting and yet as mentioned such an easy vehicle to work on.
> 
> 1. No LOC or summing device is needed. Pulling straight from the HU or anywhere prior to the amp is flat and unamplified. A simple splice works wonders.


Attached are the wiring diagrams for the Bose amp. How would I splice into the factory wiring? Are you literally talking about cutting up an RCA cable and spicing in the cut end?

-Mark


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

MMC Racing said:


> Attached are the wiring diagrams for the Bose amp. How would I splice into the factory wiring? Are you literally talking about cutting up an RCA cable and spicing in the cut end?
> 
> -Mark


Actually that is exactly what I mean. Open, splice, solder, seal. Using a set of female RCA ends the result would be an OEM unit with preouts.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

6spdcoupe said:


> Actually that is exactly what I mean. Open, splice, solder, seal. Using a set of female RCA ends the result would be an OEM unit with preouts.


Very nice. I added another screen capture to the last post that shows me what is + and - and what speaker position it is feeding.. 

-Mark


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

Update:

So I've been thinking about the direction I want to take and some things have changed. I'm now considering:

(2) JL HD 600/4 amps
(1) JL HD 7501/1 amp
3-way setup in stock locations (Either Dynaudio or HAT)
2 8" IB subs in rear deck
All active..
EQ/xover/processor to be picked.. Maybe Audiocontrol DQL-8

Plans evolving by the day.. I need to come up with the best sub option now.

-Mark


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX said:


> You know, considering the space you have to work with for the sub, you might try maximizing cone area by going with the Boston SPG555... Boston Acoustics - Mobile Audio - Products
> 
> I know you most likely aren't interested in high output, BUT if you were to run IB, the general rule of thumb is to you as large of sub as possible to get back some output lost due to the lack of box.. (no bumps in output like that of a sealed or ported box)
> 
> Run it IB and you don't have to worry about box, you get REALLY low, with little power.. (meaning easily run from a PDX.5 or similar)





> Plans evolving by the day.. I need to come up with the best sub option now.


Did you ever even consider my proposition? That has a 10 7/16 wide cutout and is 11 7/8" overall width... would it fit.. ?


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

If you can fit a 12" I would look at the new SI MAG. 

Can go wrong with the HAT or Dyn. IMO

Might also look at the Hertz MLK165 + HL70.

I like the new JL HD amps, just have to decide if you want multiple amps processor set-up or an all-in-one solution.

If you want to go active my pick would be the Zapco DSP6 or the DSP8, which should be out pretty soon.

For amp I would look at the Zapco DC650.6 + DC200.2 or maybe an all in one solution in the Zapco iForce 7 Channel amp.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX said:


> Did you ever even consider my proposition? That has a 10 7/16 wide cutout and is 11 7/8" overall width... would it fit.. ?


I did the measurements and an 8" sub is all that is possible - and even that is tight.


----------



## 03blueSI (Feb 5, 2006)

I have not seen a good pic of the trunk, but one thing you may consider is to build a baffle an inch or two behind the trunk/passenger compartment opening and have the sub play through that opening. This will allow you to use a pair of larger subs or a single larger sub if you want and also allow you, if needed, to apperiodically damp the front of the cone.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

03blueSI said:


> I have not seen a good pic of the trunk, but one thing you may consider is to build a baffle an inch or two behind the trunk/passenger compartment opening and have the sub play through that opening. This will allow you to use a pair of larger subs or a single larger sub if you want and also allow you, if needed, to apperiodically damp the front of the cone.


This idea has a lot of potential. Take a look at page 1 for some pictures of the pass through hole and someone who did a IB setup with the speaker mounted in the cab.

-Mark


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

Seats fold down, or no?


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

6spdcoupe said:


> Seats fold down, or no?


Nope, fixed.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

Makes it a bit harder, but how much space do you have to work with there for an IB setup?


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

6spdcoupe said:


> Makes it a bit harder, but how much space do you have to work with there for an IB setup?


