Bowtie, when you say that you prefer the 902-8A over the 802-8G, do you mean the 902 with the light diaphragm, or with the 34647 diaphragm? Or do you mean in your opinion with either diaphragm the 902's "beat" the 802-8G's with light diaphragms.

Also, does anyone have some kind of description as to what kind of improvement I'm likely to hear if I remove the loading caps on my 902's and install rear covers with felt? Will it be like a toothpaste ad--will they be cleaner and brighter? Or warmer, or roll off at a higher frequency--any or all of the above?
Well, i have to start by saying that the difference that i hear between the 23744 and 34647 diaphragms is NOT significant. My biggest attraction to the "light" diaphragms is in preserving the value and originality of the speakers i own that were originally equipped with them. I do use the lights that came in my 9849's since they have such low hours of total use. But the "lights" from my 604-8G's are shelved to be included in the eventual sale of the 604's. The 34647's sound "just as good" and allow freedom of worry about breaking a non-replaceable part.

To answer your question about the 802 vs 902 in simple terms, the 902 magnet/motor structure, and throat length and angle give a HF extension advantage regardless of the diaphragm used. I've never tried a "light" phragm in a 902, and since it was never a "stock" marriage i'm not inclined to venture down that path.

I think the 902 is best suited to XO's of 1200hz or higher, i haven't heard them in a system crossing them lower, nor would i run them lower myself. That said, low XO's are where the removal of loading caps and damping the covers really makes the most difference. At 1.2k or above, i'd probably just leave the caps in place. But, i encourage you to give it a try and see what your own ears say. It's an easily enough reversed mod.