PDA

View Full Version : Build a box for me $$



bad03ranger
05-30-2008, 07:21 PM
i would like people (with good reps) who would build this box for me to give me a price i would like prices for ported the ports need to be firing out the top of each chamber and need to be 2"ID and 18"long ,using 5/8" MDF for the box unless 3/4 will give me at least .35^ft per sub after Displacement sub is .03 and what ever the port takes up-no terminal cups i will install everything else
http://www.caraudio.com/gallery/4/7/7/1/9/subbox.jpg
give links to builds youve done if avail.

Mr Cabinetry
05-30-2008, 09:20 PM
i would like people (with good reps) who would build this box for me to give me a price i would like prices for ported the ports need to be firing out the top of each chamber and need to be 2"ID and 18"long ,using 5/8" MDF for the box unless 3/4 will give me at least .35^ft per sub after Displacement sub is .03 and what ever the port takes up-no terminal cups i will install everything else
http://www.caraudio.com/gallery/4/7/7/1/9/subbox.jpg
give links to builds youve done if avail.

Just did a re-draft of the enclosure Sketch Up according to the dimensions you provided in the drawing and you have a discrepancy in regards to the front baffle angle.

The out board part where you have 6 3/8" for the TD, if that angle line is extended to the top middle section where you have 4" for the TD is actually 4.4250".

So, the question becomes one of which dimension is the one determining the angle of the baffle? 6 3/8" or 4"?

BTW, did you do that on purpose just see if anyone would catch that mistake???



Phil
Woodlawn Cabinetry

bad03ranger
05-30-2008, 11:34 PM
BTW, did you do that on purpose just see if anyone would catch that mistake???

yeah thats wat i did LOL no i just selected it with measure and thats the length it gave but the 4"td is correct whatever that TD of the wing is what it is

Mr Cabinetry
05-31-2008, 01:47 AM
Well, for that design to yield the spec's you want, 5/8" MDF is what you'll have to use and that will get ya at .44 cu.ft. total volume.

Actually, the enclosure will be slightly over net volume by .019 cu.ft. if were splitting hairs here. Only problem I see is the 2" dia port x 18" firing out the top which will mean the port tube will need an elbow since the height is only 11".

That said, $ 160.00 plus shipping as I am sure as the night is dark, any of the other box builders will say they can do it for less than that.

Phil
Woodlawn Cabinetry

bad03ranger
05-31-2008, 11:11 AM
my local shops are giving me a range of $300-$400 and $400-$500 that would kill my budget i have about $600-$700 to spend on the box,subs and wiring

Mr Cabinetry
05-31-2008, 04:58 PM
Here's your enclosure shown as thru view's. The subwoofer is a 8w3v3 done to scale in sketch up to give you a better idea of exactly why a round port can not work for the space involved.

This side & top view thru view shows the subwoofer ( to dimensional scale ) mounted.

As can be seen, even though the top depth would allow for a 2" dia port ( up firing ), there's just not enough space inside to allow the port to come down from the top, make a turn with an elbow and continue across to the side ( either direction ) and make another turn with an elbow to go downward without the subwoofer motor being in the way.

The subwoofer could be moved further down on the front baffle to gain lenght before the first elbow turn clearing the top of the subwoofer. After that turn, the only place to the rest of the port to go would be back in toward the recessed center section.

That could cause a problem to a degree of choking the port restricting the air flow within that confined area of the enclosure. However, given your only using a 2" port, air flow given the cone to excursion displacement of the subwoofer at rated power would most likely make the concern a non issue.

Phil
Woodlawn Cabinetry

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/Side.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/Top.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/FrtRight-1.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/FrtRight.jpg

Goindef154
05-31-2008, 05:03 PM
That looks nice :D

mazda6i07
05-31-2008, 05:15 PM
Talk to mlstrass

low00ranger
05-31-2008, 08:42 PM
Here's your enclosure shown as thru view's. The subwoofer is a 8w3v3 done to scale in sketch up to give you a better idea of exactly why a round port can not work for the space involved.

This side & top view thru view shows the subwoofer ( to dimensional scale ) mounted.

As can be seen, even though the top depth would allow for a 2" dia port ( up firing ), there's just not enough space inside to allow the port to come down from the top, make a turn with an elbow and continue across to the side ( either direction ) and make another turn with an elbow to go downward without the subwoofer motor being in the way.

The subwoofer could be moved further down on the front baffle to gain lenght before the first elbow turn clearing the top of the subwoofer. After that turn, the only place to the rest of the port to go would be back in toward the recessed center section.

That could cause a problem to a degree of choking the port restricting the air flow within that confined area of the enclosure. However, given your only using a 2" port, air flow given the cone to excursion displacement of the subwoofer at rated power would most likely make the concern a non issue.

