Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
This chart displays the relationship between odd shaped subwoofers and circle subwoofers. You may know the triangle and pentagon subwoofers from Bazooka and Xtant, respectively, and the 24" square subwoofer as the new MTX Jackhammer.
----------------------
Pentagon
One Subwoofer
Diameter of Cone | Cone Area in square inches
10" ---> 74
---------------------
Pentagon
Two Subwoofers
X Subwoofer | Circle Subwoofer Equivalent of 2X Subwoofers
10" ---> 13.5"
--------------------
Pentagon
Three Subwoofers
X Subwoofer | Circle Subwoofer Equivalent of 3X Subwoofers
10" ---> 15"/18" (between the two)
--------------------
Pentagon
Four Subwoofers
X Subwoofer | Circle Subwoofer Equivalent of 4X Subwoofers
10" ---> 18"/21" (between the two)
--------------------
Triangle
One Subwoofer
Diameter of Cone | Cone Area in square inches
10" ---> 48
12" ---> 86
--------------------
Triangle
Two Subwoofers
X Subwoofer | Circle Subwoofer Equivalent of 2X Subwoofers
10" ---> 11"
12" ---> 15"
--------------------
Triangle
Three Subwoofers
X Subwoofer | Circle Subwoofer Equivalent of 3X Subwoofers
10" ---> 13.5"
12" ---> 18"
--------------------
Triangle
Four Subwoofers
X Subwoofer | Circle Subwoofer Equivalent of 4X Subwoofers
10" ---> 15"
12" ---> 21"
--------------------
Square
One Subwoofer
Diameter of Cone | Cone Area in square inches
8" ---> 64
10" ---> 100
12" ---> 144
15" ---> 225
18" ---> 324
24" ---> 576
--------------------
Square
Two Subwoofers
X Subwoofer | Circle Subwoofer Equivalent of 2X Subwoofers
8" ---> 12"/13.5"
10" ---> 15"
12" ---> 18"
15" ---> 24"
--------------------
Square
Three Subwoofers
X Subwoofer | Circle Subwoofer Equivalent of 3X Subwoofers
8" ---> 15"
10" ---> 18"/21"
--------------------
Square
Four Subwoofers
X Subwoofer | Circle Subwoofer Equivalent of 4X Subwoofers
8" ---> 18"
10" ---> 22"
12" ---> 34"
--------------------
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
2 15's is considerably larger than 1 21".
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CHEMMINS
2 15's is considerably larger than 1 21".
That was one of the ones I was iffy about. It's about 40 cubic inches difference, which is about 10% marginal error. I don't think that it would be audible?
Thanks for the input! Anyone else feel free to help improve this!
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CHEMMINS
2 15's is considerably larger than 1 21".
And four 10's is pretty much exactly the same sd as one 18, not one 21.
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RAM_Designs
And four 10's is pretty much exactly the same sd as one 18, not one 21.
4 10's would be 314......no?
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CHEMMINS
4 10's would be 314......no?
I'm just going off of Fi's specs. 1240cm^2 for the four 10's and 1210cm^2 for the 18.
OP: If you're going to do the whole pi(r^2) thing, take 3" off of each normal-sized woofer's diameter since you have the mounting ring and surround on each side to consider when looking for a somewhat accurate idea of the cone size.
Or just look around for normal sd measurements on different size woofers.
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
so 2 8s same as 1 12? gona do 4 8s instead of my 4 12s.looks like im gona lack the cone area i guess
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RAM_Designs
And four 10's is pretty much exactly the same sd as one 18, not one 21.
79*4=316
18"=254
21"=346
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RAM_Designs
I'm just going off of Fi's specs. 1240cm^2 for the four 10's and 1210cm^2 for the 18.
OP: Sd isn't just a flat thing that you can measure by looking at the radius of a woofer, cone angle comes into play as well. And if you're going to do the whole pi(r^2) thing, take 3" off of each normal-sized woofer's diameter since you have the mounting ring an surround on each side to consider when looking for a somewhat accurate idea of the cone size.
Or just look around for normal sd measurements on different size woofers.
Alright buddy, you're making things waaaay too technical :) Like I said in the title, the measurements are not exact.
You are going by the cone area of a specific subwoofer, whose basket is measured to be 8/10/12/15/18". My chart compares ACTUAL cone area, so it rules out angle, surround width, etc.
If I measured your way, I would be required to put every single sub ever made in existence, separately, on this chart. I'm sorry bruh, but I don't have the time for that lol
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Quote:
Originally Posted by
1mtx1
so 2 8s same as 1 12? gona do 4 8s instead of my 4 12s.looks like im gona lack the cone area i guess
Nope :/ 2 8s is similar to 11". The marginal error of 2 8s to 1 12 is about 13%. Honestly though, that's not gunna be an audible difference, but still.
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Troll Face
Nope :/ 2 8s is similar to 11". The marginal error of 2 8s to 1 12 is about 13%. Honestly though, that's not gunna be an audible difference, but still.
so i should b ok then. im gona do 4 8s tune to 32 instead of 4 12s sealed. the power will b the same i just will b doing four lower rms subs that will see close to there rated power where my 12s where seeing about half there rated power with my curent amp. thanks good write up might i add my luv
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Quote:
Originally Posted by
1mtx1
so i should b ok then. im gona do 4 8s tune to 32 instead of 4 12s sealed. the power will b the same i just will b doing four lower rms subs that will see close to there rated power where my 12s where seeing about half there rated power with my curent amp. thanks good write up might i add my luv
Yeah, good idea. It's fun to showoff to all the caraudio noobs you know, then tell them you're running 8's :)
Thanks! It took hours upon hours, so I'm glad at least someone appreciates it...
Re: Cone Area Relation Chart
Updated the first and second posts to include the Jackhammer 22" (first post), and the square, pentagon, and triangle subwoofers. Again, feel free to critique!
Tomorrow, or whenever I find time next, I will go through and display the marginal error for every equivalence comparison. Other than that, I think that pretty much covers it!