Should I remove resistor? 3.1tl

[cayovelez]

I am in upgrade mode of my 3.1tl this weekend, i have finished larry's rings, dynamat extreeme and crossover upgrade(went soniccraft all around and mills). I have one dilema, there is this resistor on the pic attached of my xover and on most mods for this xover are not there; should I remove it? It is labeled: 2ohms5%25W

Thanks, Carlos

[Toolfan66]

I just pulled the crossovers out of my 3.1tl's this morning and my Xovers do not have that resistor..

[inspiredsports]

Check the schematic here . . .

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55888

I would remove anything not specified in the 3.1TL schematic.

What's odd is that resistor in your photo looks exactly like the 5 watt sand resistors Polk was using during that time period.

[Face]

If it is in place of the 1.3ohm resistor and in parallel with the second 12uf in the HF circuit, either leave it there or replace it with a 1.3ohm resistor. Removing it will create a mess and replacing it with a 1.3ohm will slightly raise the HF level.

[Toolfan66]

He replaced the 1.3ohm resistor with a mills it is in the same place as the resistor on my boards.

But now that I am looking more closely at his board it kinda looks like he has two mills where the 1.3 should go, something don't look right!!

Carlos can you take some more pics of your boards and maybe post a list of parts you used with values??

[Face]

I'm not seeing the attachment.

[Toolfan66]

Pic of my board!!

[Toolfan66]

Lets try this pic!!

[cayovelez]

Here is a better pic with some labels.

[cayovelez]

From your r3 to r5 this resistor seems to be installed

[Toolfan66]

do you have two mills in parallel with one another??

[cayovelez]

yes i do

[Face]

Yes, the 2.5ohm doesn't appear to belong, odd.

What are the values of the two Mills in series(?) on the left of your board.

Just curious, who modded the boards or did you buy the speakers pre-modded?

[Toolfan66]

a 1.2 resistor would have worked just fine..

[cayovelez]

.68 each

[cayovelez]

I have 2 .68 in place of the 1.3. I have seen it on this page also look at second page :http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/show...ossover&page=2

[cayovelez]

My 3.1TL were produced on may july 90 i have seen others with that weird resistor, I am wondering if I should leave it or remove it? I am all done with my upgrades: larry's rings, Dynamat extreeme on all drivers, rdo198, all sonicraft caps replaced and mill resistors(still with the weird resistor) armacell, large Dayton spikes. The only thing left for me to do is figure out the resistor issue, and any other upgrades? It has been fun, tomorrow will be listening post upgrades will see.

[TennMan]

do you have two mills in parallel with one another??

yes i do

I have 2 .68 in place of the 1.3. I have seen it on this page also look at second page :http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/show...ossover&page=2

Shouldn't you have the 2 .68 ohm resistors in series to get 1.3 ohms?

[Joe08867]

Looking at the pic his .68 resistors are in series.

I would remove that other resistor. I see no need for it in the schematic.

[cayovelez]

I have the .68 in series, I did the upgrade of the xover. When researching the xover upgrade I came across someone with that resistor on their xover for their 3.1, wonder how their experiences on removing the resistor.....

[FTGV]

If you can determine to what part of the circuit to which each lead of that 2.5R resistor is connected we should be able to determine it's purpose.

[CNWDI]

If you can determine to what part of the circuit to which each lead of that 2.5R resistor is connected we should be able to determine it's purpose.

I'll definitely bow to the superior knowledge of crossovers in general and Polks in particular on this forum...but my EE background in reading labels tells me that's a 2 Ohm, 5% tolerance (so, 1.9 to 2.1 Ohm), 25W resistor...not 2.5 Ohms. I don't know why it's there and suspect the best answer is to make it go away, but I just don't want us thinking it's a 2.5 Ohm resistor unless there's some other indicator I'm missing...

[FTGV]

Yes your correct it is a 2.0R not 2.5 R.