10-04-2015, 05:37 PM | #1 |
mappy2112
Drives: 2012 camaro SS/RS black with orange Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 6
|
upgrade audio
I have the 2012 with the Boston stereo- it sounds ok but its really below my standard. I have 2 sets of Rockford Fosgates 6.25 T2 components and a Rockford Fosgate T1000-4 Ad amp . and two T1500.1 d amps to run two RF's T2's (12" subs ) . I ran this system in my truck with an extra battery and 240 amp high output altenator. Has anyone else done this much or more power in the audio system upgrade ?
__________________
2012 SS/RS black /orange stripes , flow master , hurst , Nevada lic. # RUSHR4O
|
10-04-2015, 07:42 PM | #2 |
Drives: 2013 2SS 1LE Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Homestead
Posts: 54
|
I have the JL c5 6.5 2 pairs powered by a 600/4 with a single 12" W6 being pushed by 750/1 jl that sounds awesome and i still have a trunk with the side trunk box. With the windows down and sunroof open at 125 mph you dont hear the wind noise at all. Stock Boston head unit.
__________________
"ah hell you can always make more money!" - dad
" its no fun going slow!" '13 2SS 1LE NAV, LT, CAI, Tune with 447RWHP before new lungs, Billy Boat exhaust 3" Fusion. |
10-05-2015, 10:45 AM | #3 | |
H-Town Camaro Club
Drives: 2013 Dusk Edition 2SS/M6/Sun/NPP Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,234
|
Quote:
Without getting toooo deep into the physics, the max you can run on the stock system is 1,500W of quality rated power @ 4 ohms. Go Big or Go Home has the largest usable Camaro audio system I am familiar with, pushing 4kw of class D amplification with two optima batteries on the stock alternator. You can try DIY, but second/multiple battery installations demand trained professionals on hand. If the set up in your truck worked without burning alternators then I would replicate that exact system for your Camaro. There are many 240A+ alternator choices available. Last edited by Snoman; 10-07-2015 at 09:06 AM. Reason: Accuracy |
|
10-07-2015, 03:21 PM | #4 | |
Aural Assault Vehicle
Drives: 2010 IBM 2SS/RS, 2015 Sierra Denali Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Garner, NC
Posts: 792
|
Quote:
The stock Delco battery (at least the one that came in my car) was a decent battery. With the battery being mounted in the spare tire well and a stout stock alternator cable, the stock system would be fine at plenty more than 1,500W. My first system in my Camaro was: RF Power T2652-s front components RF Power T1692 rear RF Power 3Sixty.3 processor RF Power T1000-1bdCP RF Power T800-4AD RF Power T400-4 RF Power T1D215 (15") sub I didn't have any issues with the stock power system on that setup. All that being said, an upgraded alt is not going to hurt anything except your wallet and maybe fuel economy (like anyone cares about that ). DC Power makes some very nice alts for the Camaro V8's.
__________________
My amplifier pop/click/thump solution thread
Power Mods * K&N Typhoon CAI, Flowmaster American Thunder cat-back exhaust, Hurst Short Throw Shifter Exterior Mods * Black Phantom Grille * 22" T.I.S. 537MS wheels w/ Nitto INVO rubber * OEM body kit Suspension Mods * BC Racing Coilovers * Lakewood Strut Tower Brace Audio Mods * Stinger SPP 2250 Battery * Mosconi 6to8v8 w/ RCD * Pioneer AVH-X7500BT * Scosche Dash Kit * 2 - Mosconi AS200.4 * 2 - JL Audio 13W6v2 * Focal 165KRX2 Power (active) * Mosconi Gladen One 240.2 * Rockford Fosgate Power T1692 |
|
10-08-2015, 07:34 AM | #5 | |
H-Town Camaro Club
Drives: 2013 Dusk Edition 2SS/M6/Sun/NPP Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,234
|
Quote:
Hmm, that is a 1,540w RMS @ 4 ohms system. The average efficiency of RF amps is also less than 40% per their engineers and manuals. You say stock, but you replaced batteries? Confused, but I believe you mean well. True class D's are more efficient, though not significantly. Perhaps I should have added "without introducing substantial risk of damage to the electrical system" at the end of my previous statement for clarity. The OP was asking about running a system more than twice this size. Once an audio system moves past 40A continuous (~1,500wRMS @ 4 ohm), significant risk is introduced to the vehicle. A/B, D, G, Tube....manufactures do not get the luxury of changing the laws of physics. 