# Kicker 40CWRT672 6.75" sub



## rockin (Sep 13, 2012)

So I thought AWESOME! Sub-bass up front! NAH. I doubt the sensitivity is as good the abysmal published sensitivity of these (84.6 db) and FR of 30-500hz didn't happen. 
They did reproduce 50 hz better than any of the 6.5s I tried including my Diamond HEX 6.5s, MB Quart PCE 6.5 (the German ones) and Dynaudio Esotar2 650s.
That was about it, though. Their sensitivity is so poor you'd probably want 1000 watts each to keep up with the rest of your system. 
Every other driver blew this out of the water from 70 hz on up. 
The only application I could see these used for is an addition to a factory system. Damn I wanted to like these.


----------



## Nismo (Jan 10, 2010)

Looks like Hoffman struck back. Must be a giant box setup, if it didn't go deep, and wasn't sensitive. Did you try running the specs to see what kind of box they want?

Eric


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

so it's better at sub frequencies? Maybe that's why they call it a sub, and not a mid bass.

what was your enclosure volume?

these don't look that bad, just going by appearances.


----------



## Nicks84 (Jun 30, 2010)

They were probably inside the stock door ? Does'nt seem to be a good enviroment for anything deemed to be a sub, and very possibly why it did not outperform any of the others (though, all the speakers mentioned above are way better than anything Kicker has ever put out).


----------



## mosconiac (Nov 12, 2009)

Yeah, it's a sub, so your expectations of "midbass" performance (just because of it's small diameter) is unrealistic.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Aside from not knowing it's inductance (probably high which is why it is only rated to a stretched 500hz), it would be still fair to say that it is of little use beyond very low power infinite baffle. I say that due to the fact that it's recommended box is sealed of .75 cubes which is far into and even above some 8" or 10" subs. It's quite a contradiction in itself.... almost like shallow subs that still require large boxes.


----------



## Nicks84 (Jun 30, 2010)

Bayboy said:


> I say that due to the fact that it's recommended box is sealed of .75 cubes which is far into and even above some 8" or 10" subs. It's quite a contradiction in itself.... almost like shallow subs that still require large boxes.


I mean, it is Kicker . . .


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Nicks84 said:


> I mean, it is Kicker . . .




And that deems the entire brand as impractical?


----------



## Nicks84 (Jun 30, 2010)

Bayboy said:


> And that deems the entire brand as impractical?


No, not exactly. I was just being facetious. But I think we all know that Kicker is associated with a certain quality that is not exactly audiophile standard. And as such, when comparing to brands like Diamond, Mb Quart's QSD, or Dynaudio, the fact that the lesser quality brand might not show results that outperform the higher quality products, should not exactly be surprising. (especially if we don't know the enviroment it was in)


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

But you are also comparing apples to oranges... why would anyone compare a Ferrari to a Honda to prove a point? We are talking about application & cost so there is quite a dividing line and am sure one would take that into consideration. The only question concerned is it useful? Id say yes if it was relegated to sub duty which it is labelled for.


----------



## rockin (Sep 13, 2012)

1) My expectations are unrealistic.
That's a pretty stupid thing to say as it implies you know what my expectations are.
The test is based on Kicker's published frequency response. Not my unfounded expectations based on something I pulled from my ass out of nowhere like 
"These must have been tested infinite baffle in a door"

2) 50 HZ is not the only sub bass frequency. 

I consider 20-80hz as typical duty for a car sub. I know others consider up to 100 hz sub duty. 

3) Why do I have to calculate an enclosure when a range has been provided by the manufacturer?


Min Sealed Box Vol (cu. ft, L)

0.18, 5.1

Max Sealed Box Vol (cu. ft, L)

0.75, 21.4

Go run out and get your Kicker 6.75" subs and prove me wrong.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

How were they ran or did I miss that info earlier?


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

focal sells a 5" sub.

doesn't mean it's going to impress beyond what a 5" driver is capable of, and I'd say the same of this Kicker.

Some people don't need 120 db of 40 hz bass, they just want to hear all the music so if there's a 6.75" driver that will do the work, it's not about how it compares to other subs, it's about how it does it's job.

If it does it's job, what is the problem?

It probably plays louder than the 5" Focal sub, with less distortion and costs less than half as much.

It also probably can't compete with Pyle 10" subs, the blue wave would do them in.


