This guy posts from the FORUM and not only does he not quote
so I dont know exactly what posts he is refering to, but also he is
replying to a thread that has been over for a couple of months at least!!!
WOW.... I wish these Forum guys would come on over to RAC
and learn to post with the appropriate ettiquette....

jksandwell wrote:

Alright Alright, I've been viewing this spit fight for awhile.

you mean a WHILE AGO... this thread has been dead for
months....

I've seen
the arguments on both sides but this last comment made me kind of
****ed.

If you had quoted we would know which comment you are
refering to.

I am going to try and put this in simple form for those not
following along. I have to say Tom is right, there are no cancellations
(or so few and small that it is negligible) under the 60 hz line on ALL
test cars and 80 hz for most of them.

the graphs are there for all to see... Originally TOm had said there
were no cancellations under 120Hz (a typical xover freq)
Then he changed to 100Hz, now that I published my graphs
he says 60Hz... ha ha ha kinda cracks me up......
Why is it that your ****ed about this?

There is a decrease in SPL and he
never said there wasn't or at least I haven't seen it,

he has said that woofer location in a car is not important...
In fact he wrote an article saying the exact same thing that
was published in a car audio magazine years ago...

a loss in SPL
does not necessarily mean a cancellation there are as we know (many
many many factors).

Not a cancellation? How do you explain it then?

But Eddie is right in what he has said. LOL yes
they are both right. If your hunting for that extra bit of SPL and want
to raise it by a few decibels at the least, aim the box backwards. His
graphs look legit to me and I don't think anyone has denied it just put
words in Tom's mouth. Tom is being a bit of a tongue twister by not
exactly lying but antagonizing the hell out of Eddie.

hmm....

And Eddie is
being defensive because he feels there is an assault on his methods and
test equipment (who wouldn't be?).

hmmm.... Arent you missing something???
my graphs are good ones, everyone seems to agree my methods are sound.
It is TOM thats being defensive because he wrote an article
years ago and feels my graphs make him look like a dummy....

Maybe you missed the biginning of this thread...

Eddie just cool it, we all know your tests are
legit and Tom is being well a prick w/ flowery words.

ha ha ha

We understand the
point your tring to drive and yes louder is better to most of us and we
all learned something. Thank you

Your welcome....

Eddie Runner
http://www.teamrocs.com