Jump to content

Recommended Posts

-Resistance is NOT Impedance.

-Volts * Amps does NOT equal Watts in AC land

-You can NOT use an AC voltmeter and AC current meter to get true power unless you are powering a resistor and are using a scope or clipping detection device. I don't care what your friend the "electrician" said.

-You can NOT use a DMM to measure impedance

-Clipping is NOT DC

-There is NO SUCH THING as Watts RMS (though we use it in audio)

-WTH is "Box Rise"

-The word "subsonic" to describe low frequency audio is TOTALLY incorrect

-CCA wire is NOT OK

-Class D is not better, it's cheaper

WTH is Class D?

D'Amore Engineering will be launching a FREE education section on it's website in the next few days. There will be a series of videos and demonstrations to prove all of the above statements and more. This sport is more full of bad information than the gossip mags at the checkout stand. Something needs to be done. This bad information continues to get passed on, and our hobby continues to be degraded.

I'm still paying on my student loans, but it doesn't mean you have to.

Stop by www.DAmoreEngineering.com soon, watch some vids, buy a t-shirt.

Thank you for doing this.

I find myself needing to sit back and learn a few things.

  • Like (+1 Rep) 2

Ed Lester

ShowtimeSPL Host

Showtime Electronics Video Marketing

My old Build Log



5 time dB Drag Finalist
Last ride 2007 HHR, current dB 153.5 and bass race 149.4 dB. 153.0 dB on music

New Ride, 2008 HHR SS. Build under way.
Loudest score ever = 171dB
2009 dB Drag Racing, North American Points Champion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Tony, I had a question about electrical efficiency. Is it exponential or linear?

2002 Honda CR-V
Alpine 9887

My Build


Second Skin Damp
4 DC XL 15's
2 DC 5ks
Singer 320 amp
6 cap banks
Sky High wire
2 VM-1's

all under window line

Team DC Audio

Obama has a law he's trying to pass right now, trying to ban Leo for being a threat to children everywhere.

EDIT: Not in a JP kind of way.

I thought I was going to die from all the jizz filling my ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of you guys here are ridiculous...!

I won't name names but damn.....

Tony isn't inventing shit for a profit, he's creating tools that are affordable to most and elevating the common intellect.

He's simply stating theory, yet you guys think its voodoo.

Testing methods have been WRONG for years, he's trying like hell to get people in the right direction yet you think he's fooling you....

Would you rather be in the dark and be happy in your world of misconceptions or realize there were mistakes and use the correct methods?

I hate to break it to you, but testing AC electronics correctly can be expensive..... GET OVER IT!

Most electronics manufacturers spend THOUSANDS actually tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars to accurately test their equipment.

Tony has customized some of that equipment into pieces that most everyday people can afford which is damn impressive.

I have a professional LCR meter at work that cost $12k!

Tony's IMSG does a very similar function for $300...Bargain.

AC signals involve frequency which means there are varying impedances and phase changes.

Testing those signals requires a little knowledge and the right equipment which is not generally possible with generic multimeters.

Sorry to break it to you, but sometime change hurts...otherwise society keeps making the same mistakes.

Whew..ok I'm done.


Booooooo....Aye....Jamie....Get off the stage....no one cares....back to the discussion.... :lol2:



Edited by Wicks

This post sent with 100% recycled electrons.
2004 BMW M3
Mechman 280A
2 - XS Power XP3000

1 - XS Power D375

500F of Maxwell SuperCaps (soon to be 1000F)

Dash mounted O-scope
Audison bitOne (Remote DRC MP)
Highs Amp - PPI Art A404
Hertz HSK130 (HSK165 waiting...)
DC Audio DC9.0K
2- DC Audio XL12m2

LEGAL             - 147.3dB @ 41Hz
OUTLAW         - 150.2dB @ 45Hz

OUTLAW         - 145.7dB @ 30Hz




Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can easily do this with smaller wire. It is scalable. Test using a 500 watt amp with 4 gauge wiring. Not much of an electrical strain.

Indeed you could. But my thoughts are: If you need to run a bunch of wire and are looking to see if using OFC or CCA would be cheaper, wouldn't it make sense to test this under that scenario?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks a ton for that video!! We had a DC circuits lab today in my Basic Engineering class. Your video covered our WHOLE lab. I was really ahead of the game, can't wait for the other videos

  • Like (+1 Rep) 2


'01 Dodge Stratass Sealed Trunk Build Log
2008 Honda Fit Sport Build Log

On 10/3/2013 at 10:00 AM, ROLEXrifleman said:

Anyone who says they knew everything they wanted out of life at 19 can go suck a bag of dicks cause they are lying to themselves or brought up in a cult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow. thats all i got to say. hell back in the ealry 90's i was just hooking up stuff. i did not bother with all this, but you need it now. thanks for the info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or two runs of CCA for that matter since it would result in lower transmission losses than a single run of OFC...two runs of CCA has a resistance of .085mohms per foot according to the values Tony was working off of...so if CCA is half the cost, wouldnt two runs of CCA actually be superior to one run of OFC by the exact same logic that one run of OFC is greater than one of CCA?

Thats always been my logic on the matter...i'll stay tuned to see if Tony has any other reasons for his statement that it is "not okay," there must be something else to it that I am just not thinking of...?

