Jump to content
Sundown Audio

difference between using recommended enclosure specs and smaller or bigger?


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, 1point21gigawatts said:

In this application since it isn’t a wall or something like that, an aero port would be louder and sound better. The ported enclosure I designed for myself was strictly spl because it was designed with a lot of port area and bandwidth wasn’t something I cared about when designing it. I could use a lot of port area in that build because the enclosure only being about 4.6 cubes after displacements on around 6000-8000 rms after rise. But I decided to change to an aero port because in most regular applications an aero port is better and louder because air flows better through a tube than a rectangle or square and the response is better because of that too. But on that spl slot ported enclosure I designed would probably be louder than the aero ported one I designed but not sound nearly as good. But when it comes to your build, an aero port is the best way to go, no doubt.  

if you can make an aeroport design work , then pls go ahead. from what ive read a 6 inch port is needed.. i dont know if it can be done with my max dimensions though..remember that custom zv3 i got has a 10.5 inch depth.  also another thing to keep in mind.. in my car the sub and port back sound best.. if you were to do an aero, the aero would have to be to the side and i dunno how that would sound.

if it cant be done.. then slot port is fine..

 

im leaning towards SLOT port simply because it will be easier to build and i can have the slot and sub facing BACK and that sounds best in my car.

Edited by akuma4u
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 1point21gigawatts said:

But just to let you know, that enclosure you design is excellent. 

thanks.. i had to increase my max dimensions a tad bit so i hope it will fit. i may have to use some crisco and lube the hell out of it to slide it in LOL damn trunk is too tight.

 

all i need is the cut sheet/blueprint so i can send it off to my builder and then i can let u know in a week or so how it turned out.

btw, my current box which does sound pretty good is like this:

current steel box.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, akuma4u said:

thanks.. i had to increase my max dimensions a tad bit so i hope it will fit. i may have to use some crisco and lube the hell out of it to slide it in LOL damn trunk is too tight.

 

all i need is the cut sheet/blueprint so i can send it off to my builder and then i can let u know in a week or so how it turned out.

btw, my current box which does sound pretty good is like this:

current steel box.png

That’s the specs of the enclosure you are using now?

:stupid:“How can we help you?”
:guido:
“And don’t forget to tell them that 
the customer isn’t always right.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just noticed that Torres calculates end correction factors port width plus half of port width instead of just half of port width. Idk why he calculates end correction factors like that. Only half the port is added to the physical length to find the effective length of the port. End correction factoring is added because the end of the port shares a common wall with the enclosure making the subwoofer see a longer port. Only an extra half the width of the port is what the subwoofer sees as port length as long as the end of the port isn’t the width of the port away from the side wall which would add more effective length. I’ll calculate them specs to reference. Because port length is not something to miscalculate.

:stupid:“How can we help you?”
:guido:
“And don’t forget to tell them that 
the customer isn’t always right.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 1point21gigawatts said:

I just noticed that Torres calculates end correction factors port width plus half of port width instead of just half of port width. Idk why he calculates end correction factors like that. Only half the port is added to the physical length to find the effective length of the port. End correction factoring is added because the end of the port shares a common wall with the enclosure making the subwoofer see a longer port. Only an extra half the width of the port is what the subwoofer sees as port length as long as the end of the port isn’t the width of the port away from the side wall which would add more effective length. I’ll calculate them specs to reference. Because port length is not something to miscalculate.

Wait wait b4 u do that i have to tell u. The design was made by a builder who used winisd. He told me the final specs. 3 x 12 width and 37 long for port roughly 33hz and 13.5 x 31 x 17 depth. I took these specs and input them into torres to get an idea of what im dealing with and to show you as well 

Edited by akuma4u
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 371 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...