Phil
Woodlawn Cabinetry

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/Side.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/Top.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/FrtRight-1.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/FrtRight.jpg

Is that .44 cubic foot per sub and with or without displacements? Just clarifying.

Also, would it be possible to put a 2 inch round port on each side or a similar rectangular port and put them on each far corner against the bottom and back pieces? For this case it looks like it may be better to go with a 3" x 1.25" or so rectangular port using the bottom and back pieces as port walls and having the shorter part of the port going up and down. Changing the port area like that changed the length a small bit of course, but I'm afraid he would have noticeable port noise with a 2" x 1" rectangular port.

BTW, I recommend Phil to make it.... he produces quality boxes and is obviously on top of things. I know he has done other Ranger boxes too. I've just been helping bad03 on the Ranger forums decide what subs to use, how to get the space he needs, what frequency to tune to, etc. I'm not that great with woodworking so I recommended he ask around here.

Mr Cabinetry
05-31-2008, 10:04 PM
Is that .44 cubic foot per sub and with or without displacements? Just clarifying.

Also, would it be possible to put a 2 inch round port on each side or a similar rectangular port and put them on each far corner against the bottom and back pieces? For this case it looks like it may be better to go with a 3" x 1.25" or so rectangular port using the bottom and back pieces as port walls and having the shorter part of the port going up and down. Changing the port area like that changed the length a small bit of course, but I'm afraid he would have noticeable port noise with a 2" x 1" rectangular port.

BTW, I recommend Phil to make it.... he produces quality boxes and is obviously on top of things. I know he has done other Ranger boxes too. I've just been helping bad03 on the Ranger forums decide what subs to use, how to get the space he needs, what frequency to tune to, etc. I'm not that great with woodworking so I recommended he ask around here.

The enclosure Gross Volume is .44 cu.ft. ( subtract sub and port displacement ) an it will be slightly over .35 cu.ft. Net Volume.

As stated previously, it's possible and I mean possible to put a 2" dia port to the spec's also previously stated, but it would be a royal b!tch to put them in there and to be honest, I'm not overly thrilled that the OP is limiting his option to this port.

It would be far easier and less time consuming just to do a slot port as it would be far better suited to perform the task at hand. Also, I did advise the OP via PM that in using a slot port would required the enclosure design to be modified to account for the additional displacement of the slot port walls.

I can easily overcome the issue by substituting 5/8" mdf for 1/4" & 1/2" mdf to gain back the volume required and in doing so provide more port surface area in the process so the enclosure design will allow for the subwoofer to achieve better performance bass response and output wise.

Now, I know that just about anyone here is going to say using any less ( material thickness waste ) will make for an inferior enclosure as to the performance of the subwoofer.

To be blunt and painful honest, BULLSH!T!!!

I've built my fair share of enclosure using all thickness of materials when the design warrants there usage in order to gain what is required and none, I repeat, NONE of those enclosure's in terms of the customer voicing their concerns or doubts after the fact upon taking delivery of the enclosure and firing it up informed me to the latter the enclosure did perform as expected.

If I had any doubts that using other thickness of mdf to fabricate an enclosure would hinder the enclosure structural integrity or performance, I would not do so, but, I know what the limits are as to what is and what not is possible.

Phil
Woodlawn Cabinetry

PV Audio
05-31-2008, 11:15 PM
In ~.3 cubes ported, those subs will choke to death.

Mr Cabinetry
05-31-2008, 11:56 PM
In ~.3 cubes ported, those subs will choke to death.

And you would know this because your vast knowledge and experience with this particular subwoofer as to how it performs within a specific enclosure design and vehicle is second to none.:rolleyes:

PV Audio
06-01-2008, 12:35 AM
And you would know this because your vast knowledge and experience with this particular subwoofer as to how it performs within a specific enclosure design and vehicle is second to none.:rolleyes::confused: I don't understand what you're getting all bent out of shape for; I just made a truck box for 3 of those guys in .35 cubes net ported, and they honked like I've never seen. Customer said **** it, give them .5 a piece and they sang. IIRC, JL's specs are .3 or .35, but in real life experience, that's on the small side.

Mr Cabinetry
06-01-2008, 01:38 AM
:confused: I don't understand what you're getting all bent out of shape for; I just made a truck box for 3 of those guys in .35 cubes net ported, and they honked like I've never seen. Customer said **** it, give them .5 a piece and they sang. IIRC, JL's specs are .3 or .35, but in real life experience, that's on the small side.

I made the comment given the context of the statement you made. Yeah, the enclosure in terms of volume is on the small side, but well within an " acceptable " tolerance given the limitations of the enclosure design and that's all there is to be had based on what the customer has got for it.

