Vintage vs New

I'm sorry, but the Tekton Double  Impact looks as if it would sound truly horrible.  What is it:  A Bose 901 based on tweewers, rather than midranges, plus a bunch of subs? Jeez!  No one needs all of those 14  tweeters, unless he can't design one to take more than a watt or so. I will bet that with the 8 subs, one with a bit of midrange thrown in, does have at least double impact.

Funny back in the 70s my 901s were killer.JBL 100s still go for crazy prices.Carver Amps,Rotel,Macintosh still hold there own.Everything has a place .Sure new speakers .But back then you could get top of the line for hundreds not thousands. 

@mijostyn states: 'you aught to know by now I don't pull punches'   It seems you don't pull your toilet chain either!

Get a plumber to fit a new one and try and keep it clean. Basic hygiene?

I love vintage speakers.  Problem is there are many things that can age in a speaker.  I worked for AR (Acoustic Research) in the mid 1970's.  I bought some 10pi speakers in 1980.  I pulled them out a few years back and brought them back to near new shape.  That cost around $500.00, more than I paid for the speakers.

They still sound great, still eat lots of power.  I gave them to a friend of mine to start building his system.

Another thing - Used speakers on eBay can be a great deal, for what they are.

Vintage has inherent issues with things wearing out. Electrolytic Filter caps for example do not last forever and need to be replaced. Contacts, relays, potentiometers, Lpads all oxidize over time and can cause problems. Some woofer surrounds deteriorate and have to be replaced. Unless you are willing to address ALL such issues rather that employing  a piecemeal approach, vintage is not going to work out in the long run in my opinion.