1,500w RMS can (and will) easily draw between 40A and 100A off your battery. Any more than this and we are required to move to a 0+AWG power supply set up where things get really fun. Now we are drawing more from the vehicle than it's own electrical system, have to begin talking about how current flows and battery isolation to prevent explosions. At this point, it becomes a guessing game. If the car is idling, the stock alternator will overload, weaken and burn out. Stock batteries will be reduced to rubble as they were not meant for this level of cycling. Replacing the battery with a more robust one, deep cycle, marine or AGM will allow you to run the audio longer while the car is off. 4kw on a stock system possible? Absolutely, but you will destroy things doing so. The 1.5kw is a generally accepted guide for most seasoned installers, after this it is best to seek local professional help to ensure nothing is damaged. Last edited by Snoman; 10-08-2015 at 07:48 AM. |
|
10-08-2015, 12:13 PM | #6 | |
Aural Assault Vehicle
Drives: 2010 IBM 2SS/RS, 2015 Sierra Denali Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Garner, NC
Posts: 792
|
Quote:
Why are you assuming 4 ohms? Also, where did you get that 40% number? Average efficiency of the T400-4 (a Class A/B) is 68-69%, and that is direct from RF. The T800-4AD average is 75-80%. If you don't believe me, they even have it printed on their website. T1D215 wired to 1 ohm mono, 1kw RMS (birthsheet of 1542W @ 1 ohm) T2652-s on the T800-4AD, bridged to 2 channels - 300x2 RMS (birthsheet of 236x4 @ 2 ohms - would relate to around 472x2 @ 4 ohms) T1692 on T400-4, bridged to 2 channels - 200x2 RMS (birthsheet of 245x2 @ 4 ohms) Math says that is: 1000+600+400 = 2000W RMS or 1542 + 944 + 490 = 2976W RMS (birthsheet numbers) So, does that mean I was running 2000W or 2,976W on the stock electrical? The answer is "lol-no". It really boils down to an individual's listening habits and goals. I could (and did) run that system without issue as I wasn't trying to blow out windows or hurt feelings at stop lights. I listened to music on it, at an almost uncomfortable level, and had no issues (nor would I expect any). I even occasionally cranked the sub up to insanity (I'm nostalgic) and didn't see any of the telltale signs of undue stress on the electrical system. It handled it just fine, because I was probably never actually "using" more than 800-900W, and most of that being used by the sub (low frequencies require exponentially more power than mid-high frequencies). What I'm getting at is that more questions should be asked than just a blanket "Over 1500W is too much on stock electrical".
__________________
My amplifier pop/click/thump solution thread
Power Mods * K&N Typhoon CAI, Flowmaster American Thunder cat-back exhaust, Hurst Short Throw Shifter Exterior Mods * Black Phantom Grille * 22" T.I.S. 537MS wheels w/ Nitto INVO rubber * OEM body kit Suspension Mods * BC Racing Coilovers * Lakewood Strut Tower Brace Audio Mods * Stinger SPP 2250 Battery * Mosconi 6to8v8 w/ RCD * Pioneer AVH-X7500BT * Scosche Dash Kit * 2 - Mosconi AS200.4 * 2 - JL Audio 13W6v2 * Focal 165KRX2 Power (active) * Mosconi Gladen One 240.2 * Rockford Fosgate Power T1692 |
|
10-08-2015, 03:03 PM | #7 |
H-Town Camaro Club
Drives: 2013 Dusk Edition 2SS/M6/Sun/NPP Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,234
|
This is why I didn't want to get into the Physics, though we are both basically implying the same thing. It works
1542w@1ohm + 944@4ohm + 490w@4ohm does not equal 2976w. The best laymen explanation is to convert everything to fractions; 1542/1 + 944/4 + 490/4 = Not possible. To use Ohms law (as in all fractions) one must convert everything to the same common denominator (i.e. the same ohm) to analyze electrical stress on a system. The point of performing such a health analysis is so the owner does not find himself driving a brick suddenly, because the alternator fried or battery is drained. 1.5kw is only meant as general installer guide and not some crazy brick wall. The numbers used to determine over or under 1.5kw is simply taking the stated rated RMS power into 4 ohm. "Peak power" (or more accurately "dynamic power") is useless in computation as the only intent is to ensure continual power plus vehicle system draw is not greater than the stock alternator. 40A (39.73) is required to produce 1,500W RMS into 4 ohms at 50% efficiency. The T1000 is rated at 700w@4ohm The T800 is rated at 600w@4ohm (2 ch) The T400 is rated at 400w@4ohm (2 ch) The T1000 is less than 50% efficient pushing 1ohm (per manual). 70A continuous draw (per manual) with 31.6A output, but the efficiency drops to less than 20% when pushing 4 ohm (70A draw vs. 13.2A output). Perhaps the current drops when pushing 4 ohms. This is what most people call manufacture funny math, reminds me of the Pyramid amps claiming 5kw for $100 : ) Most installers will "tune" amps no higher than 80% and most listening levels are below 80%. 