If the speaker mounts on the trunk side of the rear wall opening, then a 12" would work. If we want to slip it into the interior - the picture on the first page shows what 1 guy did.

I'm starting to think I'm making this too hard. A single sub in a sealed fiberglass enclosure in a trunk side is sounding better by the minute.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

If you choose to open up the wall a bit, then ..










Otherwise you could do as the other picture showed or similar to..


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

If you choose to open up the wall a bit, then ..










Otherwise you could do as the other picture showed or similar to..


----------



## bigabe (May 1, 2007)

MMC Racing said:


> Update:
> 
> So I've been thinking about the direction I want to take and some things have changed. I'm now considering:
> 
> ...



I've been staring at GTRs lately thinking about buying one myself, and I've put quite some thought in to what I'd do for a stereo in one. Here's my idea... all of this is based on my personal preferences. I like Dynaudio... a lot.


- Dynaudio MD102s (in factory tweeter location)
- Dynaudio MW162s (in factory midbass location)
- A single Dynaudio MW182 IB in the factory subwoofer location
- Alpine PDX-5 to power it all
- Alpine PXE-H650 Processor/OEM Integration Unit

That, combined with minimal amounts of deadening would sound INCREDIBLE. And with the weight of the factory gear being pulled out might just equal what you're putting in.

Another option would be Hybrid Audio L8s in the factory midbass locations along with some Hybrid L1Pros where the factory tweets are. Power that with an Alpine PDX 4.150 and you're set... no subs necessary.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

Another option for up front would be to modify the door panel to accept a bigger speaker. The little pocket area could be eliminated and a new bottom panel fashioned to accept a larger speaker.








[/IMG]


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

check out Buzzman's S500 build....he had a small opening like that and used an v configuration to get 2 subs firing into the cabin


----------



## kenk (Feb 27, 2008)

If I had a GT-R I would get the Alpine F1 Status pure audio sytem setup....no doubt about it.
http://www.alpinef1status.com/e/products/systemplan/pureaudio.html


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

Looked up the specs on the sub bellow - it is a 12" sub with 4.7" mounting depth.
Audiophile 30.01 Subwoofer


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

fredridge said:


> check out Buzzman's S500 build....he had a small opening like that and used an v configuration to get 2 subs firing into the cabin


You mean the configuration he didn't like and replaced?  I'm really saying to myself, why not do something proven and just do a side mounted trunk subwoofer and remove to factory subs to have a nice passthrough into the cabin.


----------



## bigabe (May 1, 2007)

MMC Racing said:


> Another option for up front would be to modify the door panel to accept a bigger speaker. The little pocket area could be eliminated and a new bottom panel fashioned to accept a larger speaker.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In that case put a pair of Dynaudio MW182s in the doors, a pair of Dynaudio MD300Ds in the A-Pillars (or kicks if you want). Lots and lots of deadening in the doors though. 

Call it good right there. That would be the coolest 2-way ever... I'd try and give 400 watts to each MW182 and 100 watts to each MD330D.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

bigabe said:


> In that case put a pair of Dynaudio MW182s in the doors, a pair of Dynaudio MD300Ds in the A-Pillars (or kicks if you want). Lots and lots of deadening in the doors though.
> 
> Call it good right there. That would be the coolest 2-way ever... I'd try and give 400 watts to each MW182 and 100 watts to each MD330D.


Good suggestive approach, but I wouldnt mate them directly. He would/should use a dedicated midrange for that combo. 182 and 330 both hold their own quite well in their territory, but pairing would yield some severe losses in the mid range arena.

He would however have to go the used/demo/etc route since Dyn is all out of 330s.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

The challenge with putting anything in the kick panels is:

1. There is a fuse panel behind the drivers side kick panel
2. I'm tall and like the foot room.


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

MMC Racing said:


> I did the measurements and an 8" sub is all that is possible - and even that is tight.


I'm sorry, I was thinking between the seats where the factory sub was... not the rear deck.. I didn't make that clear...


