# Audiobahn AW1200Q 12" 700w rms dual 4 ohm - what's it worth used?



## 96jimmyslt (Jan 31, 2011)

Audiobahn AW1200Q 12" Car Subwoofer - Sonic Electronix

$80 on ebay and one other place. Only sold in 3 places on google shopping (old sub)

I've had good experience with older audiobahns.


----------



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




----------



## TrickyRicky (Apr 5, 2009)

I regret ever even laying my fingers on some Audiobahns. In my opinion, they suck and are way way over rated.


----------



## hottcakes (Jul 14, 2010)

oh my god, dude. i get a kick out of it every time i see you post that picture.


----------



## 96jimmyslt (Jan 31, 2011)

TrickyRicky said:


> I regret ever even laying my fingers on some Audiobahns. In my opinion, they suck and are way way over rated.


What year models did you have?

The old OLD school subs I had from them were great.

Not sure about the new stuff (flame basket, screen/filter thing - and now the addition of the chrome cover for the screw holes)


----------



## TrickyRicky (Apr 5, 2009)

Yeah the ones I had, had chrome basket and flames.


----------



## 96jimmyslt (Jan 31, 2011)

TrickyRicky said:


> Yeah the ones I had, had chrome basket and flames.


Then perhaps the new stuff is just like sony xplod - old school audiobahn was good, new stuff is junk due to car audio interest in high schoolers.

edit: ok maybe it's not because of high schoolers, but there is a reason that old school car audio was good, and now the same companies are making flashy JUNK


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Don't know about you guys, but my investment in a WT3 alone was worth it as it revealed a lot of the lies companies like Bahn put out. Most of their subs were so high Q that they were better off as IB. Put them in the recommended box (sealed or ported) and that's where all the nasty, exaggerated, boosted bass came from. Selling points to people without ears.....


----------



## 96jimmyslt (Jan 31, 2011)

Bayboy said:


> Don't know about you guys, but my investment in a WT3 alone was worth it as it revealed a lot of the lies companies like Bahn put out. Most of their subs were so high Q that they were better off as IB. Put them in the recommended box (sealed or ported) and that's where all the nasty, exaggerated, boosted bass came from. Selling points to people without ears.....


So what your saying is, I shouldn't be shopping for a subwoofer according to it's sealed cubic feet requirement?

I am looking for a decent powered sub (250 w rms and up) that requires relatively small size for sealed for a form fitting box.

I also don't really know much about IB.

How can I learn more about the things you said?

I don't really get what "Put them in the recommended box (sealed or ported) and that's where all the nasty, exaggerated, boosted bass came from. Selling points to people without ear" really means.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Nothing wrong with opting for a sub with certain requirements especially box size. That's one of the most important IMO unless you drive a bus.

IB is just short for infinite baffle or what some refer to "free air". No use for people like us who drives a suv, but that's what some of the specs I gathered lead to.

Anyways.... when you put subs in a box too small to their "liking" (above Qtc 1.1) , of course you get a rather overly robust peaky bass. With subs of that nature in a car coupled with cabin gain and from a distance it may sound like it's really got some power and gets down... Up close and it's all to hell, transients, smoothness, depth all probably are suffering. Some IB subs are intended for very large enclosures. Put them in a box too small and you get what was mentioned above. Another aspect you get is an somewhat increased power handling. There's several brands on the market that exploit that to market their product as performing. Really it's probably just piss poor marketing and/or production. 


Could go on about this, but I've had a couple of dark beers so I don't want to go astray... :laugh: 

Anyways I would concentrate on the box size you want to limit to , power requirement @ available ohm load, and roll off around 50hz if possible. You may can get away with a bit higher or lower roll off depending on what tools of manipulation you have (eq, processing, etc). If going ported, then shoot for about 30hz or so... There are numerous subs on the market that will fit within that criteria.


----------



## 96jimmyslt (Jan 31, 2011)

I guess I will have to claim "stupid" on that one, since I really only judge a sub/box combo on how much I actually feel it vs how much I hear it and how much it hurts my ears.

I wish I could actually understand what you mean with all the criteria you are judging the bass with...

About the IB setup, I was thinking that it could be done VERY easily in an SUV if you never put the back seats down.

Think about how cars do it: they put a cover on the back which is just after the rear seats, and then they (decently) seal the trunk area off and just throw 2 subs on top of that single layer of plywood or MDF or whatever.

I'm guessing my cargo area is about 10 cubic feet. The 4 cubic foot box I have takes up almost half of all cargo area.

Slap 4 subs that require 2.5 cubes each and you have an IB with all the usable cargo area except for what the subs take up, and anything that goes over a couple feet in height.

But this is all worthless to me since my goal is to GAIN the cargo area completely.

I already have the amp + sub I want to use, but I figured @ 700w rms it was worth getting for a decent price and I've had good experience with basically the same style sub...well the front looked the same anyway.

Called audiobahn and they recommend 1.5 cubes sealed.

that may be a deal breaker though


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

I was an Audiobahn dealer for about a year when they _first_ hit the market. They represented a solid value that made Profile (the old California amps) look weak in comparison. 

But that reputation only lasted a couple years. I quit carrying Audiobahn when I learned about their relationship to Anaba (Thump, Precision Audio). The writing was on the wall for me.


----------



## 96jimmyslt (Jan 31, 2011)

envisionelec said:


> I was an Audiobahn dealer for about a year when they _first_ hit the market. They represented a solid value that made Profile (the old California amps) look weak in comparison.
> 
> But that reputation only lasted a couple years. I quit carrying Audiobahn when I learned about their relationship to Anaba (Thump, Precision Audio). The writing was on the wall for me.


Can you give some examples of their good stuff?


----------



## jfrosty42 (Jul 4, 2009)

Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX said:


>


Lol. Great episode.

I've never owned anything Audiobahn. My buddy's brother had a pair of the Flame Q 12s a while back. They seemed pretty damn efficient, but sounded muddy. Easily could have been the box too. 6 months later they were hanging on his wall because they no longer worked......


----------



## envisionelec (Dec 14, 2005)

96jimmyslt said:


> Can you give some examples of their good stuff?


"Good" is relative. It was adequate and extremely competitive at the time. I really only liked their 8" and 10" 'Natural Sound' woofers. They weren't high-Q and had better excursion than the higher priced models. I didn't like the Aluminum cone "SQ" woofs (AW1200Q?). They did not live up to the hype and had issues with the spiders separating. 

Their first amps were big - lots of heatsink area and a fan. I think my favorite was a 2x100W Class A/B amp that had some balls and was a decent design. Some of their early Class D Amps had issues, but the second gen fixed a lot of that. They were players, fer sure.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Were you able to test the drivers and compare with specs? 

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


----------

