mjlock

My RF 3 II says the max input power is 150 watts and my RF 3 says the max input power is 225 watts. Both have a peak power of 600 watts. I found a manual on the internet for both of these speakers so those figures are presumed true. I do not know what the xo point of the HF driver is. Being how expensive Monster cables are, I am guessing that is what made the RF 3 ii's price go up. To me, the RF 3's seem like the better speaker on paper but side by side, I can not tell the difference.

I have both a pair of RF 3's and RF 3 II's. What is the difference besides the z-series monster cable that made them raise the cost from $800 in the RF 3 to $1000 in the RF 3 II's? And why did the continuous watts go from 225 in the RF3 to 150 in the RF 3 II's to boot? I have called and emailed Klipsch customer support to get answers to these questions. They have yet to respond to my email (more than 3 days now) and when I called, they told me the specs on my RF 3 was 150 watts. Sure enough, I look at the Klipsch website and it says 150 watts for both the RF 3 and RF 3 II's. Only the back of my RF3 says 225 watts. WTF? Do I have some rare error edition speaker or what? Anybody else notice these things after 14 years? If I were to sell one pair, which one sells for more?