Avalanche 12, 15, and 18 T/S specifications.

[Duke 0]

Avalanche 12:

Fs 23 Hz

Vas 80 Liters

Qms 4.36

Qes .39

Qts .358

Znom 4 ohms

Re 2.8 ohms

Mms 197 g

Sd 480 cm^2 - (74.4 sq.in)

Pnom 800 watts

Mounting Depth:

Gasket on - 6 9/16" (6.5625")

Gasket off - 6 11/16" (6.6875")

Avalanche 15:

Qts - .3

Qms - 3.5

Qes - .33

Vas - 300.6 Liters

Fs - 15.7 Hz

Re - 3.2 ohm

Le - 2.4 mH

Xmax - 27mm

800 Watts Rms

Sd 116.09 square inches.

Mounting depth - 7.875" <---- Not sure.

Avalanche 18:

Qts - .4

Qms - 6

Qes - .43

Vas - 550 Liters

Fs - 16 Hz

Re - 3.2 ohm

Le - 2.4 mH

Xmax - 27mm

800 Watts Rms

Sd 187.55 square inches.

Mounting depth:

Gasket on - 9 7/16" (9.4375")

Gasket off - 9 9/16" (9.5625")

Anyone feel free to jump in and correct if anything is wrong.

Edited April 23, 2007 by Duke

[vladd 26]

not saying anything is wrong, but it's kinda weird that the FS of the 18 is higher than that of the 15.

[Duke 0]

not saying anything is wrong, but it's kinda weird that the FS of the 18 is higher than that of the 15.

That is quite odd. Hopefully someone can show up and correct or confirm this.

[Tommythecat 0]

Why would that be weird? It a function of the moving mass and stiffness/compliance of the suspension. Both of these are obviously different as they have different cones, surrounds, and spiders.

[Duke 0]

Why would that be weird? It a function of the moving mass and stiffness/compliance of the suspension. Both of these are obviously different as they have different cones, surrounds, and spiders.

You have a valid point, but its just odd because typically an 18 will have a lower FS than its 15 inch version. Also, I think they all have the same spiders. Its not overly odd, just a bit questionable. Reasonable doubt my friend. Which is why someone should correct/confirm this because there obviously people who have their doubts no matter how much moving mass compliance suspension mumbo jumbo you throw at them. All we need is a simple correction/conformation.

I think I remember Chad saying that his 2 18s in HT dropped a few HZ after using them a while, so maybe the 18s come with a higher FS, but after a bit of break in, they drop lower than the 15s...

Edited April 23, 2007 by Duke

[vladd 26]

where did you do any math? for that matter where did you use any real physics?

Nobody said the FS had to be lower, just that it generally is. Given that the FS was already quite low on the 15 there wouldn't have been any real reason to lower it on the 18 so they may have tried to keep it about the same. Or maybe the specs are off.

[vladd 26]

http://web.archive.org/web/20041230070919/...valanche+15.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/20041230071247/...valanche+18.htm

Looks like the specs are fine

[DevilDriver 28]

Yup, they are indeed correct. I have all of the thiele/small parameters and enclosure recommendations for Ascendant Audio at home on my laptop and will get those up later tonight.

[JimJ 11]

Since neither Cms nor Mms was listed, I didn't want to make any assumptions

[Fi Car Audio 64]

Wow... ok then.

Yes, the specs are correct based off of the fact that the cms decreased more than the ratio of Mms did for the 18s vs the 15s.

[ShawnFleming 50]

Ok guys, I think I cleaned up everything that wasnt necessary. Lets try to keep this forum for helping ppl and for showing off what we love, car stereo, without any harsh words, ect. Its car stereo guys, lets do what we can to help each other not go at each other.

[Jybfan04 1]

I wanna see the bl

[Fi Car Audio 64]

BL is right around 17 for all of them I believe.

Thanks,

Scott

[vladd 26]

i have 15.9 saved in my winISD for the ava 15, but god only knows if that's right or if i just pulled it out of my arse.

[onebadmonte 235]

What would be the T/S parameters if I wired the coils in parallel to create a 1ohm, or how can I figure that out? I've got a 15" Ava that I want to run at 1ohm in my car. Thanks