AVS Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
can someone model this driver in an llt alignment and compare it to a tc2000 15svc for me?


here are the t/s:

Qts: .45

Qes: .48

Qms: 7.48

Fs: 23.29 Hz

Re: 2.81

Vas: 55.79 L

Mms: 257 g

Bl: 14.81 T*m

SPL: 83.50 dB

Sd: 556 cm^2

Xmax: 28.75 (Physical Linear) mm

Voice Coil: 76MM mm



thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,421 Posts
Prolly because its about the same price, I know, I know...


You are looking at two different size drivers, yeah, there is a huge 13" sub fad right now, thanks to the good people at SVS and JL Audio.


The thing is a 13" sub has a MUCH smaller SD than a 15" driver, a 13"er will have about 550cm^2, a 15" driver will have 800-850cm^2. So, lets look at how these guys perform, but first, a little about displacement. The displacement of your sexy new 13" driver is 3.2Liters, the displacement of the TC2000 15" is about 4.4Liters, do you think the TC2k has just a bit of an upper hand here?


You might as well compare the TC2000 to the Soundsplinter RL-p18. One other issue I have with that sexy little 13"er, did you notice its sensitivity? Man, its gonna take a whole lotta watts to make up for that, especially seeing how the TC2k does 5dB more output with a given watt than the ED driver, not to mention that TC2k probably handles every bit as much or more power than the 13av.2


I am not even going to bother to enter the parameters right now, I can tell you right off the bat that TC2k is a much more formidable driver, the only advantage that the 13av.2 has is that it is smaller, thats it. Now for a car system that may be just what you need, but for a home system when you have the room for a full 15" driver, there is just no sense in spending so much money on that small of a driver.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,037 Posts
I just want to hop in quick and mention, that the suspension on the 13av.2 doesnt eat up as much power as a typical subwoofer.


While the sensitivity is a little on the low side.


Some higher power woofers suspensions eat up power, thus needed the power to get moving.


We have a 13av.2 in a customers car with 600 watts on it, and its kicking some tail...granted different application.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,152 Posts
You also loose a lot of cone area because of how wide the surround is. JL gets around this by using an "over roll" surround that goes over the mounting holes. TC uses narrow/tall surrounds to help preserve cone area.


-Eli
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts
It looks like a fairly well designed woofer mechanically speaking. The motor force is kinda weak for a "signature" driver ... but I assume thats their trade off for high linear excursions.


Any distortion or klippel data posted anywhere?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,875 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjw350z /forum/post/0


Any distortion or klippel data posted anywhere?

My guess is no.


The TC-2k not only displaces more air than the eD driver, but it currently costs under $300 and will yield a lower final Qtc in the same sized box (this is without running simulations...so anyone correct me if I am wrong
...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exocer /forum/post/0


My guess is no.


The TC-2k not only displaces more air than the eD driver, but it currently costs under $300 and will yield a lower final Qtc in the same sized box (this is without running simulations...so anyone correct me if I am wrong
...)

doubful ... the Vas for the TC is 5x the ed13
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,875 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjw350z /forum/post/0


doubful ... the Vas for the TC is 5x the ed13

I must need a new pair of glasses because I saw 557.9L vas for the eD at first glance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,875 Posts
This is a very strange comparison...
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top