playing in the trunk

i would say in the van your freq is around a 65 hz

Freq is only a little bit of the battle. The real challenge is finding the right enclosure. Make a program that does that and you'll be an spl god

Yes but needs to be in the 70s

ok ill see what i can do still have to learn more on ts paramter and all that greek stuff but ill look into it

thanks guys and gnight

It would be almost impossible to have something tell you that. ANd by almost I mean absolutely.

demented wrote:

thanks for the insprations just really want to know the equation for circle hz level

To calculate the port length of a round port, enter the diameter of the port (D), the box volume (Vb) in cubic feet, and the desired tuning frequency (Fb). Here is the formula: ((14630000*(D/2)*(D/2))/((Fb*Fb*Vb*1728)-(1463*(D/2))))

This will tell you the length the port needs to be for your chosen Fb (resonant of the enclosure). Make sure to use net volume, not gross(thats what Vb means anyway, NET). This also is not where it will peak. Enclosure size, port area, along with cabin and the sub its self will dictate that, but you should know that already.

I want to comment on this but I wont, itll take to long

any pics of a 4th order in a super mod van?

James Reed wrote:

demented wrote:

thanks for the insprations just really want to know the equation for circle hz level

To calculate the port length of a round port, enter the diameter of the port (D), the box volume (Vb) in cubic feet, and the desired tuning frequency (Fb). Here is the formula: ((14630000*(D/2)*(D/2))/((Fb*Fb*Vb*1728)-(1463*(D/2))))

This will tell you the length the port needs to be for your chosen Fb (resonant of the enclosure). Make sure to use net volume, not gross(thats what Vb means anyway, NET). This also is not where it will peak. Enclosure size, port area, along with cabin and the sub its self will dictate that, but you should know that already.

where's the bc I got a head ache now.. not hitting on your methods or anything but spl is just something you gotta try out because it never works like it should.. computers are for free porn

Finding the Fb or resonant of an enclosure is simply a math equation, Nothing more. But knowing Fb really is not going to tell you anything but that. Demented asked for an equation to tell him Hz level of a round port. The equation above does just that. It will give him the length a givin port needs to be for his desired Fb, enclosure size, and port diamiter.

Where it peaks, and bandwidth will be dependent on many other factors though. Once you put it in a vehicle the game really starts. Leading him to the same thing you guys are telling him. He is going to have to test in vehicle to get real world output numbers and for true frequency response. Hell simply moving the mic from the kick to the dash will change the effect of the frequency response. Moving the driver seat forward by 1 inch gained us.8 db with Andrews truck. Another inch farther forward the gain goes away. No CP in the world is going to calculate that. Thats where the real world testing, trial and error comes in.

I guess I found the magic then cuz the computer program did a 160 for me. LOL

I knew my vehicle peak, my amount of cabin gain, how much port area to start with, and plugged those numbers in, it gave me port length, built it and it was loud.

I think, now, this is my view, when you get to a certain sq inches of port area, I don't think flared round port vs slot rolled edge port matters, meaning I don't think one will be louder then the other. Just my view, could be way off here.

And I got to a 160 in under a month start to finish, didn't take months/years. Just sayin.....LOL

AMI CUSTOMS wrote:

I guess I found the magic then cuz the computer program did a 160 for me. LOL

Actually not completely. Remember all the things that have to be done perfectly to achieve that output? Seat position for one? The PC did not tell us if we had the seat 7 1/2 inches away from port it would be quieter then 9 inches away. Or that if we went farther forward we would start going down again. The PC got us close. It was sheer luck it was right. Im sure some tweaking would still help. Knowing the trucks actual peaking point made it much nicer, but there is more to be gained for sure. Without the 2 days of straight testing you would not have found that extra from using a PC.

James Reed wrote:

AMI CUSTOMS wrote:

I guess I found the magic then cuz the computer program did a 160 for me. LOL

Actually not completely. Remember all the things that have to be done perfectly to achieve that output? Seat position for one? The PC did not tell us if we had the seat 7 1/2 inches away from port it would be quieter then 9 inches away. Or that if we went farther forward we would start going down again. The PC got us close. It was sheer luck it was right. Im sure some tweaking would still help. Knowing the trucks actual peaking point made it much nicer, but there is more to be gained for sure. Without the 2 days of straight testing you would not have found that extra from using a PC.

