but they are not shallow are they?
im using the JL G-MAX monoblock 600rms@4ohm and 1200rms@2ohm |
Originally Posted by SAMzGXP
(Post 1495625)
but they are not shallow are they?
im using the JL G-MAX monoblock 600rms@4ohm and 1200rms@2ohm Here's what I would recommend: http://www.woofersetc.com/p4992/ID10...-Subwoofer.htm You would wire that to 4 ohms. If you really insist on shallow mounted subs, have a look here to compare to the JL sub you were looking at as another option to consider: http://exileaudio.com/products/subwoofers/?model=xt10 That will work in as little as .35 cubic feet. |
Might want to consider that the optimal sealed enclosure for a JL TW5 is .80 cubic feet. I'm not sure what the minimum would be, but its something to consider.
|
If you're looking for a shallow mount SQ type subwoofer you should try to find a Stereo Integrity BM Mk III.
http://stereointegrity.com/index.php?id=47 The only thing is they don't have any more available so you'd have to try to find one used or someone who has a new one for sale. They get really good reviews. I think the mark iv is coming out but it won't be for a few months. |
Originally Posted by xtremerevolution
(Post 1495627)
They are not shallow, but they do fit in very small enclosures. The mounting depth is 5.5" and the sub will work in a pretty small box. I would probably use something around .60 cubic feet. That's pretty darn small.
Here's what I would recommend: http://www.woofersetc.com/p4992/ID10...-Subwoofer.htm You would wire that to 4 ohms. If you really insist on shallow mounted subs, have a look here to compare to the JL sub you were looking at as another option to consider: http://exileaudio.com/products/subwoofers/?model=xt10 That will work in as little as .35 cubic feet. |
Originally Posted by raptor660
(Post 1495660)
You are Learning GrassHopper! MONTE..... our X is growing up!
|
Originally Posted by xtremerevolution
(Post 1495630)
Might want to consider that the optimal sealed enclosure for a JL TW5 is .80 cubic feet. I'm not sure what the minimum would be, but its something to consider.
|
Originally Posted by SAMzGXP
(Post 1495680)
so .80 is optimal, anything bigger or smaller isnt good correct?
I would imagine that in the case of a larger enclosure would be louder and allow more depth, while a smaller would be more compact but would be quieter and wouldn't play as loudly at certain frequencies as the larger box would. The way I see it, if you're going to spend that much for a quality sub, you're probably going to want to get the most out of it. I know for a fact ID subs are known to be able to provide excellent quality and range from very small enclosures, which is why I mentioned them. For example, the IDQ's I'm getting are recommended at .75 cubic feet each, but they will work great to as low as .50 cubic feet. That's a very small enclosure, but apparently they perform excellently at that size because of they way they're made. Most subs don't have that ability. |
Originally Posted by SAMzGXP
(Post 1495680)
so .80 is optimal, anything bigger or smaller isnt good correct?
|
i called this morning and they are making the sub .80cuft, which is whats recommended by JL
it will be around 5" thick, and if fits right behind the seat.. im excited looking for a sub as we speak, might buy one within the next few minutes |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:42 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands