DiyMobileAudio.com Car Stereo Forum banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
549 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Have always hated the sub in my system. Selected it based upon need for slim design for my vehicle and recommendation on sub and enclosure from someone I trusted as an expert. It has just never integrated well in my system. Always peaky at some frequency, whether configured sealed or ported.

I'm not much of a speaker theory guy, nor much of a fabricator, so the one thing that has remained constant in my sub setup has been the enclosure because I never considered it could be a problem.

Sub is a Pioneer TS-SW3041D slim 12". Never expected miracles from this thing, but it seems to fall apart so quickly when the volume is raised (sealed). Powered at 500W with a JL 500/1. Enclosure is about 1.15 ft^3.

Went back to Pioneer's spec sheet to see a recommendation for 0.8 ft^3, with a range of 0.6 - 1.0. Thought to myself, I wonder if the enclosure could be a little too big for the speaker, so I went to do some modeling in WinISD (first-time modeler).

What I found was interesting. WinISD calculates a 7+ ft^3 sealed box for Qtc of 0.707. For the recommended volumes, Qtc calculates to be around 0.91 - 1.03 which tells me the box is too small within the recommended range and that achieving optimum dampening is impossible.

Is this just the nature of slim subs? Or have I done something wrong in my modeling?

If you had to keep this sub, what size enclosure would you use? Do you think the difference between 0.8 (recommended) and 1.15 (current) is significant and could be a problem?

Specs are as follows:
Revc 3.3
Levc 2.410
Zmax 59.26
Fs 33.1
Qms 11.73
Qes 0.78
Qts 0.73
Vas 0.689
Rms 4.985
Mms 280.15
Cms 8.3x10^-5
Diam 9.7
Sd 74.0
BL 16.65
Xmax 0.26
Hvc 1.07
Hag 0.39

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
549 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top