At the most and if I put my mind to it, I could most likely eek out of the design .65 cu.ft. gross volume, but, I would have to make up for the design structure with bracing to minimize any unwanted resonance, thus, I would be right back to the issue of fighting for volume.

However and this is not a stretch in the slightest bit, I could build the entire enclosure with 1/4" MDF to get the volume and porting needed and all I would need to do to keep the structure of the enclosure intact is to have it shot with a coat or two with Duraliner, then it would be both lightweight and d@mn near bulletproof, but would cost a ***** of money for little benefit in bass response and performance.

Now, in my real life experience when it comes to subwoofers and enclosure design is never underestimate just because it " seems " inadequate to the task just because it appears as such.

He!!, I got enclosure for 4 6w0's ported to hit 137 dB's at 38hz on a meter in only .17 cu.ft. net per sub and with only 200 watts, though that may not be impressive to bassheads, it was impressive enough that I sold over 200 enclosures in various design configurations over a 5 year period.

PV Audio
06-01-2008, 02:04 AM
I made the comment given the context of the statement you made. Yeah, the enclosure in terms of volume is on the small side, but well within an " acceptable " tolerance given the limitations of the enclosure design and that's all there is to be had based on what the customer has got for it.

At the most and if I put my mind to it, I could most likely eek out of the design .65 cu.ft. gross volume, but, I would have to make up for the design structure with bracing to minimize any unwanted resonance, thus, I would be right back to the issue of fighting for volume.

However and this is not a stretch in the slightest bit, I could build the entire enclosure with 1/4" MDF to get the volume and porting needed and all I would need to do to keep the structure of the enclosure intact is to have it shot with a coat or two with Duraliner, then it would be both lightweight and d@mn near bulletproof, but would cost a ***** of money for little benefit in bass response and performance.

Now, in my real life experience when it comes to subwoofers and enclosure design is never underestimate just because it " seems " inadequate to the task just because it appears as such.

He!!, I got enclosure for 4 6w0's ported to hit 137 dB's at 38hz on a meter in only .17 cu.ft. net per sub and with only 200 watts, though that may not be impressive to bassheads, it was impressive enough that I sold over 200 enclosures in various design configurations over a 5 year period.
:laugh: Not everyone needs to brace their enclosures for a tsunami impact, although I do respect the level of detail. :)

bad03ranger
06-01-2008, 02:30 AM
:confused: I don't understand what you're getting all bent out of shape for; I just made a truck box for 3 of those guys in .35 cubes net ported, and they honked like I've never seen. Customer said **** it, give them .5 a piece and they sang. IIRC, JL's specs are .3 or .35, but in real life experience, that's on the small side.

i would think and im no pro at car audio but i would guess that a company would do a good bit of R&D before they set a spec for something

chaunb3400
06-01-2008, 02:32 AM
phil FTW!!

bad03ranger
06-01-2008, 02:34 AM
The enclosure Gross Volume is .44 cu.ft. ( subtract sub and port displacement ) an it will be slightly over .35 cu.ft. Net Volume.

As stated previously, it's possible and I mean possible to put a 2" dia port to the spec's also previously stated, but it would be a royal b!tch to put them in there and to be honest, I'm not overly thrilled that the OP is limiting his option to this port.


i do not want to limit myself to a particular port design i was just going by what JL speced the ports to be if another style port would work better and still get me to the 35Hz tune recommended by JL i would be open to it

Mr Cabinetry
06-01-2008, 02:50 AM
:laugh: Not everyone needs to brace their enclosures for a tsunami impact, although I do respect the level of detail. :)

Technically speaking, the enclosure wouldn't require any bracing .... period.

The xmax of these subs given the power they can handle for the enclosure they need, bracing in any form would be a shear waste of volume. I know this, but some people have this notion in their heads that bracing in one form or another is needed.

I didn't perpetuate the bracing requirement, but idiots long ago that saw certain subwoofer companies that built enclosures with bracing and thus it must be that enclosure's as a standard require bracing in some manner.

It's a d@mned if ya do or d@mn if ya don't mentally, people with show their enclosure designs with or without bracing and posers are giving their opinions from all sides.

Well, guess what ---- SCREW'EM. Nobody here or aboard is any great authority on the issue, myself included and therefore the adage - Opinions are like azzholes, everybody has one.

The OP of the thread is the one making the decisions, his concerns and what not are all that matters.

To say what's right or wrong is purely nothing more than points to be argued and debated till he!! freezes over and quite frankly a waste of time, it's like beating a dead horse, been there, done that..... good grief ---- are we there yet!!:noevil:

bad03ranger
06-01-2008, 03:01 AM
my thing is if the enclosure needs bracing in areas by all means brace it if it doesnot need bracing to still be a good solid box and hold up to usage that i see no use in it the way i see it if it doesnt need it dont do more work that needed

Mr Cabinetry
06-01-2008, 03:04 AM
bad03ranger,

Your calling the shots and what you want is what you will get.

