13W7 vs. Kicker L7

[somekook 10+ year member]

Surface area isn't what's important, it's DISPLACEMENT. The 13w7 has more than 2.5x the linear stroke of the 12L7, which more than compensates for the difference in surface area.
As far as accuracy, the two aren't even REMOTELY comparable. A single 10 or 12L7, in a similar alignment to a W7 of the same size, doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of managing more output.[/quote

i dont want to get into a big argument, but first of all, there are a lot of factors besides displacement, second, linear excursion alone is nothing without surface area. and the 2 square l7s have 288 square inches of surface area, where the 12w7 has 113 square inches. im not saying the l7's will deffinately be louyder, but they do have much more surface area and the w7 would need a lot of excursion to compenstae for that.

also, were not talkin about accuracy here. if we were, i would agree with you, the w7 would sound a hell off a lot better.

 

[GSteg 10+ year member]

we're talking about a single 13w7 vs 2 12L7 in terms of linear displacement. the 13w7 has more xmax and cone area than a single 12W7.

linear displacement is defined as xmax*Sd

each L7 has an Sd of 645 sqCM with an xmax of 13.20mm

the 13W7 has an Sd of 693 sqCM with an xmax of 32m.

the 13w7 will actually do more than 32mm. JL used the traditional overhung method to calculate their xmax.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[99concorde 10+ year member]

http://forums.caraudio.com/vb/showthread.php?t=41226

explains it all. havent seen geoleman post in awhile, too bad one smart cookie. could really learn alot listening to him. unlike some in the know he would explain in laymens terms making it easier for us newbs to understand.

 

[Warbleed 10+ year member]

Surface area isn't what's important, it's DISPLACEMENT. The 13w7 has more than 2.5x the linear stroke of the 12L7, which more than compensates for the difference in surface area.
As far as accuracy, the two aren't even REMOTELY comparable. A single 10 or 12L7, in a similar alignment to a W7 of the same size, doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of managing more output.[/quote

i dont want to get into a big argument, but first of all, there are a lot of factors besides displacement, second, linear excursion alone is nothing without surface area. and the 2 square l7s have 288 square inches of surface area, where the 12w7 has 113 square inches. im not saying the l7's will deffinately be louyder, but they do have much more surface area and the w7 would need a lot of excursion to compenstae for that.

also, were not talkin about accuracy here. if we were, i would agree with you, the w7 would sound a hell off a lot better.

Sd of the 12L7 is 645cm^2. By your calculations I see you took 12 x12 for the 12L7. That is NOT repeat NOT how you measure Sd. Is every last inch of the front of the driver moving air? No, clearly not. Thus calculating surface area in the simplistic fashion that you did is worthless and not applicable at all.

Sd of the 13w7 is 693cm^2, so the 13w7 has MORE surface area than a single L7, and slightly more than half the surface area of a pair of the L7s. It also has 2.5x the displacement. You do realize that displacement is bore x stroke, right? Thus is takes BOTH xmax and Sd into account, rather than just one.

I cannot think of any musically oriented setup where I would even consider taking 12L7s over a 13w7.

The 13w7 will also be far more efficient at converting power into output than will the L7s, and will need a much smaller enclosure to reach a given alignment.