1700W X 0.8 X 0.8 = 1088W. You are well below the 1.5kw guide and with your extensive experience, probably nailed it 100% at 900w RMS continuous. You (or your installer) replaced the battery, which is all I would have recommended for this system. I could get into the efficiency debate, but it's pretty simple; either RF is lying about their efficiency or lying about their average continuous current draw. <20A is required for 1,500W@4ohm @ 100% efficiency. RF claims they use 70A to produce 700W on their T-1000 and their amp is 85% efficient? Regardless, manufacture's claims into current draw and efficiency have not been used seriously. We simply use the standard accepted 50% efficiency rate and if problems arise (rarely), well break out current meters to verify system integrity. |
10-09-2015, 12:13 AM | #8 | |
Aural Assault Vehicle
Drives: 2010 IBM 2SS/RS, 2015 Sierra Denali Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Garner, NC
Posts: 792
|
Quote:
An amp, in this circuit, is equivalent to a transformer. The amp has xx load on its' secondary side, which produces a demand on it's primary side. For an amp that is producing 1542W in this case, it would require (at 70% efficiency) 2004.6W of power on it's primary side. That equates to 139.2A at 14.4V. The amp producing 944W (does not matter how many channels it is powering or what the resistive load is) - again at 75% efficiency, requires 87.4A at 14.4V. The amp producing 490W (does not matter how many channels it is powering or what the resistive load is) - this time at 68% efficiency, requires 50.0A at 14.4V. This is obviously all theoretical as none of the amps would ever be doing near their full power, at least not for long (none of the loads /speakers/ would survive very long). And that's not even going into what would happen at your alternator or battery if one did magically achieve and maintain these crazy levels. Also, all of these efficiency numbers are coming directly off of Rockford's website, and they make sense. the T1000-1bdCP and T800-4AD are class D amps, whereas the T400-4 is a Class A/B topology. http://www.rockfordfosgate.com/produ...wer-amplifiers It's all right there. How is this wrong? My point is that the question was never asked what the OP (or anyone asking this question) was going to do with this system, and that that question is most important. I'm not one to assume that just because he's running RF Power series amps and big nasty T2 subs that he only plans to pound (not inferring that you are either). Maybe he, like myself, actually enjoys music, and not only the kind of music that gives subs and windows a workout. At normal levels, tweeters may only require as little as 10W each, and mids only 25W. The subs, depending on the music selected, may only need 100W each to produce the required volume. An amp rated at XXX power at XXX ohms doesn't mean that it always produces that power at that load. The bottom line is that amps can be rated at 4,000W at 4ohms on 14.4V and none of that matters unless you're stuck in an inescapable pissing contest on who has the most watts. What matters is what the amps are actually being required to do.
__________________
My amplifier pop/click/thump solution thread
Power Mods * K&N Typhoon CAI, Flowmaster American Thunder cat-back exhaust, Hurst Short Throw Shifter Exterior Mods * Black Phantom Grille * 22" T.I.S. 537MS wheels w/ Nitto INVO rubber * OEM body kit Suspension Mods * BC Racing Coilovers * Lakewood Strut Tower Brace Audio Mods * Stinger SPP 2250 Battery * Mosconi 6to8v8 w/ RCD * Pioneer AVH-X7500BT * Scosche Dash Kit * 2 - Mosconi AS200.4 * 2 - JL Audio 13W6v2 * Focal 165KRX2 Power (active) * Mosconi Gladen One 240.2 * Rockford Fosgate Power T1692 |
|
10-09-2015, 01:33 PM | #9 | ||
H-Town Camaro Club
Drives: 2013 Dusk Edition 2SS/M6/Sun/NPP Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,234
|
Quote:
You keep bringing up this 1,542W for the T-1000 and other "dynamic power" numbers....as I mentioned before, these are 100% meaningless when perform a system health check. Instantaneous millisecond output has nothing to do with, long term continuous power. Quote:
Doubt the OP even cares or possibly even returned. I'd have to break out my old lecture notes and several beers to continue, we're beyond anything related at this point or even remotely explainable in this medium. |
||
10-09-2015, 03:09 PM | #10 | |
Aural Assault Vehicle
