I realized I posted this in the wrong thread...so here it is...
It's crazy how much it resembles the Bic F12. I wonder if I can find a driver pic of the f12 and see how close they are. Might have a look at how the amp, internals, measurements, etc match up too
The bad thing with the BAS-500 is that it doesn't really list anything but the dynamic power, which is peak. It's very likely it's less powerful than the rw-12d, but honestly that power difference doesn't make up a huge audible difference. Sure every little bit helps, but you know what I mean.Bic F12
17"H - 15"W - 18.25" D
17.625"H - 14.75"W - 17.625"D
The NXG might have a slightly more powerful amp, but really about the same. Cabinet is slightly large on the NXG, but really about the same. The port looks larger on the F12, but not sure how it looks internally (rounded off edges, length, etc) so I can't comment on tuning frequency. I didn't see an internal shot on the F12 so I can't comment on build quality, but the NXG doesn't look too bad. If you look at the drivers....they look DAMN close to being the same besides the cone material. Same basket it looks like. Same vented pole piece and magnet structure, etc.
Which brings me to my next question, if you're spending $250-275ish why not look at the Cadence CXS12. MUCH heavier, driver looks beefier (doesn't mean much without specs, etc..but still), slightly more powerful, etc. Jim also reviewed this one, but it was awhile back so we/he might need to just go off what his reviews say. The rw-12d for that $275 looked to be a killer deal with a more powerful amp and driver, but who knows until you hear them. The F12's driver looks like a 10" with that massive surround and wimpy magnet structure. Weighing in a 7lbs isn't good also for a "12" subwoofer". The 6.5" mids in my car weigh more than that! lol. Weight isn't everything, but when the Lava LSP 12" driver weights double what the F12's driver weighs....that's not good. Granted that's a $200 sub vs. a $340 sub, but still. The F12 isn't an xmax monster so technically speaking the Lava sub with a smaller surround has more cone area, therefore more spl (rough idea here folks). Just showing what the F12 is ...or isn't for that matter. Not sure about the PL-200, but it just looks like a slightly larger, slightly more powerful F12.
...I really wonder how the PA-150 would stack up against these guys. If you can pick it up for $350 it looks to KILL all of them >35. Not sure how it compares below 35hz yet though. If you look at the specs for say...the Cadence CSX15mkII, you'll see it drops off A LOT from 70hz-ish and down. The PA-150 is much better from 80hz and below (...where it should be!).
Looking at some measurements, the Lava LSP12 looks to roll off VERY quickly around 35. -10db down at 30-31hz. Smaller cabinet and not enough power kills that lower end. Likely not enough xmax/xmech either. The Emotiva Ultra 12 looks decent above 45hz, but rolls off a cliff at 30hz so it won't have much below that...plus it's quite a bit more than those in question. Not really a "budget" sub anymore. The PA-150 still looks like a monster for $350, but I don't know how it compares to the Klipsch rw-12d below 35-40hz. A pair of PA-150's for $700 could have a TON of output from 30hz and up.
I wish I could find some CES numbers for the rw-12d. Anyone have them? I'd like to compare them to the PA-150. The PA-150 seems pretty good, but Ricci's review said he thinks it's actually tuned too LOW. He thinks raising the tune from 25hz-ish up to around 30-35hz would bring a little more spl to the 25-35hz range and make it match up more with the huge numbers it has from 40hz and up.