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

MMC Racing said:


> So everyone is familiar with the space and equipment:Also, here is a GT-R owner that did a IB setup:


Here....


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

I went to a good local shop to get their opinion on what to do.. Here was their take:

Focal 165KRX3's in the stock door locations
1 10" IDQ10D4 v3 in a fiberglass enclosure in side of trunk
Zapco DC650.6 putting 2x180 on the focals, 500x1 to the sub


----------



## bigabe (May 1, 2007)

Using passive crossovers would be a TOTAL waste of the DSP capabilities of that amplifier.

That recommendation makes me wonder about the shop. That's some stupidity right there.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

bigabe said:


> Using passive crossovers would be a TOTAL waste of the DSP capabilities of that amplifier.
> 
> That recommendation makes me wonder about the shop. That's some stupidity right there.


All goes back to requirements right. If you walk in a shop and hand them an unlimited budget versus walk in and say you have $5000 to spend, the recommendation is going to be different.

This was their recommendation around a simple, light, components easy to hide in the trunk solution for $5k installed.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

MMC Racing said:


> All goes back to requirements right. If you walk in a shop and hand them an unlimited budget versus walk in and say you have $5000 to spend, the recommendation is going to be different.
> 
> This was their recommendation around a simple, light, components easy to hide in the trunk solution for $5k installed.


Product wise, an active setup would be less parts to work with/hide. The capability is certainly there, why not utilize it ?


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

6spdcoupe said:


> Product wise, an active setup would be less parts to work with/hide. The capability is certainly there, why not utilize it ?


That would work if the amp was dedicated to the front stage, but then I would need to add a sub amp.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

6spdcoupe said:


> Product wise, an active setup would be less parts to work with/hide. The capability is certainly there, why not utilize it ?


This dealer is always a dynaudio dealer and he said the soft dome mid would not fit in the factory location - that is why he recommended the focals. Not sure if that is true or not at this point.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

MMC Racing said:


> That would work if the amp was dedicated to the front stage, but then I would need to add a sub amp.


Ahh yes, you are correct. I did not notice that you were using a 3 way set.

In regards to the Dyn Vs. Focal fitment issue ... The shop is going to be able to fit the cone and optimize it's direction into the OEM location, but not do that with a dome midrange? Im sorry, perhaps I missed something here ?


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

6spdcoupe said:


> Ahh yes, you are correct. I did not notice that you were using a 3 way set.
> 
> In regards to the Dyn Vs. Focal fitment issue ... The shop is going to be able to fit the cone and optimize it's direction into the OEM location, but not do that with a dome midrange? Im sorry, perhaps I missed something here ?


His claim was the depth required for the Dyn might make it hard to fit. The Focal is very shallow. I'm not saying he is right or wrong as I'm waiting for some plastic panel remove tools to arrive before taking apart my door panel.

-Mark


----------



## filtor1 (Apr 24, 2008)

Take this for what it is worth. It may not be an issue for you.

I have never been a huge fan of single enclosures installed into one side of the trunk. I understand the need to save space (go IB), but the 30-50lbs of equipment put on one side of the trunk in a sports sedan known for its weight balance and handling would honestly rule that as a viable option. Would you ever notice, maybe, maybe not, but the spirit of the car could be lost with this unbalanced approach. 

Take this from a guy that has added over 400lbs to his car for audio purposes, but I drive a 4dr sedan, with almost zero handling capabilities at all anyway.


----------



## bigabe (May 1, 2007)

MMC Racing said:


> All goes back to requirements right. If you walk in a shop and hand them an unlimited budget versus walk in and say you have $5000 to spend, the recommendation is going to be different.
> 
> This was their recommendation around a simple, light, components easy to hide in the trunk solution for $5k installed.



My point is... they were trying to sell you a DSP loaded amp that is capable of running an active two way front stage and a subwoofer only to bridge it and run a passive set with a subwoofer.

That is retarded. And a ripoff. If you're gonna run passives off of two channels, you might as well save yourself a few hundred bucks and gone with a standard Zapco Reference Amp. 

