RF or RE??

[Cygnus 0]

Do you guys considered the new 2011 RF P2D4 15" an overall better sub than the RE SRX 15" sub? The SRX has more linear excursion 18mm vs 12. I cannot find the Mms of either sub. The Bl of the SRX is 14 vs unknow. SPL is 87db for the SRX vs 86db. The Sd is 810 vs 894. My concern is that a sub with that much Xmax(RE) could sound louder than a sub with just 12mm but with almost 900 of Sd?? Also, the cone material of the subs: RE is Kraft pulp and the RF is Kevlar. If Kevlar is a bullet proof material is going to be a lil heavy than Kraft pulp, right? Thas why the RF Xmax is only 12mm?? It seems to me that the RF guys put a lot of technology in their new subs. The RE seems to be a straight up sub, nothing technological, just a simple sub. But I know that heat plays a big role in speakers preformance. In that regard, the RF is more ahead than the RE. In general, which of those subs would sound louder or better in my aplication: 94 Corolla, Sounstream Rubicon 400 a/b class, 4ga cable, and subs in a slot ported box, tune high 30s. I'm going single 15".

[Cygnus 0]

RF said that the cone material is Kevlar fiber reinforced paper cone. Paper cone.....something is keeping the sub with just 12mm of xmax. Because if the cone is paper with some strong fibers, why dosen't move that much?? Could the Bl plays a big role in why is this happening?

[SpeakerBoy 64]

I've hardly read anything on either, but I would guess it's due to the subs being intended for different purposes. i.e. one has more sq while the other gets a little louder.

Don't quote me...

[ctmaudi 0]

Dont know anything about the RF and never heard one. However, I have a 12in RE SRx, and its one hell of a sub for the price (I got mine for $60). I had it in 2.25cu at 31Hz, and gave it 400-500w daily. Got plenty loud and has great SQ.