Even though the raw wire may be half the cost, you also need to factor in fuse holders and terminals. I've ran the numbers and found that they have roughly the same cost/performance ratio after taking that into consideration.

If you don't run fuses, that's a different story. But I wouldn't suggest that

I'm with you there Chris, I guess I'm just still waiting to hear why it is "not okay." What I m trying to get at is, if our goal is simply the best transmission possible, two runs of CCA is actually better than a single run of OFC (based on transmission losses alone and the resistance values Tony uses in his example, this is a fact).

So, if they are approximately the same price, even after factoring in fuses and terminals etc (difference in the tens of dollars, not hundreds) and two runs of CCA is the better conductor, why would you want to buy OFC unless you are limited in wire runs by the class or orginization you compete in or have physical limitations in your specific build?

^This is the question I hope Tony answers (if there is a different answer than what I have come up with). I feel like everyone here already understands that a single run of OFC will beat a single run of CCA. While I do believe it is great that he is showing the math and explaining the physics so that everyone can be on a level playing field for understanding what is going on in their charging system, I hope their is more to his assertion that CCA is "not okay" than the simple fact that in a one - to - one comparison OFC has lower losses... :shrug:

Team NorthWestSPL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm talking about knowing why different factors act and interact with each other based on the thorough understanding of the subject, rather than "well it's worked fine for me this way so far". People that think "because it worked for me, that makes it right" harm any field in which they try to advise people. The mentality is "post hoc, ergo propter hoc".

That is your statement every single time you try to argue science vs application, and it doesn't apply. Not in the slightest, even in your workout thread. The fact is, on paper we are shown that OFC wire to wire is better. So then you double a run of the CCA, come up cheaper with no performance loss...that is not "post hoc ergo propter hoc", that is actually a form of science called APPLICATION. Even the best scientific formulas have to be tested and applied, what good do they do on paper? If I switched from OFC to CCA and saved money but didn't drop a single volt or decibel from running OFC...how does your propter fit into that equation? Truth is, it doesn't. And ACTUALLY doing something has merits as well, you just would rather ignore it for something you see on paper but never do.

  • Like (+1 Rep) 1

Tell me...does this smell like chloroform to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow... of ALL the topics I said I was going to talk about, this is the one that got you guys all fired up? Oh man.... just wait until we talk about clamps and how AC power is measured.

Let me get something out of the way, when I said it CCA is "not okay", I am not saying your car is going to burn to the ground like all of the houses built in the 70s that used aluminum wire. I'm saying it is one more thing in our hobby that we don't need.

Here is the indisputable fact, not opinion: You need roughly twice as much CCA and it costs roughly 1/2 as much, and gives you twice the number of terminations (which is CCAs downfall). So what is the point?

Why it is "not okay": It is not okay because IMO you are getting ripped off. Same problem I have with overrated equipment. CCA costs roughly 1/2 of OFC, yet aluminum costs 4 times less than copper. Hmmmm. Someone please explain to me how that math works out. Yes someone is cashing out at your expense, and since the manufactures of this wire (China) are ca$hing out, of course they look for ways to cash out even more. Example:

Once I was asked, at a previous employer, to test 3 different CCA cables all 1/0 AWG. 1 of them was the current one we were selling, the other 2 were cost saving versions. What? Isn't CCA, CCA? Nope. Of the 3 I tested, the worst one had DOUBLE the resistance of the best one, and saved us 30% on cost. Can you guess which one that company started to sell? The numbers I used in Video 1: DC, were numbers I looked up for "standard", "legit" CCA, not numbers I tested. The worse of the 3 I tested had double the industry standard resistance. That being said I'm guessing the situation is even worse that what I said. But I only talk fact, so I used the industry standard resistances. Don't worry real testing is coming, I'm just waiting for the cable I ordered to arrive.

Side note: the "lanes" are not a magical place, and I have been in the lanes plenty of times myself.

I'm not sure everyone is understanding the conservation of energy here. If you lose 500 watts in a cable, that's it, it's lost, gone. Well where did it come from? Your alternator(s)... and 500 watts/14V = 35.7 amps. So if you are cool with losing 35 amps per each run of cable that is losing 500W, then ok. Fine with me. Seems like you probably spent some hard earned cash on those high output alts to just throw away 35 amps, but whatever makes you happy.

I know the guys "in the lanes" do some extreme work to their vehicles. I've been there, I've done the 3 AM builds the night before. Some of these extreme vehicles use multiple high output alts, custom built mountings, 1000s of pounds of MDF, metal, batteries, etc. You guys go ALL OUT on these vehicles. It's awesome. But then you don't on the wire? Ok 5 runs of CCA is less resistance than 2 or 3 runs of OFC. But 5 runs of OFC is way better. I just don't get it. Let us also note that less than 1% of people with systems compete. So what about the other 99%? I am going to try to hide 2 or 3 runs of CCA under the carpet of my Jeep when I could use 1 run of OFC? Hell no.

You already bought a mile of CCA and you are running it? That's fine, it works. Make sure it's terminated good and run it. It's just not as good as it could be, and it is just one more thing in our industry that has gone the way of quantity vs quality; and that is the most disturbing part for me.

  • Like (+1 Rep) 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 361 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • Create New...