The shop was just trying to sell you a $1300 amp that you won't even use. 

Once again, it makes me wonder about the shop.


----------



## Knobby Digital (Aug 17, 2008)

MMC Racing said:


> You mean the configuration he didn't like and replaced?  I'm really saying to myself, why not do something proven and just do a side mounted trunk subwoofer and remove to factory subs to have a nice passthrough into the cabin.


Personally, this is the way I'd go in any car that may see track time. And do it in a way that it's easily removeable.

I'd also opt for 1 on either side, since the weight would be a non-issue for the most part.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

bigabe said:


> My point is... they were trying to sell you a DSP loaded amp that is capable of running an active two way front stage and a subwoofer only to bridge it and run a passive set with a subwoofer.
> 
> That is retarded. And a ripoff. If you're gonna run passives off of two channels, you might as well save yourself a few hundred bucks and gone with a standard Zapco Reference Amp.
> 
> ...


Are you really trying to tell me the 10 band Parametric EQ is useless because I'd be running passive? I don't quite get your point here..

The amp was quoted as $1080 BTW with no haggling.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

icehole said:


> Personally, this is the way I'd go in any car that may see track time. And do it in a way that it's easily removeable.
> 
> I'd also opt for 1 on either side, since the weight would be a non-issue for the most part.


I understand what the other guy is saying, but people need to also realize that a car isn't THAT sensitive. 50lbs on a 2100lb car may alter that car in a noticable way, but 50lbs on a 3800lb car is a rounding error.

That said, if I go side mount, I'd want it easily removable.


----------



## bigabe (May 1, 2007)

It would be completely stupid to run that amp on a passive two way when it could just as easily run an active two way and give you maximum tunability.

And yes, that 10-band parametric would be basically useless if you're running passive. Your stock speaker locations are the suck... you need careful time alignment and crossover adjustments to make them work properly... not EQ.

And if they're quoting you that price for that amp... they're not an authorized dealer. Beware.

Seriously.. what shop is this?? Is it a reputable establishment or just some hole in the wall?



The more I look at your requirements, the more I think you could just get away with a beefy, well deadened two way front stage and no sub. MW182/MD130 is another good combo. Hybrid L8/L1Pro is another....


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

bigabe said:


> It would be completely stupid to run that amp on a passive two way when it could just as easily run an active two way and give you maximum tunability.
> 
> And yes, that 10-band parametric would be basically useless if you're running passive. Your stock speaker locations are the suck... you need careful time alignment and crossover adjustments to make them work properly... not EQ.
> 
> ...



1. Speakers in question are a 3-way setup
2. 50x4 enough power on an active 2 way - really?
3. The dealer is authorized and listed on Zapco's site. Instead of listing a price below what they are allowed to, they discounted all the equipment after it was totalled. $1080 is the net price.
4. Step down off the high horse. I didn't buy any of this, just looking for constructive opinions
5. Did you really say "the suck"? :laugh:


----------



## bigabe (May 1, 2007)

3-way... even worse when run passive. Do it active or forget it.

50x4 is plenty to power an active 2-way... especially if you go with Focals (which the shop appears to have).

And if Zapco found out about their discounting... your warranty would be voided, and the shop would lose their authorized status.

What high horse?? I'm trying to help you dude.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

bigabe said:


> 3-way... even worse when run passive. Do it active or forget it.
> 
> 50x4 is plenty to power an active 2-way... especially if you go with Focals (which the shop appears to have).
> 
> ...


Are you so naive to think that dealers don't do this all the time? Buy an amp at list, but here is a free install kit. Buy an amp at list, but here is another brand sub at 1/2 list. Zapco can not dictate the price a shop charges for other things. The discount line item on the estimate just says "Discount".. It doesn't say x% of everything - although that is how they arrived at it. It could have very well been 40% off focal and 0% off Zapco.

As for the 50x4 being enough for what I'm looking for - I don't agree.

As lastly, do you have any experience with the Focal 165KRX3 system? This isn't some cheap passive crossover with just tweeter attenuation.


