Difference between Shaker 500 and 1000?
03-04-2006, 08:35 PM
#12
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location:
Posts: 2,227
RE: Difference between Shaker 500 and 1000?
He'll let you know but I can see the little ridge of the CDC Classic (not Agressive) chin spoiler. I'm 99.9%sure that's what it is. If you decide on it you can save a little with shipping and all by looking around on the internet; Lots of places sell CDC (I just got the agressive for $125 and no sipping or handling costs) ...Jim
03-05-2006, 12:25 AM
#14
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotsford, B.C., Canada
Posts: 20
RE: Difference between Shaker 500 and 1000?
I've read that besides the addition of the subs/amp, all the other speakers are higher quality than those of the shaker 500. I don't know if average listeners would notice the difference.
03-05-2006, 12:31 PM
#17
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 757
RE: Difference between Shaker 500 and 1000?
Crucifix, I think you need to read the lit more carefully (Ford is intenionally dicey on this subject)--the rest of the speakers in the Shaker1000 are not upgrades from the Shaker500, only from the base system. The Shaker systems both have the upgraded speakers in the door, a 4x6" component plate and the 8" sub (hard to miss it). Both have two 6x8" speakers in the rear deck--neither of which are any different from the base system's set up. I've seen guys pull the speakers out of these cars w/both Shaker systems and the part numbers are an exact match. The only thing the Shaker1000 has over the 500 are the two trunk subs w/accompanying amp. If you've got independent varification of different speakers in the 1000, I'd appreciate it if you could send it my way (I'm collecting info/images from stock systems).
BTW, the ratings "1000" and "500" are peak watt ratings, not RMS ratings (again, read the lit very carefully--it's all about the advertising). The standard reduction from peak to RMS is 50%, so you're really looking at 500 WRMS and 250 WRMS stereo systems (with the capability to hit these higher Watt ratings during a burst of sound). The RMS ratings give you a better sense of the average power capability in a system. So if sowaxeman has a 250 WRMS amp powering his MTXs, he's effectively got a "Shaker1000."
I'd be very interested in where 757GT got his figures from--direct measurement? Please tell.
IMO, the $1K+ you shell out for the 1000 is not worth it. A grand gets you a heck of a lot of stereo system...and I can practically guarantee sowaxeman didn't pay a grand for his set up. Moral: you can blow away the 1000 for the money, or you can save, save, save!
Best,
-j
BTW, the ratings "1000" and "500" are peak watt ratings, not RMS ratings (again, read the lit very carefully--it's all about the advertising). The standard reduction from peak to RMS is 50%, so you're really looking at 500 WRMS and 250 WRMS stereo systems (with the capability to hit these higher Watt ratings during a burst of sound). The RMS ratings give you a better sense of the average power capability in a system. So if sowaxeman has a 250 WRMS amp powering his MTXs, he's effectively got a "Shaker1000."
I'd be very interested in where 757GT got his figures from--direct measurement? Please tell.
IMO, the $1K+ you shell out for the 1000 is not worth it. A grand gets you a heck of a lot of stereo system...and I can practically guarantee sowaxeman didn't pay a grand for his set up. Moral: you can blow away the 1000 for the money, or you can save, save, save!
Best,
-j
03-05-2006, 06:30 PM
#19
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotsford, B.C., Canada
Posts: 20
RE: Difference between Shaker 500 and 1000?
ORIGINAL: Philostang
Crucifix, I think you need to read the lit more carefully (Ford is intenionally dicey on this subject)--the rest of the speakers in the Shaker1000 are not upgrades from the Shaker500, only from the base system.
Crucifix, I think you need to read the lit more carefully (Ford is intenionally dicey on this subject)--the rest of the speakers in the Shaker1000 are not upgrades from the Shaker500, only from the base system.
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/pw/audio.htm
It says that the shaker 1000 includes nine audiophile speakers. Since it's in the context of shaker systems (no mention of base system) I assumed they were different speakers than those of the shaker 500.
