Port back vs up: The horse is still alive.

[macsdad]

I have a rf t2 12 in a 2cuft box ported at 33hrtz, sub up port back in a hatchback, and i have the box as close to the hatch as possible without it hitting it when i close it. It fuqn pounds, tried it everywhere in the hatch, this placement was the best. ssteele built the box.

[wickedwitt]

If you want it to sound good you need AT LEAST 6 horns under the frame, so everyone in SA can hear you.

[pro-rabbit]

If you want it to sound good you need AT LEAST 6 horns under the frame, so everyone in SA can hear you.

obviously you have not been to heatwave.... that setup would still not be loud enough down there

[gckless]

If you want it to sound good you need AT LEAST 6 horns under the frame, so everyone in SA can hear you.

I was thinkin atleast 6 per side.

obviously you have not been to heatwave.... that setup would still not be loud enough down there

That's how it is around here huh? What a shame. I haven't heard anything like that yet though driving around here.

[wickedwitt]

obviously you have not been to heatwave.... that setup would still not be loud enough down there

I have. I said sound good, not get loud. He needs 24-30 horns to demo at heatwave.

---------- Post added at 10:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:58 AM ----------

That's how it is around here huh? What a shame. I haven't heard anything like that yet though driving around here.

Drive around downtown for a bit, you'll find some gangstas

[stevew007]

sorry but 2 15's do not sound good (sq) in any way.my second thought is if you are not worried about numbers you should worry about looks then! with port back you loose a lot of usable room,you cant do nice trim panels the rear gate will rattle like crazy no matter what you do (with in reason).if you go port back you need alot of room between the port and the hatch to get a good wave and air movement. i can keep going on why not to port back but im sure you get the idea

[wickedwitt]

sorry but 2 15's do not sound good (sq) in any way.

[stevew007]

and i bet that system in your sig "sounds good" hahaha dont get but hurt over it.how many SQ vehicles run 15's? my idea of sounding good and others ideas are far apart. the last system i had that sounded good (FAR FROM SQ) was my wifes eclipse with DD 9510 ported and Memphis big belle turn down the gain for a good even sound.

[dbeez]

Hello. Just thought I would swing by

[wickedwitt]

and i bet that system in your sig "sounds good" hahaha dont get but hurt over it.how many SQ vehicles run 15's? my idea of sounding good and others ideas are far apart. the last system i had that sounded good (FAR FROM SQ) was my wifes eclipse with DD 9510 ported and Memphis big belle turn down the gain for a good even sound.

I don't remember him saying this was an SQ competition system. Yes, they sound wonderful, they are musical. They reproduce the sounds without distortion at high volumes. That's all I ask of them. Size of the driver doesn't automatically tint the reproduction of the sound... Smaller drivers simply take less motor and less power to be accurate. That is the only real difference. Soft part weight has little to do with actual sound. Size under high excursion does offer more chances for cone contortion, which is where the illusion of "big subs can't sound good" comes from. Well designed soft parts will reproduce the same sound in larger cones as they do in smaller.

EDIT: As a matter of fact, I can displace the same amount of air with less excursion than your 9510 did, therefore my subs would be less subject to tonal anomalies.

[gckless]

I don't remember him saying this was an SQ competition system. Yes, they sound wonderful, they are musical. They reproduce the sounds without distortion at high volumes. That's all I ask of them. Size of the driver doesn't automatically tint the reproduction of the sound... Smaller drivers simply take less motor and less power to be accurate. That is the only real difference. Soft part weight has little to do with actual sound. Size under high excursion does offer more chances for cone contortion, which is where the illusion of "big subs can't sound good" comes from. Well designed soft parts will reproduce the same sound in larger cones as they do in smaller.

EDIT: As a matter of fact, I can displace the same amount of air with less excursion than your 9510 did, therefore my subs would be less subject to tonal anomalies.

I'm not competing in anything, just want it to sound good to me. Want my install job to lend itself to make it sound good, not specifically be loud.

[wickedwitt]

I'm not competing in anything, just want it to sound good to me. Want my install job to lend itself to make it sound good, not specifically be loud.

Don't lie, you'll be happy if you don't come across anyone louder than you...

[04murdalanche]

@hispls ; funniest avatar ive seen in a minute lmao

[stevew007]

I'm not competing in anything, just want it to sound good to me. Want my install job to lend itself to make it sound good, not specifically be loud.

my point still stands. if you dont compete worry about looks and usable space. either way you design the box it can be made to sound good to you.

[wickedwitt]

my point still stands. if you dont compete worry about looks and usable space. either way you design the box it can be made to sound good to you.

He will get better quarter wave response by porting back. He will get much better output by not having the subs and port on the same plane. I agree with you that the hatch is going to cause problems with noise, but that can be alleviated and would be the best option given his cabin.