I'll have that other thing we discussed done tomorrow ( eh, it is tomorrow already ) later today.

bad03ranger
06-01-2008, 03:14 AM
ok i do like others input b/c i do not know much about this but like i said before if JL recomends something than more than likely its b/c it works best in that application if we can work out this port issue and i like the design we may have a go at it im assuming this is how you pay ur bills and not a side hobby so its kinda what will work best and be the best quality also will you be carpeting the box for the price u gave in ur PM if i get one from you

Mr Cabinetry
06-01-2008, 03:24 PM
I need to know if and what is obstructing the top of the enclosure ( RED ) and at what depth the obstruction comes out over across the top??


http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/BoxDetail.jpg

morgans432
06-01-2008, 03:31 PM
Phil is a great builder and knows his stuff man. You still have to hear my subs in that box man you would like it.

bad03ranger
06-01-2008, 05:37 PM
this is the area that limits me from going above 11" but it sticks out 1.25"
http://www.caraudio.com/gallery/4/7/7/1/9/DSC00287.JPG
this is the maximum TD at 3" above the offset of the rear cab wall
http://www.caraudio.com/gallery/4/7/7/1/9/DSC00286.JPG
wow thats not a great pic the measurement is 2.5" at 14" from the bottom
not sure if i said this before but this is for a 2003 ford ranger

PV Audio
06-01-2008, 05:53 PM
ok i do like others input b/c i do not know much about this but like i said before if JL recomends something than more than likely its b/c it works best in that application if we can work out this port issue and i like the design we may have a go at it im assuming this is how you pay ur bills and not a side hobby so its kinda what will work best and be the best quality also will you be carpeting the box for the price u gave in ur PM if i get one from youSon, I'm not contesting you or JL audio, and with that said, Mr. Cabinetry is one of the best on this site, but the fact of the matter is, I'm stating real world experience. RE doesn't say to give their SE 15 8 cubes tuned to 18hz, but it can make plaster fall off the ceiling while watching Cloverfield in the home theatre. No one is telling you what to do, just relaying experience that might help you in the end.

bad03ranger
06-01-2008, 06:05 PM
Son, I'm not contesting you or JL audio, and with that said, Mr. Cabinetry is one of the best on this site, but the fact of the matter is, I'm stating real world experience. RE doesn't say to give their SE 15 8 cubes tuned to 18hz, but it can make plaster fall off the ceiling while watching Cloverfield in the home theatre. No one is telling you what to do, just relaying experience that might help you in the end.

i understand ur not contesting anything just giving advice and i would prefer u didnt call me son but other than that i realy would like to do this once and not have to keep getting boxes remade im just going off of JL recomended specs i dont have alot of room to play with considering this is a reg cab mini truck im sure im pushing the limits of airspace now using 5/8" MDF im 6'1" tall so i cant loose too much leg room either the specs i gave are at my comfortable driving setting and thats not with seats all the way back

PV Audio
06-01-2008, 06:07 PM
No offense given or taken. :)

And I call everyone son, even though you're 5 years older than me. :)

low00ranger
06-01-2008, 09:06 PM
Phil - that is .35 net per sub, right?

Mr Cabinetry
06-01-2008, 09:33 PM
Phil - that is .35 net per sub, right?

Yeah, .35 cu.ft. net.

bad03ranger changed up the design alittle, but, his and my way of thinking about it sort of crossed over into we both were thinking the same thing and in the process allowed for the enclosure to gain more volume so I can do slot ports to give him alittle more port area than the 2" dia port area.

I'm working of the final revisions of the enclosure as we speak.

bad03ranger
06-01-2008, 10:07 PM
I will check back in around 11 got to watch Jens Pulver take the title from Uriah Faber

Mr Cabinetry
06-02-2008, 12:36 AM
I will check back in around 11 got to watch Jens Pulver take the title from Uriah Faber

Just to update ya on the progress of the enclosure.

The slot port idea is proving to be a really PITA. However, I just had a brain f@rt as to a possible solution but, I won't be able to do anything about it for now till I can go out tomorrow and find what I'm looking for to put this to rest, if I find it at all.

I'll let ya know what I find out tomorrow.

bad03ranger
06-02-2008, 01:53 AM
thanks 4 ur help

BobbyDD
06-02-2008, 02:42 PM
If it won't work well Phil won't build it. He knows his ****.

PV Audio
06-02-2008, 03:31 PM
I mean when all you eat is taco bell and roughage, I'd hope he'd know his **** :D

kovemaster559
06-02-2008, 03:33 PM
I mean when all you eat is taco bell and roughage, I'd hope he'd know his **** :D

ahhahaaaha DIARIA!