Damn James, be quiet, almost had these usaci boys changin there minds....LOL

AMI CUSTOMS wrote:

James Reed wrote:

AMI CUSTOMS wrote:

I guess I found the magic then cuz the computer program did a 160 for me. LOL

Actually not completely. Remember all the things that have to be done perfectly to achieve that output? Seat position for one? The PC did not tell us if we had the seat 7 1/2 inches away from port it would be quieter then 9 inches away. Or that if we went farther forward we would start going down again. The PC got us close. It was sheer luck it was right. Im sure some tweaking would still help. Knowing the trucks actual peaking point made it much nicer, but there is more to be gained for sure. Without the 2 days of straight testing you would not have found that extra from using a PC.

Damn James, be quiet, almost had these usaci boys changin there minds....LOL

i just use winisd, haha

but apparently its competely retarded for anything more complicated than a regular ported box.

AMI CUSTOMS wrote:

James Reed wrote:

AMI CUSTOMS wrote:

I guess I found the magic then cuz the computer program did a 160 for me. LOL

Actually not completely. Remember all the things that have to be done perfectly to achieve that output? Seat position for one? The PC did not tell us if we had the seat 7 1/2 inches away from port it would be quieter then 9 inches away. Or that if we went farther forward we would start going down again. The PC got us close. It was sheer luck it was right. Im sure some tweaking would still help. Knowing the trucks actual peaking point made it much nicer, but there is more to be gained for sure. Without the 2 days of straight testing you would not have found that extra from using a PC.

Damn James, be quiet, almost had these usaci boys changin there minds....LOL

My view on it is. Measure wave path to find where it should peak. Then model close to that on paper and program. Then you come back and tune it in to exactly what the vehicle likes.

Just going and building a box and guessing a port and enclosure volume and just throwing it in and test, test, test seems like such a waist of time to me. I will measure to know 1/4 wave, then model to peak at that below or above that frequency. Then comes in Testing, testing and more testing changing port to raise or lower the tune into the exact cabin resonance. Still a LOT of work but seems better then starting from blind.

I'm not smart or talking Shit if your looking for an equation to hit it on money there is not one. In usaci 0-6 STOCK is louder than your 160 wall just saying wait till after finals see num in the class u would. Be in work all next year then get back to me. I do know this if your not working your not loud

sweep wrote:

I'm not smart or talking Shit if your looking for an equation to hit it on money there is not one. In usaci 0-6 STOCK is louder than your 160 wall just saying wait till after finals see num in the class u would. Be in work all next year then get back to me. I do know this if your not working your not loud

I think we are all in agreement that testing is the ONLY way to truly get louder. How we get to the testing phase is another. I know I like to do paper math and computer modeling before I start in the testing phase. It allows me to get closer to my goal faster. Testing is tedious and time consuming. If you can minimize some of it, more the better to me.

sweep wrote:

I'm not smart or talking Shit if your looking for an equation to hit it on money there is not one. In usaci 0-6 STOCK is louder than your 160 wall just saying wait till after finals see num in the class u would. Be in work all next year then get back to me. I do know this if your not working your not loud

Best in usaci 0-600 stock is a 157 for outlaw, I did that sealed on the dash. So I am not sure what you are saying here.

James Reed wrote:

sweep wrote:

I'm not smart or talking Shit if your looking for an equation to hit it on money there is not one. In usaci 0-6 STOCK is louder than your 160 wall just saying wait till after finals see num in the class u would. Be in work all next year then get back to me. I do know this if your not working your not loud

I think we are all in agreement that testing is the ONLY way to truly get louder. How we get to the testing phase is another. I know I like to do paper math and computer modeling before I start in the testing phase. It allows me to get closer to my goal faster. Testing is tedious and time consuming. If you can minimize some of it, more the better to me.

I agree with that, I like to do some of my testing on paper/computer, doesn't take long and that gets me going in the right direction.

If u can I am with u

Lol I don't know were your looking man loud an clear did a 60.2 in 2008 so don't know what your taking about if your looking a local shows don't . Were in the lowest mod class a 63 plus will take in a week

sweep wrote:

Lol I don't know were your looking man loud an clear did a 60.2 in 2008 so don't know what your taking about if your looking a local shows don't . Were in the lowest mod class a 63 plus will take in a week

Just looking at the results page, wasn't looking at all time records, just results from this year. And even in my class that would be running it is a 165, look at Kumar's electrical, like 12 batcap 8400's, I am on two xs d3100 on a 12 volt setup, you are comparing apples to oranges my friend.

I under stand but we could of put 12 volt bats an could of beat yall best number with no work. I can sit at home an say I could of don this an that but u have to play an see will come next year an bring apples an prob do the. Same thing we did this year . An the num we played was not all we had an it was drop in no work. The box wasn't for that car an 8 Hz off I brought a 153.8

Can the computer open my beer?