RPM 5.1 or RPM 3, tonearm quality and esthetics

[muziekfreak]

I want to buy a nice stylish Pro-ject RPM turntable. I doubt between the RPM 3 which will cost me 600 euro and the former RPM 5.1 carbon for 550 euro. The three I find more aestheticly impressive with it's free 'floating' platter and right-angled design for the tonearm and motor.

Apart from the differences in cartridge, 2M red vs silver, weight (5,5 vs 6,5 kg) and mat (vinyl vs cork / felt) i'm specially interested in the two tonearms which seems the main difference between the two decks. The RPM3 has an 10” s-shaped carbon arm of which I don't have a part number, the RPM 5.1 has the 9cc (non EVO) 9" straight carbon. This tonearm has sold by Pro-ject separately in the past for around 750 euro, now you can find it for around 500.
I found some info about the RPM 3 tonearm in this small thread: https://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_f ... 42&t=84949.

This fact alone (and the threads about the 9cc here) makes me think that this tonearm is way better then the one in the RPM3, but is that really the case? And if so, how much better is it? Can you estimate that in some way? Or maybe the RPM3 is better in other aspects?

[muziekfreak]

Anyone?

[Hawkeye62]

I went from a Project rpm 1 to an rpm 5.1 with the old tonearm, and then to an rpm 5 carbon with 9cc tonearm. I also improved the cartridge each time too, but each step up was a clear improvement. I'd recommend the RPM 5 Carbon.

The 9cc is good enough for Linn to fit it to the LP12. Nuff said

[muziekfreak]

Thanks for your reply, in the meantime I bought a second hand RPM 3. I'm happy with it.