///M5

Also don't go sit in the Maserati and then the 911 either. That won't help.

Meh, the pic above is a 997. Sure it is better as the 996 were 1980's but the 911 hasn't evolved like it should. Drive it back to back with the Panamera and you won't want the 911 anymore.

The advantage of the 4th BP is that the box can be remote. The other "advantage" is a horribly peaky response. Port resonance is just like any other resonance whether it be modal or acoustic. If it is too close to the range your driver is playing then you will need to make sure to notch it out of the response with electronics. In your customers' case I would worry more about port velocity at listening levels than demo levels. ie, no need to worry too much about the max velocity at max power, but more focus on ensuring it is low where he will focus on listening. I still wouldn't get ridiculous with it at max power (if it were my car I like your target of 15-20) but don't get too carried away. 26Hz is REALLY low tuning in a car. The benefit is a few Hz before roll off with the disadvantage of the peak you were going for with the BP being completely eliminated. If your customer has a crap ton of music that just won't play nice on a 30-32Hz tuned box then fine, but otherwise there is no need to go that low. It is already into the law of diminishing returns for making the response nicer and is just costing you output. Car audio is all compromises. Glad you are finally off the ridiculous one of doing a 4th order BP.

I just find the 911 embarrassingly shitty. The above is probably why though. I do miss my 59

This is my real beef, lol. I loved my 59, but come on.

to our house Rodgers!

Ha, Japanese translated literally is super funny to read http://allcars2017.com/2017-mazdaspeed-6/

...and it was fun

And both are fast enough for me to be an asshole in anytime I want. I did get more sideways in the Panamera, but also had more time to push it.

997 is better, but drive one back to back with a Panamera and you won't feel it is anymore.

Part of the problem with the 911 is it feels like a cheap ass piece of crap from 1995 on the inside. The interior is seriously antiquated. If I wanted an old ass fast car, I'd build one.

It is the same as before, you are just reading it in a positive way instead of negative. There was no number 2) btw...either way, first question you need to find out is what your customer will play on them. In the rest of the post it surely sounds like nothing low in which case tuning higher makes a ton of sense to give yourself some gain where he will want it. I like 20, but you don't have to go that low in this build. Output will mask the noise. As for the rules of thumb, you'd be surprised how many fall way outside of them. They are a shortcut for the uninformed and should be taken with a grain of salt at best. Science doesn't lie, art confuses things. I know which I prefer to follow... I understand liking the curve better if you tune lower, but you actually considered the BP curve which is laughably bad so why so worried about the frequency on the ported enclosure? 36" isn't long. You are thinking about this completely wrong though. Ignore port area and port length and instead solely focus on port resonance and port velocity. The actual shape/size whatever is irrelevant. That is irrelevant. Not a compromise. You state wall therefore all of your designs suffer the same fate loading wise. Sure there are differences mechanically due to the enclosure but if they are acoustically analogous then they are the same in that regard. Why is this not a concern in a BP to you? Laws of Physics are the same and while the environment is slightly different it is easy to calculate exactlywhat that means. I find it funny that you are worried that 36" for a large system sounds long, but are okay with 14". 14" for 3 18's sounds wicked nasty short to me. The reason for the negativity earlier is simple. The 4th order BP buys you NO advantages here. It is really not a good choice. The problem is that you've "heard" from others that have had success what they like. The bummer is none of them understand the success nor did they compare it with something else that would have worked better, yet they sing the gospel and you are happy to hear it. The opposite is true here, you aren't eager to hear what I say so only "see" the negative instead of the reality which included a lot of positive. Blame it on written/read word as it truly distorts reality to the eye of the beholder. It is your eye, you can choose to see what you want.

When no money is on the line I am great at it...wish the inverse held true

I preferred the way it drive to the 911. Drive turbos back to back. The panny is ugly but not on the inside

Money/value etc aside of course. If someone just gave me a car to drive at no cost that is what I would pick.

Simple, a simple ported. You have modeled, so it is easy to see how much excursion will be at what power. That will determine the max size/gain. Port area we could surely discuss, but it is a function of solely managing port velocity and what your customers' expectations will be. I'd err on the side of a lower velocity personally that may not be what your customer wants, but I wouldn't take a customer that didn't understand I won't make that compromise. Obviously we don't know your interaction with him so if you want to discuss that you need to be more specific on what. While that is true, a standard ported enclosure is also more forgiving. Considering you are building this in one shot the KISS principle is worth following. You also referenced musical which of course pushes this way. I read your book, think the problem is simple. You are looking for golden rules, rules of thumb or other things to follow. This doesn't exist. In the installation you propose there are not so many things to balance so if that is what you want to have a more direct conversation on then you need to ask. Just like the install should be KISS the thread needs to be as well. If you want to discuss something, start the discussion.

I would rather have the 4 door

I still park the big ugly in front of a Ford parking only sign

Hp on the mids I haven't changed yet. Going to t/a and nail it down here this week.

Before I add3d the subs I never really bottomed out the mids. Now I have. Probably shouldn't have added the bass.

No idea how that got underlined. Pphone ftl

I meant your perception of me in a GM is like mine of you in a Mazda. Rereading that it sounds like you read it right but it isn't how I meant it. I like that a lot better than the subbie or lexus btw. I rented a base and it drive nice but had a rental interior.

It is akin to me driving a GM

Nice. I didn't expect that

Your question was which alignment. You provided 3 choices. That was 86'd to two choices. Then a discussion of compromises occurred for which you offered no insight as to which way you want to lean. Generically staying simple ported was discussed and it seems logical. No one here would assume with you touting 27 years of experience that a discussion of port size on a simple box would be necessary. We even see you come to the right conclusion: The only strange part is the last part of the post. Tells us something. Us readers of your thread see that you started a thread hoping we would all support the 4th order BP that was referenced elsewhere and when we didn't you still tried to push it. Every post that states to look into a different alignment you respond with further 4th order BP questions. Considering that isn't a logical alignment for the build it is hard to be constructive.