Drives: 2010 IBM 2SS/RS, 2015 Sierra Denali Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Garner, NC
Posts: 792
|
Quote:
Also, IASCA is not infallible either. A righteous plenty of "funny math" was allowed even by IASCA with amplifiers like the U.S.Amps VLX-25 being allowed to compete in sub-50W SPL competition. I mean hey....it's only rated for 12.5W X 2 at 4 ohms..... I'm not saying I don't like IASCA or MECA, because they promote a hobby I have been enjoying for 20+ years. The 1542W number (as well as the other numbers I referenced) was a "birthsheet" RMS number for the amps I had in my car, not a dynamic power number. If RF tests the amps as they say they do on the birthsheets, they plug in a sine sweep (or maybe it's pink noise) and read the RMS power output. Sadly, in reality, the birthsheet number is really just another pissing contest certificate. So yeah, if my car had achieved a 300A peak/150A continuous draw, batteries would have exploded, alternator would have resigned, and power cabling would probably have melted. But the reality is that those numbers (RMS ratings in this case) don't mean a whole lot. Good, well designed amps (like the RF Power Series) wouldn't allow that catastrophe to happen anyway as they would shut down/off once the voltage dropped low enough....and at 300A (or even 150) it would definitely happen. My point was, and is, that the RMS numbers really don't mean a whole lot. More information has to be taken into consideration before just saying "this is the most combined RMS your amps can have on the stock system".
__________________
My amplifier pop/click/thump solution thread
Power Mods * K&N Typhoon CAI, Flowmaster American Thunder cat-back exhaust, Hurst Short Throw Shifter Exterior Mods * Black Phantom Grille * 22" T.I.S. 537MS wheels w/ Nitto INVO rubber * OEM body kit Suspension Mods * BC Racing Coilovers * Lakewood Strut Tower Brace Audio Mods * Stinger SPP 2250 Battery * Mosconi 6to8v8 w/ RCD * Pioneer AVH-X7500BT * Scosche Dash Kit * 2 - Mosconi AS200.4 * 2 - JL Audio 13W6v2 * Focal 165KRX2 Power (active) * Mosconi Gladen One 240.2 * Rockford Fosgate Power T1692 |
|
10-09-2015, 06:34 PM | #11 |
Drives: 2014 2LT/RS Ashen Gray Metallic Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Posts: 585
|
Having worked in the car audio industry for well over 30 years, and having worked for speaker and amplifier manufacturers, I can tell you that amps have both low voltage and over current/short circuit protection to reduce the possibility that an amp will "run away" and draw infinite amounts of current. Most well designed amps have a low voltage protection circuit that is usually engaged at around 8 volts to shut down the amp, to prevent any damage to the battery and charging circuits in the car, as well s the amp's power supply circuits.
The most important factor in designing a system to work with the factory battery/alternator is what is the dynamic power requirements of the system. It has nothing to do with maximum watts/current that an amp can generate, when in reality, under the dynamics of playing music, an amp will see maximum output for a small fraction of time, so the stress of a system is dependent on the volume of music played, the dynamics of the music and the efficiency of the overall system. Gain matching is also very important, as it is easy to over drive an amp to clipping/maximum distorted output/ by sending to much distorted signal to the amp's input. Unless you are competing in SPL and are going to "burp" a system with a steady state frequency, you should not see an amp run at full output for more that a few seconds at most in a typical audio system designed for full range musical reproduction at reasonable listening levels. thanks for listening.....YMMV.... |
10-09-2015, 10:07 PM | #12 | |
Aural Assault Vehicle
Drives: 2010 IBM 2SS/RS, 2015 Sierra Denali Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Garner, NC
Posts: 792
|
Quote:
__________________
My amplifier pop/click/thump solution thread
Power Mods * K&N Typhoon CAI, Flowmaster American Thunder cat-back exhaust, Hurst Short Throw Shifter Exterior Mods * Black Phantom Grille * 22" T.I.S. 537MS wheels w/ Nitto INVO rubber * OEM body kit Suspension Mods * BC Racing Coilovers * Lakewood Strut Tower Brace Audio Mods * Stinger SPP 2250 Battery * Mosconi 6to8v8 w/ RCD * Pioneer AVH-X7500BT * Scosche Dash Kit * 2 - Mosconi AS200.4 * 2 - JL Audio 13W6v2 * Focal 165KRX2 Power (active) * Mosconi Gladen One 240.2 * Rockford Fosgate Power T1692 |
|
|
|
Tags |
2012 camaro 2lt camaro ss, audio upgrade, high power |
Thread Tools | |
|
|