enclosure for 0ffronty

[DbDesigns]

@05fronty


a little under 2.5 cu ft per chamber, tuned to 30hz. 13.5 sq inches of port per cu ft.
I went with this design because I know that it works very well in ext cab trucks, thats why I am implementing it in the danger ranger. comments?

[DbDesigns]

title fial.

[Falcons]

Looks simple enough to get the job done!

[CAT MAN]

@05fronty


a little under 2.5 cu ft per chamber, tuned to 30hz. 13.5 sq inches of port per cu ft.
I went with this design because I know that it works very well in ext cab trucks, thats why I am implementing it in the danger ranger. comments?

please tell me you know 13.5^2in is freaking tiny for a slot

[DbDesigns]

please tell me you know 13.5^2in is freaking tiny for a slot

13.55 per cube, he wants loud to the ear but to also retain some good sound. not all of us are meter chasers tony... lol

[Kangaroux]

please tell me you know 13.5^2in is freaking tiny for a slot

Doesn't matter, the subs don't need much port area. Nick from obsidian has done testing on it as well as myself and they don't need much port.

[Sonic.]

Looks good !

[CAT MAN]

13.55 per cube, he wants loud to the ear but to also retain some good sound. not all of us are meter chasers tony... lol

BS or you wouldnt be in Ca. lol

[DbDesigns]

BS or you wouldnt be in Ca. lol

lulz.

[kushy_dreams]

I would have done a 6 or 8in round port with a v behind it.

How is the builder supposed to make that concave piece at the back of the port, why not just 45s?

[DbDesigns]

I would have done a 6 or 8in round port with a v behind it.

How is the builder supposed to make that concave piece at the back of the port, why not just 45s?

sonotube and fiberglass. he said no aeros. so I did a slot. if he doesnt want to do the sonotube method I can swap it out for 45s with a few clicks...

[Kangaroux]

I would have done a 6 or 8in round port with a v behind it.

How is the builder supposed to make that concave piece at the back of the port, why not just 45s?

Lot of times stuff like that is just for looks on the design, though I agree

[quackhead]

@05fronty


a little under 2.5 cu ft per chamber, tuned to 30hz. 13.5 sq inches of port per cu ft.
I went with this design because I know that it works very well in ext cab trucks, thats why I am implementing it in the danger ranger. comments?

I personally have avoided that type of design. Looking at the bottom pic, it looks like the dark brown thingy is creating a choke point right at the entrance to the combined section of the ports. If you were to use a piece of pvc piping there in the interior corners to identically replicate the radius on each side of the brown thingy, then it would look ok to me. Actually by glassing in a length of piping from the speaker side of the ports sounds like a very good idea with your design. Or, maybe using 2 pieces of wood and creating a triangle in place of the curved brown thingy and '45 ing the interior corners of the ports to perfectly match would work too.

My point is, at a glance, it looks like you are going to be tuning the ports pre maturely where they combine into one port section. I like my ports to be perfect dimensions throughout the entire length of the port without any restrictions that will alter the resonant frequency, this includes dowel pins as well. The atmospheric pressures in both chambers fluctuating in unison, combined with the atmospheric pressure inside the port, should be enough to counter act any suspected flex in the interior port walls.

Looks good though, Ranger man......just my .02... lol

[DbDesigns]

final sketch.

[dbeez]

Not digging that for an ext. Cab truck at all.