What are the Shallow-mount disadvantages?

[jdes 10+ year member]

Are there any disadvantages to using a shallow-mount sub? I've heard a pair of 10" RF P2 vs. a pair of 10" Kenwood Excelons in the same box(on a board though). The RF killed the Kenwoods. Like they were a size bigger.

The sale rep said that since the subs have to fill the whole room with bass, all shallow mounts would seem weak compared to regular subs; that they cannot go as low as regular subs.

Then I go to another store and this car audio guy says,"nope, that's not true." Because regular subs and shallow-mounts equivalents share the same voice coil and Vmax. The motor is the only thing that's re-engineered to save space.

Then I've been told that shallow-mounts need the same amount of air space as a reg sub. That the only space saved is the reduction of the motor intrusion in the air space.

Click to read more...

 

[Scoobydoo 5,000+ posts]

yes

 

[ARSkemp 10+ year member]

Then I've been told that shallow-mounts need the same amount of air space as a reg sub. That the only space saved is the reduction of the motor intrusion in the air space.

I think most shallow mounts do need the same space as a regular sub, although i remember hearing about some shallow mount JL's needing a lot less airspace (they're quite pricey though).

 

[skateboardkid 10+ year member]

and the motor design is gonna limit xmax usually, VC length is shorter less windings to dissapate heat, other wise if they spent time on the design it is gonna sound pretty good and considering you would have had no bass at all with a normal driver they are ussually acceptable.

THe shallow mount help it fit in like a box that would go behind your front seat, same airspace but entire box is only 4.5 inches deep, it might go acrosss the whole cab and to the bottom of the window but is still only 6" deep with the MDF factored in.

 

[Polecat 5,000+ posts]

actually, most won't need near the room enclosure wise, but, they do have less motor strength and Xmax then conventional subs. But, there is a need, in some restricted installs for shallow mount subwoofers.

 

[chinxtaboi 10+ year member]

what stores did you visit in houston? ive heard the excelons were real nice, but i guess not as nice as the rf huh. memphis has a shallow one comin out too, but i havent heard one yet.

 

[jdes 10+ year member]

yes

It all cannot be right as there was one discrepancy

 

[SilverSquared 10+ year member]

What are you putting it in?

 

[jdes 10+ year member]

and the motor design is gonna limit xmax usually, VC length is shorter less windings to dissapate heat, other wise if they spent time on the design it is gonna sound pretty good and considering you would have had no bass at all with a normal driver they are ussually acceptable.THe shallow mount help it fit in like a box that would go behind your front seat, same airspace but entire box is only 4.5 inches deep, it might go acrosss the whole cab and to the bottom of the window but is still only 6" deep with the MDF factored in.

How does the motor design limit xmax? I would think it make for a weaker motor thus less output but less xmax?!

 

[jdes 10+ year member]

What are you putting it in?

I'm considering putting some in my 92' MR2 Turbo

 

[jdes 10+ year member]

what stores did you visit in houston? ive heard the excelons were real nice, but i guess not as nice as the rf huh. memphis has a shallow one comin out too, but i havent heard one yet.

Mobile one, StereoFX, and unknown minimall caraudio store. The excelons look great and sound pretty good untill the RF P2 came on. Not being bias. In fact the saleman was an SQ guy saying that it would be less noticeable in a car.

 

[jdes 10+ year member]

actually, most won't need near the room enclosure wise, but, they do have less motor strength and Xmax then conventional subs. But, there is a need, in some restricted installs for shallow mount subwoofers.

According to the specs I saw, everyone of the shallow-mount had air space ranges of conventional subs.

less motor strength and Xmax then conventional subs? Why less xmax?

 

[Kil4Thril 10+ year member]

According to the specs I saw, everyone of the shallow-mount had air space ranges of conventional subs.
less motor strength and Xmax then conventional subs? Why less xmax?

With everything being shallower, where would you put the suspension and motor to allow more excursion?

 

[dillinja666 10+ year member]

With everything being shallower, where would you put the suspension and motor to allow more excursion?

over there >>>>

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

With typical motor topologies Xmax is going to be taken down compared to a deeper sub. Most shallow mount subs are in the 6-9mm range concerning Xmax. However, the thing to keep in mind is that their competition (normal, low-end subs that are shallow-ish) have about the same amount of linear travel. As far as the box requirements, that's all in the design. You can have two shallow subs and have one require 2 ft^3 and another require 0.5^3 and have the same low end extension (2 ft^3 is stretching it a bit, but I'm just giving you an example). Just because it's shallow doesn't always mean that it requires less space than a normal subwoofer.

Clearance-wise, there is plenty of clearance for most sub-500 watt and power applications. With a shallow cone, the proper suspension, and a shallow motor design, you can end up with plenty of travel for the intended application.

What you're not going to get is 4" of travel and 2000 watts of power handling out of a sub that's 3.5" deep. But what you can end up with is a very good performing subwoofer that is 3.5-4" deep off of 200-400 watts.