The Performer Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 It was 1.85 cu.ft for all 3 subs. I'm settin the challenge of getting max sound out on min space.I know on Sound Sol forum they say 15 inch^2 of port area, but i dunno if that'd be 45 for 3 subs... Man, that's hella small for those... I really don't know what to tell you, the times I used that calculator was just for single subs. I say just play with the calculator on that link I gave you and keep double checking here, I know alot of the guys on here will be able to tell you if you're spot on or not. Good luck Quote CERTIFIED BITCHES!!! Not being new at something doesn't mean anything. Just because a prostitute isn't new at what she does, doesn't change the fact that she still 'sucks' Click to see my build! Proud DC owner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eskii Posted July 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Yeah, if that is total cubes for all 3 then he might have to go with a dirty word *GASP* ....sealed. Ha, yeah, i've always had sealed, so time for something different. Fi recommend 0.5 cu.ft min for a ported BL 10, so it's not too extreme wat i'm doin. Especially coz i'm overpowering them Quote Previous: 1988 Nissan Patrol Rockford T800.4 Rockford T1 15 (sealed) Rockford 6.5 Components Current: 1997 Jeep Wrangler Build goals... 1x RF P300.2 4x Hertz HCX165's Built Completes Alpine 9886 Headunit RF P300.2 RF P500-1bd 2x RF P2-D2 8" Subs, 1.3 cubes @39.5Hz 4x Hertz HCX130's Current comment... Satisfied for the moment, focusing on performance upgrades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eskii Posted July 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 You tune a port for the box, not for the subs. It wouldn't matter if you have 3 subs in that box or 1, the tune would be the same if the internal volume and port size & length were the same.....So- I think you would be better off with all 3 sealed or just 1 ported. Just because you can stuff the speakers in there doesn't mean it will be louder or sound better. But wouldn't the amount of subs determine the port area, coz there's more air moving. It's all planning at this stage. So i'm just going through my options Quote Previous: 1988 Nissan Patrol Rockford T800.4 Rockford T1 15 (sealed) Rockford 6.5 Components Current: 1997 Jeep Wrangler Build goals... 1x RF P300.2 4x Hertz HCX165's Built Completes Alpine 9886 Headunit RF P300.2 RF P500-1bd 2x RF P2-D2 8" Subs, 1.3 cubes @39.5Hz 4x Hertz HCX130's Current comment... Satisfied for the moment, focusing on performance upgrades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Performer Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Ha, yeah, i've always had sealed, so time for something different.Fi recommend 0.5 cu.ft min for a ported BL 10, so it's not too extreme wat i'm doin. Especially coz i'm overpowering them Eh, I'd still go a bit more to be on the safe side. Quote CERTIFIED BITCHES!!! Not being new at something doesn't mean anything. Just because a prostitute isn't new at what she does, doesn't change the fact that she still 'sucks' Click to see my build! Proud DC owner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eskii Posted July 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Eh, I'd still go a bit more to be on the safe side. I can push it to 2.37 if i go with 3/4 MDF Quote Previous: 1988 Nissan Patrol Rockford T800.4 Rockford T1 15 (sealed) Rockford 6.5 Components Current: 1997 Jeep Wrangler Build goals... 1x RF P300.2 4x Hertz HCX165's Built Completes Alpine 9886 Headunit RF P300.2 RF P500-1bd 2x RF P2-D2 8" Subs, 1.3 cubes @39.5Hz 4x Hertz HCX130's Current comment... Satisfied for the moment, focusing on performance upgrades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Performer Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 I can push it to 2.37 if i go with 3/4 MDF That's a hell of jump... What in the world were you considering on using with the 1.85 cubic volume at first? Quote CERTIFIED BITCHES!!! Not being new at something doesn't mean anything. Just because a prostitute isn't new at what she does, doesn't change the fact that she still 'sucks' Click to see my build! Proud DC owner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eskii Posted July 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 That's a hell of jump... What in the world were you considering on using with the 1.85 cubic volume at first? Well considering each sub will have bout 1.3kw each. I figure it's best to go for smaller volume. Quote Previous: 1988 Nissan Patrol Rockford T800.4 Rockford T1 15 (sealed) Rockford 6.5 Components Current: 1997 Jeep Wrangler Build goals... 1x RF P300.2 4x Hertz HCX165's Built Completes Alpine 9886 Headunit RF P300.2 RF P500-1bd 2x RF P2-D2 8" Subs, 1.3 cubes @39.5Hz 4x Hertz HCX130's Current comment... Satisfied for the moment, focusing on performance upgrades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin - STAPUFT Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 But wouldn't the amount of subs determine the port area, coz there's more air moving. It's all planning at this stage. So i'm just going through my options You would have really high port velocity if you port that box either way. The smaller the port the lower the tune. The longer the port the lower the tune. I assume that the 1.85 cubes includes the port? So any port takes up air space along with the sub too. So to get that low tune you need either small port that is short (really high port velocity) or a large port (10-16 square inches per cubic foot of box) with a long length to get the lower tune. That is fine but you only have that 1.85 cubes to work with and the port would start to gobble up your space. So... you get back to the high port velocity again. I have been putting numbers in Bass Box Pro and I just can't make it work with that tune. 3 10s with their displacment, plus a port that is only 12sq inches that is 18 inches long gives a remaining internal space of around 1.4 cubes (less than the recommended) and tunes to about 32-33 hz. That gives a really high vent velocity and poor low end output. I just don't see it happening. But you could proove me wrong- that space is just killing you. Quote 12 - 12"s in the STAY PUFT 1989 Chevy Astro Build & Comment Log Un-Interrupted Build LogYouTube Channel Chevy Trailblazer 5.1 Dolby Digital DTS Install You have a beard of a mysterious sea captain. I would follow you to hell and back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eskii Posted July 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Ha, yeh. It really is killing me. Wranglers aren't the best for serious bass. I can get 2.1 cubes with the 3/4 MDF, not including port. I'm doing some CAD designs now, so i'll show you whe i'm done with them Quote Previous: 1988 Nissan Patrol Rockford T800.4 Rockford T1 15 (sealed) Rockford 6.5 Components Current: 1997 Jeep Wrangler Build goals... 1x RF P300.2 4x Hertz HCX165's Built Completes Alpine 9886 Headunit RF P300.2 RF P500-1bd 2x RF P2-D2 8" Subs, 1.3 cubes @39.5Hz 4x Hertz HCX130's Current comment... Satisfied for the moment, focusing on performance upgrades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eskii Posted July 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Here's what ive got. The port is 15 cu.inch and 15.6 long. tuned to 32Hz. Net Volume is now at 2.05 cu.ft. Quote Previous: 1988 Nissan Patrol Rockford T800.4 Rockford T1 15 (sealed) Rockford 6.5 Components Current: 1997 Jeep Wrangler Build goals... 1x RF P300.2 4x Hertz HCX165's Built Completes Alpine 9886 Headunit RF P300.2 RF P500-1bd 2x RF P2-D2 8" Subs, 1.3 cubes @39.5Hz 4x Hertz HCX130's Current comment... Satisfied for the moment, focusing on performance upgrades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.