Menu
Forum
What's new
New posts
Live Activity
Search forums
Members
Registered members
Classifieds Member Feedback
Car Audio Discussion
General Car Audio
Car Audio Build Logs
Car Audio Equipment
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Help
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Car Audio Classifieds
Car Audio Wanted
Classifieds Member Feedback
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
SHOP
Shop Head Units
Shop Amplifiers
Shop Speakers
Shop Subwoofers
Shop eBay Car Audio
Log in / Join
Test
Forum
Search
Search titles only
Search titles only
Log in / Join
Search
Search titles only
Search titles only
What's new
New posts
Live Activity
Search forums
Members
Registered members
Classifieds Member Feedback
Menu
Reply to thread
Forum
Car Audio Equipment
Subwoofers
10" shallow mount vs. 8" standard sub
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ndalik" data-source="post: 8655488" data-attributes="member: 675590"><p>I apologize for bump the old topic...</p><p></p><p>I happen to have a Rainbow Vanadium 8" in a box - supposed to quite an impressive driver and modelled in WINISD its response walks all over the slim subs. The Aplineis <a href="https://atfulldrive.com/best-car-subwoofer" target="_blank">https://atfulldrive.com/best-car-subwoofer</a>where my hopes were initially pinned with the surface area and xMax as you note - but modelling the figures at least it is quite unimpressive in terms of bass extension / F3 and SPL (on paper the smaller Vanadium significantly outperforms the Alpine shallow 10" in extension and SPL - from what I have read it's SQ is good too).</p><p></p><p>This is what posed me to post, as everything I had to go on was calculated and what everyone's really interested in is how things actually sound So I thought I'd canvass opinion to see if I was barking up the wrong tree, or is the calculations were likely to be a true representation of the difference sound wise...</p><p></p><p>To add complication to my specific predicament though the drawback with the Vanadium is it is dual 4 ohm VC. I have no amp specs as it is fibre MOST input / OE and they won't release (or the people I've spoken to don't understand) the info. The current OE driver is 10", single VC and measures 3.1 ohm at rest, so I have no idea if the amp could drive into the two VCs in parallel as that would be a little less than 2 ohm, in series we are looking at 6+ ohms (so assumedly reducing the power and so the cone excursion / SPL which defeats the object somewhat) and as the Vanadium is rated peak at 250W I can't really run it single VC for fear of cooking the coil! Anyway, enough of my specific issues with that driver as that wasn't what the post was about!</p><p></p><p>So from what you say minbari it is quite possible the WINISD plots are right that in all reality an 8" could provide 'better' response than a 10" under these circumstances / compromises...</p><p></p><p>There are a lot of useful videos on this subject on Youtube, I'll leave one here, Hope this helps someone. Good luck!</p><p></p><p>[MEDIA=youtube]SEpPnY0iAcs[/MEDIA]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ndalik, post: 8655488, member: 675590"] I apologize for bump the old topic... I happen to have a Rainbow Vanadium 8" in a box - supposed to quite an impressive driver and modelled in WINISD its response walks all over the slim subs. The Aplineis [URL="https://atfulldrive.com/best-car-subwoofer"]https://atfulldrive.com/best-car-subwoofer[/URL]where my hopes were initially pinned with the surface area and xMax as you note - but modelling the figures at least it is quite unimpressive in terms of bass extension / F3 and SPL (on paper the smaller Vanadium significantly outperforms the Alpine shallow 10" in extension and SPL - from what I have read it's SQ is good too). This is what posed me to post, as everything I had to go on was calculated and what everyone's really interested in is how things actually sound So I thought I'd canvass opinion to see if I was barking up the wrong tree, or is the calculations were likely to be a true representation of the difference sound wise... To add complication to my specific predicament though the drawback with the Vanadium is it is dual 4 ohm VC. I have no amp specs as it is fibre MOST input / OE and they won't release (or the people I've spoken to don't understand) the info. The current OE driver is 10", single VC and measures 3.1 ohm at rest, so I have no idea if the amp could drive into the two VCs in parallel as that would be a little less than 2 ohm, in series we are looking at 6+ ohms (so assumedly reducing the power and so the cone excursion / SPL which defeats the object somewhat) and as the Vanadium is rated peak at 250W I can't really run it single VC for fear of cooking the coil! Anyway, enough of my specific issues with that driver as that wasn't what the post was about! So from what you say minbari it is quite possible the WINISD plots are right that in all reality an 8" could provide 'better' response than a 10" under these circumstances / compromises... There are a lot of useful videos on this subject on Youtube, I'll leave one here, Hope this helps someone. Good luck! [MEDIA=youtube]SEpPnY0iAcs[/MEDIA] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Car Audio Equipment
Subwoofers
10" shallow mount vs. 8" standard sub
Top
Menu
Home
Refresh