Impious

Don't use it and buy something new.

Honestly depending on type of eDead you have it is probably crap anyways. I can't think of a single version they made off hand that was actually any good. So even if you get it to adhere to a surface of your vehicle, that does not mean it is going to perform well. Do you know what type/version of eDead you have?

Is this for competition or strictly for street beating?

Bridge it to the midbass and get a 2nd affordable amp for the WB's

You were leading the charge on the black hats!!! LOL....I'm just glad to see my pestering paid off! Ordered one last night as soon as I saw this thread

Not my style, but look good none-the-less. Also see the black flex fit hats are back in stock Thank you!

From the measurements I've seen they don't make a spectacular widebander. Great midrange, but not a great WB on the top end. Many people use them as WB though and are happy, so I guess it's all relative. WB aren't my forte, honestly.....I'm not as well read or experienced with their relative performance. Sean would probably be able to give suggestions much quicker than myself. I'd need to spend some time researching. I've read every time a thread comes up about using a fullrange/widebander about how those 3" (average size) full range speakers don't do super well on the top end or get real loud. I've used to have the Logitech Z-560 4.1 speaker set (still have all the speakers too, amp blew on it) and now I have the Z-5500's on my computer. Both sets use 3" full range speakers (look just like several of the TB speakers) for the highs and quite honestly except maybe for the very highest frequencies I don't notice an issue with the range. Same on the output, the damn things will get almost stupid loud. Now, I'm sure they're not doing anything super special with these things, not at their price point, so either my tastes for high frequency range and output are a fair bit off center in comparison to you guys and your experience, or I've simply and straight up never experienced what really great speakers sound like and the output big power subs can do. I'm sure the answer is a little bit of both, but in my experience with these sets it's hard for me to imagine needing any more output or having any real issues with the upper range response. I guess I just have a hard time understanding where the comments come from. Like I said before.....it has a lot to do with the listener, the listening material, personal preference, etc. Some people can't really hear above ~15khz anyways (sometimes even lower), some music has more info up there than others, some people preference's don't require a lot of top end "air" and "sparkle". Same thing with horns....even the "good" ID horns roll off hard around 15khz in most installations. Output (within the main passband) is sufficient for the average listener to jam on. I like to rock out and haven't had any problems getting enough output. Then again I also don't have 150db of bass.....

LMAO http://fortwayne.craigslist.org/ele/3632243138.html Really? 3kw RMS per sub? Asking $500 for the pair, when they are $140 each brand new?

Nak now definitely isn't the same Nak of old. That said the amps atleast should still a solid product. Just from glancing at the specs I could find of that sub, it's no where remotely near the level of a Q or Icon...and either of them would promptly hand the SPW-1210 it's ass.

M5

It's like you didn't even read my posts When using multiple drivers the center-to-center distance should ideally be no more than one wavelength of the highest frequency played by the drivers. Or, to put it another way, the drivers should ideally be crossed at a frequency with a wavelength no more than their center-to-center distance of the drivers. Since the center-to-center distance is going to include the diameter of the basket but the beaming frequency does not, then two drivers will actually require a lower crossover frequency than a single driver of the same "stated" diameter. I.E. a 7" driver might only have a ~6" cone, but the center-to-center distance between two 7" drivers would be ~7" assuming they were placed directly next to each other with baskets touching. If they were spaced 1" apart then the center-to-center distance increases to 8" and they would require an even lower crossover point (ideally). These rules aren't hard-n-fast and there is some leeway, but they are good starting points to figure out approximately where things might start to go haywire.

From the measurements I've seen they don't make a spectacular widebander. Great midrange, but not a great WB on the top end. Many people use them as WB though and are happy, so I guess it's all relative. WB aren't my forte, honestly.....I'm not as well read or experienced with their relative performance. Sean would probably be able to give suggestions much quicker than myself. I'd need to spend some time researching.

In the main passband I don't think output would be an issue. A WB's rated sensitivity is lower than a standard tweeter, but given their sizable cone area advantage their peak output capabilities will exceed that of a tweeter.....might take comparatively more power to get there, but given their coils are significantly larger than a tweeter's and tweeter's really don't use much power to start with that's not going to be much of an issue. Where a WB is going to fall short of a tweeter is above ~10khz, but how much that affects things depends on listener preference, listener's hearing abilities and listening material.

The only other recent company is USD audio. Crossfire had horns briefly, I don't remember exactly but I'm thinking their horn body wasn't very good. Veritas is an older car audio horn. Illusion Audio had their CH-1 horns which were good. Image Dynamics is going to be the most prevalent though. It's rare to see any of the others up for sale on the major forums. Stay away from the older ID CD1e horns, the compression drivers were crap.

