Thiel Owners

I spent several weeks going to my dealer's showroom to audition the 3.7s and 2.7s. I took a widespread selection of my classical CDs with which I was very familiar. 
In the end, I selected the 2.7s, along with a SS2.2 sub to extend the lower bass. I'm still completely satisfied with the choice. Disclaimer: I listen to classical music, and not much else. 

Living room is 16 x 24 x 12, with a large opening along one side of one 24' wall.  Straight 12"ceiling.  Speakers equally spaced from side walls, 9' apart and 2' from the end wall. SS2.2 centered between the speakers.  

I was wondering if the CS2.7 uses the same bass driver as the CS2.4?  At least they visually look the same and about the same size.

Andy - No 2.7 and 2.4 are not the same woofers.
Longer historic perspective answer:A new model from Thiel included new drivers, either specifically developed for the new model or trickled down from a more expensive recent product. Ex. the CS1.6 woofer was borrowed from the in-house developed CS7.2 mid-woofer. A newly named generation had new drivers.
The 2.7 woofer may use the same cone as the 2.4 (I don't know). But the 2.7 woofer was developed in conjunction with Warkwyn-Canada, along with the crossover. That development consumed tremendous costs, proving that outside engineering could not be afforded for Thiel to keep breaking new ground. In Jim's time I believe the 2.7 coax would have been a new driver based on the 3.7 concept. In fact, he spoke of developing such a 7.3 coax. A smaller diameter mid-plate would allow a higher crossover and perhaps a smaller tweeter to higher resonsnce-free extension. That hypothetical driver, along with a star cone, would then be trickled down into the model 2 - and called the 2.5, the next generation of the model 2.

The 2.7 is certainly an accomplishment, and a tribute to Home-Team- Thiel's dedication to creating a legacy worthy of Jim's 3.7 work. But it is less of a product than Jim would have engineered, given the time.

George - Nice system, nice room, and good solution.

Unsound - I am being excruciatingly careful to avoid editorializing the sound. We called what many brands do "euphonic engineering" - to knowingly alter the sound-field for desired illusions.
A look behind the curtain: I used my modified CS1.6s as sound reinforcement for a live acoustic concert last night in our 12,000 cubic foot Village Arts Center. As usual during sound check, I compare the unamplified house sound to that in the headphones (Beyer770Pro), to that through the speakers. The naturalness was comment and question-worthy from the musicians, two attendees and the house manager. To date there are no changes to drivers or electronics or cabinet walls. The baffle surfaces have been modified for a qualitative improvement which genuinely pleases and encourages me.