----------



## SUX 2BU (Oct 27, 2008)

I don't get why you don't put a pair of beefy 8's in those factory sub locations. Seems pretty straightforward to me.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

SUX 2BU said:


> I don't get why you don't put a pair of beefy 8's in those factory sub locations. Seems pretty straightforward to me.


I haven't ruled it out, but they would need to be IB mounted as the available volume if sealed up is only around .35. The existing speakers form a triangle in their current mounted configuration and are very shallow, so there may be a limit to how beefy a speaker assembly could be.


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

MMC Racing said:


> As for the 50x4 being enough for what I'm looking for - I don't agree.


Maybe it's not, but it's not like the drivers in your proposed 3-way passive setup would be seeing more than that, even when bridged, considering that passive crossovers are parasitic, and that you're adding another set of drivers.

I just think it's silly to think that 100w on an active 2-way setup isn't enough, but 180w on a passive 3-way is.

T/A and XO are more important than EQ, as has been mentioned.


----------



## MMC Racing (Dec 25, 2008)

capnxtreme said:


> Maybe it's not, but it's not like the drivers in your proposed 3-way passive setup would be seeing more than that, even when bridged, considering that passive crossovers are parasitic, and that you're adding another set of drivers.
> 
> I just think it's silly to think that 100w on an active 2-way setup isn't enough, but 180w on a passive 3-way is.
> 
> T/A and XO are more important than EQ, as has been mentioned.


Before another post from the passive crossover sucks crowd, have any of you actually looked at the adjustability on the focal xover in question here? As for time alignment it would still be available side by side, but you guys are right that it won't be available per speaker.

50watts on a quality midbass - not cutting it for me. Do you really believe the focal woofer in this 3-way passive configuration is not seeing significatly more power than 50watts? (and to keep this simple, lets keep using rated watts instead of actual)..


----------



## sunsetronics (Jun 16, 2010)

I have a 2009 GT-R and want to upgrade the stereo, MMC Racing what did you finally install any pics?

This is what I am thinking for my gt-r

Subs
I personally wanted very heavy bass so I was thinking of 2 12" DD 3500's in the trunk ported into the cabin thru were the stock subs are. I wish the 9500’s but they weigh 50 lbs each and the 3500’s 35lbs still heavy any ideas for lighter subs with very high output about 1200 watts rms each ?? 
Or 2 Hertz ML3000 12”s
Or morel Ultimo 12”s

Speakers
For the front a set of 3 way’s maybe Audison Voce or morel or DD audio and the rest of the speakers will remain stock.

Amps
Light weight amps maybe 2 JL HD1200/1 + HD600/4 or 
2 Audison LRx5.1k or 
2 PDX-M12 + PDX-F6 or 
1 DD audio M3a + Cb5 or
RE Audio XTX 5000.1 

Processor
Not sure about a processor maybe the Alpine PXE-H650, audio control or most probably Audison bit 1 or 10

Battery
Replacing the stock with a XS S3400

If I did go with the M3a amp and Cb5 or the 2 Audison LRx 5.1k

Would my stock alternator and charging system keep up or do I need to use smaller amps?

I'm just worried about the total weight of the system I'm just worried about the total weight of the system any ideas or recommendations?
Powerful light weight subs?
Speakers with good mid bass?
light weight power full amps?


----------



## ecbmxer (Dec 1, 2010)

I want that car so bad! I would definitely do an IB config. Or what about two 8W7 subs mounted where the OEM ones were but in a custom ported box that extends into the trunk.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

sunsetronics said:


> I have a 2009 GT-R and want to upgrade the stereo, MMC Racing what did you finally install any pics?
> 
> This is what I am thinking for my gt-r
> 
> ...


You are worried about 15 pounds of weight difference per sub but you aren't worried about the weight of 5 cubic feet net tuned to 35 Hz for your enclosure? Something is not computing here.


