DLHgn Posted December 30, 2016 Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 That JL box actually looks pretty cool. Never seen a box like that. I like the design where the sub and port face up. The angles on those boards may be a little tricky but hey, if you can do it then do it! My concern would be, like Triticum said, securing your box. If you can figure out a way, and I know you already said you did, to make sure that bad boy is 100% secure then I say go for it! Worse case scenario is you have to make another box because you don't like the way this one sounds as long as you don't blow this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadeTreeMechanic Posted December 30, 2016 Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 I like the third design. Maybe even move it back so it sits against the seat back so it is close to the back window. With sub and port up, it would be able to load against the corner where the roof and window meet. 91 C350 Centurion conversion ( Four Door One Ton Bronco) 250A Alternator (Second Alternator Coming Soon) G65 AGM Up Front / Two G31 AGM in Back Pioneer 80PRS CT Sounds AT125.2 / CT Sounds 6.5 Strato Pro component Front Stage CT Sounds AT125.2 / Lanzar Pro 8" coax w/compression horn tweeter Rear Fill FSD 5000D 1/2 ohm (SoundQubed 7k Coming Soon) Two HDS315 Four Qubes Each 34hz (Two HDC3.118 and New Box Coming Soon) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triticum Agricolam Posted December 30, 2016 Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 I agree with ShadeTree's suggestion and would design the box so that it rests against the back of the seat. You could then fire the port up along the back of the box. "Nothing prevents people from knowing the truth more than the belief they already know it.""Making bass is easy, making music is the hard part."Builds: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdjd Posted December 30, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 Yea I'm leaning toward the third design also. Can't move it back cause I want to be able to hinge down the cup holders that are in the center. I'm concerned with the overall sound but I want my truck fully functional. Do you think it would sound better if I made the overall size larger to the specs of the second design? 6.21cf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdjd Posted January 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 bump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DLHgn Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Sounding better is up to you. It would be a more peaky response. Some people like that and some people don't. To get a better idea of what it will sound like, you need the net volume, not the gross volume. Net volume takes into account driver, bracing, port and misc. displacements. It's the total air space that the driver will see when everything is said and done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadeTreeMechanic Posted January 3, 2017 Report Share Posted January 3, 2017 I wouldn't worry about making it any bigger. That's the least of your worries with the sub and port in the middle of the truck. I would just keep the old setup. You are splitting hairs that become moot, given the compromises being made. You might not notice much of a difference no matter what you do. Interested to see how it turns out. Just my two cents worth. 91 C350 Centurion conversion ( Four Door One Ton Bronco) 250A Alternator (Second Alternator Coming Soon) G65 AGM Up Front / Two G31 AGM in Back Pioneer 80PRS CT Sounds AT125.2 / CT Sounds 6.5 Strato Pro component Front Stage CT Sounds AT125.2 / Lanzar Pro 8" coax w/compression horn tweeter Rear Fill FSD 5000D 1/2 ohm (SoundQubed 7k Coming Soon) Two HDS315 Four Qubes Each 34hz (Two HDC3.118 and New Box Coming Soon) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdjd Posted January 3, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2017 Thanks for the replies as it really helps to hear from people who have been around this for a while. If I made it like the larger design the net volume would be: 4.15cf and if I make it the smaller design the net volume will be 3.56 cf. This is after driver ,port, and all bracing. So which do you think would be best and why? I originally chose the larger design because the net volume would be right in the middle of what AA recommends:3 to 5 cf. Please explain what you mean by peaky. The JL setup I had in there seem to blend with my front stage pretty good but was just lacking overall punch and volume. I don't mind my bass to boom a little. I want to know my bass is there. I think the JL enclosure ended up being a little smaller than what JL recommends so I was hoping to make this set up sound better and get louder. I just never felt the JL setup ever moved much air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DLHgn Posted January 3, 2017 Report Share Posted January 3, 2017 By peaky I mean that if you're looking at a frequency response graph there will be a visible peak in response. This equates to the sub being louder at that peak but keep in mind that cabin gain can change it depending on where the peak is and where your cabin peaks at. If you're really indecisive, you could always make the larger box, and, if you don't like the way it sounds, try and take up internal space. Would be a pain in the ass but you could go that route if you wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.