PV Audio
06-02-2008, 03:34 PM
OP and MC, sorry about the thread shitting. I'll leave now. :)

Mr Cabinetry
06-02-2008, 05:57 PM
AHAHAHAHAHAH......... I WIN!!!!!!!!

I finally figured the SOB PITA slot port out. After being out and about searching for what I would hope would solve all my ills for this design, I found NADA man, I was totally fr!ggin disgusted and quite annoyed with whole d@mn affair.

I resided myself to the fact that sometimes there's nothing that can be done to overcome a design issue when fighting against every inch of space to make it work, I was going to toss in the towel and give up, concede to defeat that I just couldn't do it.

OHHHHHH..... But I did, I took one more crack at this ******, turned it inside outside, twisted it this way and that way and then it just clicked.

Yeah, I know some " builder critic's " are going to say this and that and pick it apart, BUT, I don't give a ***** because I really don't care what ya say. I beat my head against the wall for 15 hours just to solve this b!tch. if ya can improve on it, be my quest!!


http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/FrontThruView.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/BackThruView.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/FrontFinishedView.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/FrontRemoved.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/BackRemoved.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%20Box%20JL%208w3v3/SideRemoved-Sub-PortDetail.jpg

PV Audio
06-02-2008, 06:10 PM
Creative, I'll give you that. :)

low00ranger
06-02-2008, 07:25 PM
Nice man, nice. You should save this markup for other Ranger people. It seems like every week I see somebody trying to squeeze out reasonable space in a regular cab and this looks like a winning design for those not ignorant to 8's.

bad03ranger
06-02-2008, 08:09 PM
wow looks like a winner to me is the price still the same you quoted me? were you able to squeeze out more port volume

Mr Cabinetry
06-02-2008, 08:18 PM
Nice man, nice. You should save this markup for other Ranger people. It seems like every week I see somebody trying to squeeze out reasonable space in a regular cab and this looks like a winning design for those not ignorant to 8's.

I save every design I do for future reference. And given the amount of time I sweated over this design just to get the slot ports to work and fit, it's already on a backup drive.

The only thing I don't know is what model year ranger this is for??

Mr Cabinetry
06-02-2008, 09:24 PM
wow looks like a winner to me is the price still the same you quoted me? were you able to squeeze out more port volume

The price increased on this to $ 175.00 plus shipping. For the amount of time I invested just in the design work alone, I gotta charge something.

Yes, the port is 1 x 5 = 5 sq.in. of port area. So with that size port given the dimensions of the enclosure I was able to increase the net volume to .507 cu.ft. and with the rms of that sub @ 250 watts, there will be no port noise.

Here's the deal though, in order to achieve those goals of the design, the entire enclosure will be built with 3/8" MDF and with the slot port as shown/designed, it is acting as bracing as well so there is no need to be concerned about the enclosure not being structurally sound.

If I didn't think it wouldn't hold up, I wouldn't of designed it as such.

Phil

Mr Cabinetry
06-02-2008, 09:35 PM
Nice man, nice. You should save this markup for other Ranger people. It seems like every week I see somebody trying to squeeze out reasonable space in a regular cab and this looks like a winning design for those not ignorant to 8's.

Low,

I actually have 4 other enclosure's that would fit in that space behind the seats of a Ranger that are less in depth than what I designed here for 2 8w3v3 ported.

The reason Ranger owners don't know about them is because they were designed to fit behind the rear seat of the Chevy Avalanche, but they would be just as at home be the seat of Ranger Standard Cab.

The other reason folks won't like them is there designed for ED subwoofers.

bad03ranger
06-02-2008, 09:57 PM
The price increased on this to $ 175.00 plus shipping. For the amount of time I invested just in the design work alone, I gotta charge something.

Yes, the port is 1 x 5 = 5 sq.in. of port area. So with that size port given the dimensions of the enclosure I was able to increase the net volume to .507 cu.ft. and with the rms of that sub @ 250 watts, there will be no port noise.

Here's the deal though, in order to achieve those goals of the design, the entire enclosure will be built with 3/8" MDF and with the slot port as shown/designed, it is acting as bracing as well so there is no need to be concerned about the enclosure not being structurally sound.

If I didn't think it wouldn't hold up, I wouldn't of designed it as such.

Phil
ok the price is good and the ^ft is that per sub after displacement and if for some reason 3/8" does not hold up what kind of warranty do you have for ur boxes i understand using under normal every day use i know i cant stand on the box

Mr Cabinetry
06-02-2008, 10:40 PM
ok the price is good and the ^ft is that per sub after displacement and if for some reason 3/8" does not hold up what kind of warranty do you have for ur boxes i understand using under normal every day use i know i cant stand on the box

My warranty is I stand behind what I build to the degree the integrity of enclosure is structurally sound to withstand usage under normal conditions the enclosure is design for given the subwoofer being used in it.