----------



## FAUEE (Jul 22, 2010)

MMC Racing said:


> The vehicle is a 2009 Nissan GT-R with "Premium Bose" system. The 2 9" so called subwoofers are a complete joke. For those not familiar with the car, they sit in-between the rear seats and vent into the trunk.
> 
> My goals for the system are to improve the SQ, while keeping the weight added as low as possible. I decided to experiment with 2 6 1/2" subs. For my first test, I'm going to use Elemental Designs. They are blowing out their 7Kv.2's for $75/pair. I'll create a sealed enclosure for them in the existing location of the Bose speakers. I may also try swapping in the JL 6w3's to compare.
> 
> ...


My opinion is that if you can afford a GT-R you can afford to not concern yourself with eD products at all, much less blowout ones, and you should be looking at quality gear, not a hodgepodge of name brand gear and SPL kiddie gear.

If someone were looking to do a light weight build, they should ONLY be looking at neo motor drivers, preferably with light weight frames (ie, not SPL kiddie cast iron frames that have a neo motor stuck on them because neo is cooler). The smart thing to do would be to concern yourself with the amp weights as well. The more compact class D amps are not lighter than a full size amp simply because they're smaller, they have very similar weights. And having a huge box of any kind will be stupid heavy, someone concerned with weight should be used Carbon Fiber over a honeycomb lattice of some sort.


----------



## UNBROKEN (Sep 25, 2009)

It's a 2 1/2 year old thread...I'm sure he figured it out by now. 
Just sayin'....


----------



## sunsetronics (Jun 16, 2010)

Regarding the W7 8''s i don't think they would move enough air to give me the bass I'm looking for.

I do agree I don't want any headaches later so I will only use high end gear

Using a box make of carbon fiber is a great idea, do you know anyone in the Los Angeles area who can build carbon fiber sub boxes. I do have a great installer I have yet to ask him.

So any good recommendations for subs using neo magnets?
I did see the morel ultimo 12''s the look amazing and light weight but they don’t look they have much excursion although they say they can handle 1000 watts RMS?


----------



## ecbmxer (Dec 1, 2010)

I'd say two 15" subs in an IB config then. Didn't even realize this was an old thread, just saw "GTR" and posted, haha.


----------



## sunsetronics (Jun 16, 2010)

*Install Done!*

So I finally finished the install attached are the pics

Processor: Audison Bit One
Subs: 2 10" DD Audio 2510 Supercharged carbon fiber cone
Speakers: 2 sets of the DD Audio German 6" mids DDAW6.5
and 1" tweeters DDA28 and 3" for center and rear fill
Sub Amp: M2b (1700wx1 @ 1 ohm)
Mid and tweeters Amp: S4b (Cont Power at 4 ohm 120W x 2 + 240 x 2)
Center and rear Amp: SS4a (Cont Power at 4 ohm 156W x 4 @ 14v)
All Audison wiring and fuse blocks
BatCap Model 400 
Plus extra iPod connector/charger with video to the monitor 
The whole thing weighs about 150-160 lbs
16 days to complete 


Sounds Super Clean and Super Loud!:laugh:


----------



## omegaslast (Nov 4, 2010)

the gt-r is already 3800 something lbs, concerning yourself with weight savings is a bit weird, looks like you realized this and just went with a well rounded setup. looks super clean.


----------



## Lunchbox12 (Sep 4, 2011)

*Re: Install Done!*

Looks great bro!
So you decided on a bandpass enclosure, how does it sound to you?
I think you did a fantastic job. very clean!
I'm getting my 2013 GTR delivered this May and I will take some advice from this thread for sure.
Thanks for sharing the pics.
JJ


kenk said:


> If I had a GT-R I would get the Alpine F1 Status pure audio sytem setup....no doubt about it.
> http://www.alpinef1status.com/e/products/systemplan/pureaudio.html





sunsetronics said:


> So I finally finished the install attached are the pics
> 
> Processor: Audison Bit One
> Subs: 2 10" DD Audio 2510 Supercharged carbon fiber cone
> ...


----------