I'm just citing information I read elsewhere. If it's incorrect information I apologize, and thanks for clearing it up.
03-05-2006, 07:00 PM
#20
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Peoria, AZ
Posts: 382
RE: Difference between Shaker 500 and 1000?
ORIGINAL: Philostang
Crucifix, I think you need to read the lit more carefully (Ford is intenionally dicey on this subject)--the rest of the speakers in the Shaker1000 are not upgrades from the Shaker500, only from the base system. The Shaker systems both have the upgraded speakers in the door, a 4x6" component plate and the 8" sub (hard to miss it). Both have two 6x8" speakers in the rear deck--neither of which are any different from the base system's set up. I've seen guys pull the speakers out of these cars w/both Shaker systems and the part numbers are an exact match. The only thing the Shaker1000 has over the 500 are the two trunk subs w/accompanying amp. If you've got independent varification of different speakers in the 1000, I'd appreciate it if you could send it my way (I'm collecting info/images from stock systems).
BTW, the ratings "1000" and "500" are peak watt ratings, not RMS ratings (again, read the lit very carefully--it's all about the advertising). The standard reduction from peak to RMS is 50%, so you're really looking at 500 WRMS and 250 WRMS stereo systems (with the capability to hit these higher Watt ratings during a burst of sound). The RMS ratings give you a better sense of the average power capability in a system. So if sowaxeman has a 250 WRMS amp powering his MTXs, he's effectively got a "Shaker1000."
I'd be very interested in where 757GT got his figures from--direct measurement? Please tell.
IMO, the $1K+ you shell out for the 1000 is not worth it. A grand gets you a heck of a lot of stereo system...and I can practically guarantee sowaxeman didn't pay a grand for his set up. Moral: you can blow away the 1000 for the money, or you can save, save, save!
Best,
-j
Crucifix, I think you need to read the lit more carefully (Ford is intenionally dicey on this subject)--the rest of the speakers in the Shaker1000 are not upgrades from the Shaker500, only from the base system. The Shaker systems both have the upgraded speakers in the door, a 4x6" component plate and the 8" sub (hard to miss it). Both have two 6x8" speakers in the rear deck--neither of which are any different from the base system's set up. I've seen guys pull the speakers out of these cars w/both Shaker systems and the part numbers are an exact match. The only thing the Shaker1000 has over the 500 are the two trunk subs w/accompanying amp. If you've got independent varification of different speakers in the 1000, I'd appreciate it if you could send it my way (I'm collecting info/images from stock systems).
BTW, the ratings "1000" and "500" are peak watt ratings, not RMS ratings (again, read the lit very carefully--it's all about the advertising). The standard reduction from peak to RMS is 50%, so you're really looking at 500 WRMS and 250 WRMS stereo systems (with the capability to hit these higher Watt ratings during a burst of sound). The RMS ratings give you a better sense of the average power capability in a system. So if sowaxeman has a 250 WRMS amp powering his MTXs, he's effectively got a "Shaker1000."
I'd be very interested in where 757GT got his figures from--direct measurement? Please tell.
IMO, the $1K+ you shell out for the 1000 is not worth it. A grand gets you a heck of a lot of stereo system...and I can practically guarantee sowaxeman didn't pay a grand for his set up. Moral: you can blow away the 1000 for the money, or you can save, save, save!
Best,
-j
I'm impressed at the 500's capability since it's the first factory system I've ever heard that could play every note on my Portishead CD which spends plenty of time at or under 35Hz. Plus, every system I've heard previously required the rear shelf speakers to make the bass, but I can turn them off now and not miss them at all. I can only imagine that the added surface area of the additional subs would make it that much better in the 1000. So, if you are not one to care about tinkering with things, the 1000 would be plenty of system for most jazz, country or rock people. SQ could always be improved, but unless you listen to something better, you'll never know.