His point was, if you randomly assemble parts you aren't going to have proper T/S parameters, which means you are not going to be able to design an enclosure for it. If you had someone measure the T/S for you, then you would be able to at least design an enclosure......but you're stuck with whatever the T/S turn out to be, it might turn out to be a turd since there is absolutely zero actual engineering or design going into the parts selection. The moral of the story is your plan is not a good one. Even if the parts fit together and you're able to assemble a working subwoofer, it doesn't mean the driver is going to be any good. Good parts on a good motor with zero engineering going into the design does not mean the results are also going to be any good.

Using either of those does not mean the gain is set right.

Beaming is only an issue if you need to mate with a high playing tweeter....which goes back to my prior point of finding a mid first then selecting a tweeter that can low enough to mate with the mid. And again, center-to-center distance plays a role when using multiple speakers in the same range (also ideally between two speakers at the crossover point, but another story for another day), so it's not only about diameter. Really two 5.25's aren't going to have significantly more area than a 7", and the 7" is probably going to have parameters that lend itself more towards better midbass performance without a ported enclosure.

I certainly don't know how much room he has in the pillar sections, and have always leaned towards a 2-way setup, but in this instance it doesn't seem like it would be that much more work (for a beginner) to jump to a 3-way, and use some small tweeters where the WB start dropping off. I mean one could certainly spend weeks finding that perfect XO point, slope, and filter type between the WB and tweet, but this doesn't seem like a stretch to get the mid and WB tuned, then move on to the tweet. Only reason I brought it up as feasible is that the tweeters would have a pretty narrow bandwidth at such a high frequency that it would be harder to mistune. Though this may require an additional amp, more space, money, another dsp, and more effort than what the reward is worth. What do you think? Seems like Mike already made up his mind....but with the added amp channels, additional processing (options for 4-way are generally more expensive), additional space and although minimal tuning it's one less thing to worry about (speaker selection, phase, placement, aiming, xover freq & slope, EQ, etc) the 2-way with a WB would end up being much more simple. Though it's a good stepping point to moving on to a 3-way when funds/knowledge allow since he'll already have a good midrange to fill in the middle. And really, if he ends up happy with a WB up top then it's less expense and headache. I generally don't advise WB (I know Sean is all about them) but in this case with a desire to run a large midbass it simply makes more sense. Personally for your situation I think the Peerless SLS8 would be a no-brainer: http://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-8-woofers/peerless-sls-830667-8-paper-cone-woofer/ Affordable, parameters would lend it to working well in a car door, good excursion, proven performance. Downside is it's only good up to about 300hz, so you need a widebander that can play down that low. On the bright side you're using a widebander and not a tweeter so that isn't a huge issue.

What's the purpose behind the dual mids? You are still limited on how high you can run the mids based on the center-to-center distances between the two speakers. So running multiple smaller speakers isn't necessarily going to be better (as far as LPF crossover point) than a single larger speakers, depending on the circumstances.

Since you are going with a-pillar tweeters already, and you seem to have your heart set on using large mids.....this might be one instance where going with an 8" (or 10") midbass and a 3" widebander on top might be a good option. The larger diameter full range driver on top will play a lot lower than any tweeter allowing you to better mate with the mid and giving you a much larger selection of mids. A couple downsides are that the widebander MUST be on-axis to the listener, and you'll be losing some top end response and "shimmer". If those are issues you can deal with it will make your situation a little easier. If you wanted to stick with a tweeter on top then you are going to be severely limited for choices of both 8" mids and tweeters as you'd necessarily need a crossover point in the vicinity of 1500hz and there are limited choices in both categories to meet that need. The last option is to go with more standard 6.5" - 7" mid, possibly even a higher excursion option like the Exodus Anarchy. Decide which way you want to go.

Curious of the source? If it was a "clamp test" then the results are meaningless. My deepest apologies kind sir No reason to apologize. I was stating not to use a clamp test as a basis of comparison. The results of a clamp test aren't meaningful.

What processing does the 9857 have? I'm not familiar with it. If it isn't active-capable, then you will need a processor.

A good front stage is a just as much a result of proper installation and tuning as it is the speaker selection. Everyone has specific goals, and those goals will determine most of how to go about selecting speakers and installing/tuning the system. It's a really big topic, so specific questions will be easier to answer as literally an entire book could be written on how to select, install and tune a good front stage. As others have said if this is your first foray into active a 2-way is recommended. What are you using for processing? Personally I prefer to choose a mid first, then decide on a tweeter to mate with it. Due to people's usual preferences and the compromises involved I personally feel it's better to find a mid that matches your goals (midbass performance, low frequency extension, midrange performance, etc) and then find a tweeter that plays low enough to mate with the mid rather than limit your mid choices based on the tweeter.

For horns you can either purchase them used, or contact Eric Stevens directly (former owner of ID, now sells the horns directly): http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/members/eric+stevens.html Horns (actual horns) are a good option of high output and still retaining good SQ, but they can be difficult to tune correctly. If you are unfamiliar with active setups and equalization it may be a better option to go with standard components. Are you using the 9887 for your processing?

Do not get an epicenter. Without knowing more about the system and your goals we have no idea how that $300 would be best spent or what else can be done to improve the system.