If for any reason the construction of the enclosure fails to due inadequate fabrication, I will either replace the enclosure or refund the costs under condition of the enclosure has to be shipped back to me for visual inspection to determine if failure was caused by my hand or caused in some other manner and picture document the cause of said " failure ".

I will not merely take someones word that the enclosure failed and they want there money back without me see for myself what the problem is as to if I am at fault or not.

I will not stand behind what I just stated if the enclosure is damaged in shipping, that's why pay for insurance for every enclosure I ship to protect both me and the customer.

Thankfully, I can say that to date, I have never had a customer contact me due to an enclosure behind delivered in a damage state. I ship my enclosure's in double wall corrugated cardboard boxes I make myself from sheet stock cardboard and open cell foam blocking for the packing material.

But, I can assure you that when I build an enclosure, it will not come apart, at least not on it's own, I haven't had one fail yet out of the thousands I've built since 1995.

bad03ranger
06-02-2008, 10:57 PM
My warranty is I stand behind what I build to the degree the integrity of enclosure is structurally sound to withstand usage under normal conditions the enclosure is design for given the subwoofer being used in it.

If for any reason the construction of the enclosure fails to due inadequate fabrication, I will either replace the enclosure or refund the costs under condition of the enclosure has to be shipped back to me for visual inspection to determine if failure was caused by my hand or caused in some other manner and picture document the cause of said " failure ".

I will not merely take someones word that the enclosure failed and they want there money back without me see for myself what the problem is as to if I am at fault or not.

I will not stand behind what I just stated if the enclosure is damaged in shipping, that's why pay for insurance for every enclosure I ship to protect both me and the customer.

Thankfully, I can say that to date, I have never had a customer contact me due to an enclosure behind delivered in a damage state. I ship my enclosure's in double wall corrugated cardboard boxes I make myself from sheet stock cardboard and open cell foam blocking for the packing material.

But, I can assure you that when I build an enclosure, it will not come apart, at least not on it's own, I haven't had one fail yet out of the thousands I've built since 1995.
that sounds good to me. So as u stand now on this design this would be the finished product right? and also I do not need terminal cups on this enclosure. also with this port design what does that make the box tuned at

PV Audio
06-02-2008, 11:15 PM
3/8" MDF exists? That **** would be PRIME for some home audio enclosures. Even .5" MDF chokes off small 2-3" drivers. Where could I gemme summadat?

Mr Cabinetry
06-02-2008, 11:29 PM
that sounds good to me. So as u stand now on this design this would be the finished product right? and also I do not need terminal cups on this enclosure. also with this port design what does that make the box tuned at

As it stand now, that design is the finished product, unless you wish to change it.

That port is tuned to what you wanted - 35 hz.

Mr Cabinetry
06-02-2008, 11:36 PM
3/8" MDF exists? That **** would be PRIME for some home audio enclosures. Even .5" MDF chokes off small 2-3" drivers. Where could I gemme summadat?

Well, I get it my distributor over in Jersey. I would say that most lumber yards within your area are buying from one local distributor that handles a board regional area.

Also, you may want to looking into cabinet shops in your area and ask them where they get their sheet materials from.

Best bet would be to search the net for MDF Distributors in your area.

bad03ranger
06-02-2008, 11:48 PM
As it stand now, that design is the finished product, unless you wish to change it.

That port is tuned to what you wanted - 35 hz.
i may need to change the cut out for the fan but every thing else is just like i want
im waiting to hear back from the people that make the fan im going to get i will let u know this thing looks sweeeeeet
PM with particulars on ordering

low00ranger
07-16-2008, 12:46 PM
How is this coming along?

Mr Cabinetry
07-16-2008, 01:07 PM
How is this coming along?

His enclosure had to be trashed and is in the process of a new enclosure being built.

The reason for the enclosure being tossed is due in part that the wood glue I presently use ( I buy in 5 gallon pale ) is defective. The manufacturer of the glue had a bad batch run and was recalled after numerous other customers complained that the " bond " of the glue had " weak bond joints ".

And for the record and to squash any rumors.

This wood glue is not a retail available, it is only sold for commercial use: meaning it is not sold in HD, Lowes or any other store that sells wood glues.

I buy my glue thru my distributor where I buy my materials and this is my first time using this product and unfortunately this enclosure was first with this glue and thats why I trashed it and now I use only TITEBOND WOODWORKERS GLUE.

low00ranger
07-16-2008, 01:52 PM
His enclosure had to be trashed and is in the process of a new enclosure being built.

