DIYMobileAudio.com Car Stereo Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Hopefully someone here can help me on if this enclosure needs any adjustments, or will work fairly well as is.

The subwoofer in each side calls for the following:
Recommended ported volume .75 - 1 cf Enclosure is currently at .86 cf with port area excluded
Recommended port area: 10.5 inch sq Current port is 8.25" x 1.25" x 17" Length
Recommended Tuning Freq: 39 hz This is what I am really wanting some people to confirm if this port setup is close to 39hz


I do not have any room to increase box outside dimensions. So hopefully, if it does need any adjustment, it can just be going smaller or adjusting port dimensions/length.

Any help would be appreciated greatly. This is my first attempt to make a custom sized ported enclosure to fit into a very niche' space.

 

· Registered
2010 Jeep JK / 2005 Volvo S60R / 1991 Volvo 744TI SE
Joined
·
158 Posts
Which sub are you planning on using?

Quick and dirty model using the Kicker 78CWR84 in a 0.86cu.ft. enclosure @ 39Hz, wants a port 8.25" X 1.25" X 18.51". If you change the port from 1.25" to 1.156" (1 and 5/32") you get a length of 17.02".

Rectangle Slope Font Parallel Screenshot
Rectangle Font Parallel Slope Technology
Rectangle Slope Font Parallel Screenshot
Rectangle Font Slope Parallel Screenshot
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Which sub are you planning on using?

Quick and dirty model using the Kicker 78CWR84 in a 0.86cu.ft. enclosure @ 39Hz, wants a port 8.25" X 1.25" X 18.51". If you change the port from 1.25" to 1.156" (1 and 5/32") you get a length of 17.02".
I made a change in my decision on which sub I am using and purchasing. So here is the new information and new sub box. Let me know how you think this will work.

I am now using a Skar Audio SDR-12
Specs for the sub are:
Ported Enclosure Volume: 1.75 - 2.0 cu ft. without port/bracing volume
Recommended Port Area: 25in sq
Recommended Tuning: 34-36hz

My enclosure is 2.0cu ft
Port size is: 6 3/4" x 3 15/16" x 24 3/4" (for 34hz)

So I followed the manufacturer's recommendations on size and port (i think i have the port length correct using an online port length calculator)

You can see from the new box design it is down firing. I am not sure if that will really have any effect on changes needed to the box calculations at all?
Additionally I have about 1 1/4" from the top of the sub's magnet/port to the top of the box. This should be enough space? I don't have any wiggle room here really.


Thanks
 

· Registered
2010 Jeep JK / 2005 Volvo S60R / 1991 Volvo 744TI SE
Joined
·
158 Posts
Red is the DV-2 version pretty much as you have it (software wants the port to be 26.59"). Oange is with a few minor tweaks: 6.75" x 2.25" x 24.74" port, tuning frequency of 27Hz. Keep in mind these are rough runs, not. accounting for power/excursion and assuming the TS params on Skar's website can be trusted/are accurate (not necessarily a good assumption). For kicks, the blue is a Dayton RSS210HO-4 in your original box.

Rectangle Slope Font Parallel Screenshot
Rectangle Font Personal computer Parallel Technology
Rectangle Slope Font Parallel Screenshot
Rectangle Font Parallel Screenshot Technology
Rectangle Slope Font Parallel Software
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Red is the DV-2 version pretty much as you have it (software wants the port to be 26.59"). Oange is with a few minor tweaks: 6.75" x 2.25" x 24.74" port, tuning frequency of 27Hz. Keep in mind these are rough runs, not. accounting for power/excursion and assuming the TS params on Skar's website can be trusted/are accurate (not necessarily a good assumption). For kicks, the blue is a Dayton RSS210HO-4 in your original box.

View attachment 332852 View attachment 332853 View attachment 332851 View attachment 332850 View attachment 332854
Appreciate your help. Since I am fairly a noob at this, I really don't know how to interpret the graphs. So any clear conclusions or advice on your end on what is "performing" better.

Thanks
 

· Registered
2010 Jeep JK / 2005 Volvo S60R / 1991 Volvo 744TI SE
Joined
·
158 Posts
Since I am fairly a noob at this, I really don't know how to interpret the graphs. So any clear conclusions or advice on your end on what is "performing" better.
That depends on what your goals are for the system (be loud, better quality, etc.)? How much power is being fed to the sub (make/model of amp) and are you going to use a DSP and/or is this part of a bigger system or just an add-on to a stock system?

Generally speaking, the shape of the orange and blue graphs are closest to what some would consider ideal...but that depends on what you're looking to do and can change on the other factors (filters needed to control cone excursion, hence the need to know the amp/power being used).
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I was planning on using a Skar Audio RP-800.1 Amp.

Rated at 600RMS at 2ohms (trying not to stress an alternator at all)

It is being added to an otherwise stock sound system in my Audi
 
1 - 7 of 7 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