FI Car Audio -- -- - -- -- - --

---

quote:

Thanks for the inquiry.
How Fi stacks up to my previous companies offerings? Well that is somewhat
of a tough question. I designed all the products for RE and like each one
of them for their specific application. Fi is the same way, although not
all subs have a certain amount of direct comparisson to them.

SQ of the Q is more on par with the XXX than it is to the SX. I never
designed the SX to have tons of SQ, but more of a SQL/SPL sub that simply
took lots of abuse for daily applications or light SPL competitions.
Q works well with 750-1200W depending on the exact enclosure and application
for daily. Q works well in both ported and sealed, although for straight SQ
applications sealed really is the only option. The group delay and natural
response of sealed simply eclipse that of ported enclosures. Not too
mention sealed matches up much better to the cars natural transfer function
making things relatively flat far beyond what ported can do (with normal
ported tunings). The Q definitely can keep up with the current crop of
"SQL" drivers out there. No issue there.

The SSD works well with 600-1000W.

Please let me know if I can help with anything else.

---

---

quote:

Well I know the guys at Low-Hz had a few of them tested out by various people. And there were a few problems that they had with them.

The biggest problem was, the FI Q's were not hitting the lows as hard as they should have been. If you have heard a mag 15 before, you know that between 27-50hz, the sub is just a complete monster. The problems with the FI q's, is that in the 27-33Hz range, they were just not hitting that hard.

Originally, Scott said to inrease the port diameter to fix this problem.

Now to give you numbers this is how everything was tested.

The SI mag 15 was in the same box as the FI Q. The box was 4 cubic feet, tuned to 28 Hz. Now SI reccommends about 25 cubic inches of port are for the mag 15. The FI we didn't have a number on, so we just ended up making it 50 cubic inches, figuring that would be more than enough for any sub.

Anyways, of course that was way more than the mag needed, but that was fine, since it still pounded the lows really well. The FI Q on the other hand was having plenty of problems in the lower frequencies. So we talked with Scott at FI and he said well up the port volume. He said try going with 75 SQUARE INCHES!!!

Not sure how much you know about box building, but a 4 cubic foot box, tuned to 28 Hz, with 75 square inch port, requires one LONG A** port.

Anyways, they started building the new box, even though a sub that required a box like that seemed very impractical. Tested it out with that port area, and still no change in the low end from the FI Q.

Overall, it sounded like the FI Q was a decent driver. SQ was good, and output was pretty good as well. As far as low end extension, the mag was the winner, and as far as output the mag was louder as well. They measured both subs with a termlab, and they were around 143, and 147 db's with around 1000rms going to each.

So in overall SQL, the mag is much better than the FI Q, but if you don't care much for the lower bass frequencies, and just want a solid sub between 35-60hz, than the FI Q would be fine.

---