The reason for the enclosure being tossed is due in part that the wood glue I presently use ( I buy in 5 gallon pale ) is defective. The manufacturer of the glue had a bad batch run and was recalled after numerous other customers complained that the " bond " of the glue had " weak bond joints ".

And for the record and to squash any rumors.

This wood glue is not a retail available, it is only sold for commercial use: meaning it is not sold in HD, Lowes or any other store that sells wood glues.

I buy my glue thru my distributor where I buy my materials and this is my first time using this product and unfortunately this enclosure was first with this glue and thats why I trashed it and now I use only TITEBOND WOODWORKERS GLUE.

OUCH.

Man, I was looking forward to pictures of this. And the manufacturer's error means less profit for you on affected boxes you've built :furious:

Buck
07-16-2008, 01:53 PM
pm: psych0ticnemes1

iamamp3pimp
07-16-2008, 02:03 PM
i dont like changing brands for that very reason

Mr Cabinetry
07-16-2008, 02:43 PM
OUCH.

Man, I was looking forward to pictures of this. And the manufacturer's error means less profit for you on affected boxes you've built :furious:

There still will be picks of the build for this enclosure.

As for enclosure's built being effected by the " glue debacle ", this enclosure was the only one. I'm not that gullible though because with anything " new " I limit my " liability factor " by doing " test shots " which proved " favorable " in the " joint bond " so I only did this one enclosure with the glue and then that's when my distributor contacted me to inform me of the issue's other were having.

So, I'm only out what I put into this one enclosure, but, no other enclosure's were built with this glue, so, even though, I lost time and money on one customer it could of been worse to lose a sh!tload of time and money on alot of enclosures.

As for the money, my distributor made up for it :)

So, now all builds are to be done with TITEBOND, but this is only because I can longer find ProBond Woodworkers Glue where I used to be able to purchase it. I'll have to call Elmers to find out what retailers also sell it.

Mr Cabinetry
07-16-2008, 02:49 PM
i dont like changing brands for that very reason

I only changed because I could no longer find ProBond Woodworkers Glue where I was able to buy it, but I called Elmers and they told me Ace & Tru Value Retailers are still selling it, I just have to call around to find what store locations near me may or may not stock it.

I'm not a big fan of Titebond wood glues only because some years ago their products had similar issue's and I'm not saying they do now, but, that is why I always used Elmers Wood Glue Products and if I can get Probond again, that's what I will build with.

bad03ranger
07-17-2008, 02:51 PM
OUCH.

Man, I was looking forward to pictures of this. And the manufacturer's error means less profit for you on affected boxes you've built :furious:

thats what i said but hey ***** happens its cool though

Mr Cabinetry
08-08-2008, 10:31 PM
http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%202%208w3v3%20Ported/139.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%202%208w3v3%20Ported/140.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%202%208w3v3%20Ported/141.jpg

Build Pic's:

http://s29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/MrCabinetry/Ranger%202%208w3v3%20Ported/

iamamp3pimp
08-09-2008, 01:18 AM
well ill be ****ed.

how in the hell did you carpet that thing? - it looks amazing

mobeious
08-09-2008, 10:21 AM
eh i dont see that encloser working to well... but hey what do i know... guess we will see

Mr Cabinetry
08-09-2008, 10:42 AM
eh i dont see that encloser working to well... but hey what do i know... guess we will see

I'll wait till the verdict comes in from the jury.

Mr Cabinetry
08-09-2008, 10:43 AM
well ill be ****ed.

how in the hell did you carpet that thing? - it looks amazing

Patience, lots of patience.

bad03ranger
08-09-2008, 11:31 AM
eh i dont see that encloser working to well... but hey what do i know... guess we will see

why do you say that

its tuned to 35Hz like JL specs say and just a bit bigger on ^3ft than they recomend

i think it was .5 AFTER dis. is that right Phil

kpozr2
08-09-2008, 11:36 AM
Wow. That looks amazing. Good Job!

Mr Cabinetry
08-09-2008, 11:55 AM
why do you say that

its tuned to 35Hz like JL specs say and just a bit bigger on ^3ft than they recomend

i think it was .5 AFTER dis. is that right Phil

Wayne,

After subwoofer and port displacement, the net volume is EXACTLY . 51 cu.ft.

Listen, I'm not going to get into a pizzin contest with what who says " will or will not sound good " given their basing that opinion " solely " on the design.

Wayne, you'll be the judge and only you, once the subs are in the box and installed in the truck and fire it up and tweak the system settings - then and only then your going to be satisfied or not.

bad03ranger
08-09-2008, 12:04 PM
Wayne,

After subwoofer and port displacement, the net volume is EXACTLY . 51 cu.ft.

Listen, I'm not going to get into a pizzin contest with what who says " will or will not sound good " given their basing that opinion " solely " on the design.