----------



## namesmeanlittle (Nov 20, 2013)

1000 watts for ONE 6.75 inch speaker O.O i can get a 10 watt 10 to outdo that... in a folded bass horn but still. who in there right mind wants to power it, i bet i can get a 100 watt 12 to outdo it and after battery size amp size and cost my 100 watt 12 will be cheaper and take about as much space.... I see no prepose.....just saying its kinda stupid


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

rockin said:


> So I thought AWESOME! Sub-bass up front! NAH. I doubt the sensitivity is as good the abysmal published sensitivity of these (84.6 db) and FR of 30-500hz didn't happen.
> They did reproduce 50 hz better than any of the 6.5s I tried including my Diamond HEX 6.5s, MB Quart PCE 6.5 (the German ones) and Dynaudio Esotar2 650s.
> That was about it, though. Their sensitivity is so poor you'd probably want 1000 watts each to keep up with the rest of your system.
> Every other driver blew this out of the water from 70 hz on up.
> The only application I could see these used for is an addition to a factory system. Damn I wanted to like these.


If they produced 50hz better than any other 6.5" you heard, wouldn't that make them a home run?

There's no way to get around Hoffman's Iron Law; it's the reason my subwoofer is six cubic feet. The only way to get a lot of output out of a small box is to use a TON of power. Doesn't matter if you're running Morel, Dynaudio, Focal or some POS you bought at the swap meet. There is no way to get away from Hoffman's Iron Law.


----------



## edzyy (Aug 18, 2011)

Nicks84 said:


> No, not exactly. I was just being facetious. But I think we all know that Kicker is associated with a certain quality that is not exactly audiophile standard.


********

They make excellent amps & I'd have zero issues using any of their subs in an SQ install.


----------



## 1996blackmax (Aug 29, 2007)

I've run Kicker amps in the past & would have no issues using them once again.


----------



## namesmeanlittle (Nov 20, 2013)

kicker amps i've heard some of them...... perfect sounding amp when its not running


----------



## Nicks84 (Jun 30, 2010)

edzyy said:


> ********
> 
> They make excellent amps & I'd have zero issues using any of their subs in an SQ install.


Again, mostly being facetious. I also think their amps are great. I too have ran kicker amps in the past. Big fan, very solid amps IMO. 

I have just never been impressed with their speakers, namely their subs. I will give the L7's their due, they make a **** of noise and decenetly clean for thier output. I think the only Kicker subs I have heard that I really liked for SQ were the original Solobarics. But I don't have a *problem* with Kicker subs, per se. I just know that of 10 choices, Kicker would not be in my list. That is not to say I wouldn't run them in an SQ install. I mean, we all know that even pos speakers wont sound awful if it has a good install. And they are better than lots of subs out there that I can think of.

So you all can calm down, Kicker makes decent products, and by some people's standards, great. I was mostly poking fun. :lipsrsealed:


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

I bet in a blind ABX test, half the people in this site couldn't tell you which was which using subs that have the same motor topology, brand for brand.

half probably could, but only if they were listening for something unique or peculiar, and they had experience with both the Kicker, the control, and the other brand chosen, as long as the speakers' drive levels were kept inside of Klippel Xmax parameters.

and, leaving out the shallow and square subs, too...

never really liked those square things.


----------



## Nicks84 (Jun 30, 2010)

cajunner said:


> I bet in a blind ABX test, half the people in this site couldn't tell you which was which using subs that have the same motor topology, brand for brand.
> 
> half probably could, but only if they were listening for something unique or peculiar, and they had experience with both the Kicker, the control, and the other brand chosen, as long as the speakers' drive levels were kept inside of Klippel Xmax parameters.
> 
> ...


I would very much agree with you.


----------



## Nismo (Jan 10, 2010)

cajunner said:


> I bet in a blind ABX test, half the people in this site couldn't tell you which was which using subs that have the same motor topology, brand for brand.
> 
> half probably could, but only if they were listening for something unique or peculiar, and they had experience with both the Kicker, the control, and the other brand chosen, as long as the speakers' drive levels were kept inside of Klippel Xmax parameters.
> 
> ...


Just because I am me, I'll toss an Adire Brahma or other XBL2 sub in there for fun. They DEFINITELY sound different, and would probably be easy to distinguish vs an overhung sub, especially if pushed to a moderate level.

I'm getting my Brahma 12" turned into a 15" with OE parts in a few weeks, and I can't wait! 

Eric


----------

