In need of an explanation

[Triticum Agricolam]

As long as the port has enough area to keep port velocities at a reasonable level the shape of the port doesn't make a lot of difference.

The difference between aero ports, slot ports, octo ports, etc mainly comes down to their implementation. Performance wise they all get the job done.

[warhead052]

Well I punched in numbers into torres calculator and 4 4"x10.25" aeros will have 50.24" square inches of port area, but the tuning

frequency is 60hz. 2 4"x10.25" aeros have 25.12" square inches of port area. So smaller aero, even if there's more still means less port area.

[Triticum Agricolam]

You kinda lost me with your last post.

As you add more port area the port/s have to get longer to keep the tuning the same.

[warhead052]

Ohhh see I didn't know that. That makes more sense to me now.

[warhead052]

Okay I plugged in some digits and this is what I came up with. Slightly bigger box but after the ports taking up space it has a much smaller net volume. If
I'm right that should mean it'll play a little louder and maybe move a bit more air. The slot port only has 4 more square inches of port area. Will I notice a loss or gain in sound quality and performance from that? Or should I just try the 4 4inch aeros?

[99blazer]

I would increase the depth to 18. and your port 13.5 X 3.25 and 25inches long that will bring ur tuning to 34hz and 14.2 sq inches of port per foot and I would do 3 common walls

[warhead052]

I think your math might be off a bit. Either that or I did something wrong.

[99blazer]

u got enter the number of common port walls and the displacement of the subs. which I roughly estimated the subs to be about .15 for both and I used 3 common port walls instead of the 2

[warhead052]

Ohhhhh gotcha. Isn't the next volume .5 cubes too big though?

[99blazer]

well you could go back to your original 15x32x16 but do a port 13.5 x 3 and a length of 28. and if you want port in middle you use 2 common port walls or if you want port on side use 3