Wayne, you'll be the judge and only you, once the subs are in the box and installed in the truck and fire it up and tweak the system settings - then and only then your going to be satisfied or not.

thats true im saying itll sound good b/c its designed based off JL spec sheets for the port area which i think is a lilltle larger than JL speced and also .16^3ft larger than speced

if i doesnt sound good it will be of my own fault b/c this is how i wanted the box, i wanted a ported box in a reg cab ranger, with a place for my amp-and thats what it is

is there such a thing as a brek-in period or should i just play normal music at normal levels for a week then go to test tones and bass CDs

Rashaddd
08-09-2008, 12:08 PM
:wow:

nice box man, seriously.

you got some skillzzzzz

Mr Cabinetry
08-09-2008, 12:24 PM
thats true im saying itll sound good b/c its designed based off JL spec sheets for the port area which i think is a lilltle larger than JL speced and also .16^3ft larger than speced

if i doesnt sound good it will be of my own fault b/c this is how i wanted the box, i wanted a ported box in a reg cab ranger, with a place for my amp-and thats what it is

is there such a thing as a brek-in period or should i just play normal music at normal levels for a week then go to test tones and bass CDs

Wayne,

IMO, this box should sound good for the subs, the port is " alittle " on the "wack" side of design given for how it had to be to fit for the tuning you wanted. Personally speaking, in the manner in which air moves or should I say is " excited " by the excursion of the subwoofer is a non factor as to how it's going to sound.

I don't recall how many watts each sub will be operating at, but, I can say this much, for the port area they are @ 300 watts is still well below the point when port noise would start to occur.

I made " d@mn sure " all corners that needed to be rounded over " were " rounded over before I put it together. All Joints are a as tight as 13 yr old virgin and the only thing that can/could screw them up is the FEDEX driver " dropping the box ".

mobeious
08-09-2008, 12:37 PM
ok dont get me wrong the craftmen ship of the box is great takes some skills to build a box like that... i just dont think u will get the full potential of those subs with that box design...... there is a lil more to box design then just makeing something fit

Mr Cabinetry
08-09-2008, 12:53 PM
ok dont get me wrong the craftmen ship of the box is great takes some skills to build a box like that... i just dont think u will get the full potential of those subs with that box design...... there is a lil more to box design then just makeing something fit

Yes, true, there is more to design than " making something fit ", however, your basing your opinion on what you " think " and not on " what ya know ".

Just because a design " doesn't look right " does not mean it's not going to perform and function as it should.

The only opinion that matter's here is Wayne's once the it all put together, fired up and tweaked.

mobeious
08-09-2008, 12:57 PM
so how did u come up with the sq of port needed? for that particular design

Mr Cabinetry
08-09-2008, 01:26 PM
so how did u come up with the sq of port needed? for that particular design

How do you determine port area for given design?

Do you base it solely on the accepted " standard set of 12 to 16 sq.in. per cu.ft.? "

If that were the case here, than the port area should be 6 sq.in. minimum - 8 sq.in. maximum.

Or do you base the port area given max wattage applied to determine vent mach of said port to achieve the result which port noise will not occur below the threshold that is acceptable to achieve the function and design goals of the enclosure within the spec's and requirements?

The latter achieves what the customer wanted and is to the specifications and requirements as to design and function.

Not all enclosures are designed for use as " BassHead " applications and the customer is well aware of that, therefore the "assumption " is one that the enclosure will perform and sound like " azz ".

mobeious
08-09-2008, 02:16 PM
actually the port should take reference of the xmax of the driver and VAS of the driver as far as how much power..that would reflect on the size of the box.. and im not a bass head check my thread on diymobileaudio.com

Mr Cabinetry
08-09-2008, 03:03 PM
actually the port should take reference of the xmax of the driver and VAS of the driver as far as how much power..that would reflect on the size of the box.. and im not a bass head check my thread on diymobileaudio.com

The port does take into account the xmax, cone to excursion displacement and power = vent mach.

Now, way back when the arguments, debates and discussions were going on about vent mach, port velocity, laminar flow and all that good goofy business was " what is the acceptable ratio of air movement thru the port?".

The consensus was .20 meters per sec or 65 ft per sec, anything above those numbers was considered " too fa king high " which is total bullsh!t because that would mean the port area takes precedent over any other design element given the max size the enclosure cannot exceed or design limitations the enclosure needs to fit within the install.

However, conforming to the established " NORM's " means " one must adhere to and not deviate and anything other is subject to speculation ".

Specifications, Requirements, Fit, Function and Design = All Covered. Job Done.

Customer = The Final Word.

low00ranger
08-12-2008, 04:52 PM
That box is going to slam and will keep bad03's legroom. This is something you rarely see in a regular cab Ranger - a properly specced and built dual ported box. I just wish I could hear it in person :greedy: