ed 13ov.2

I was looking at the specs on the two and I was thinking the O was probably better. It has a lower total Q, lower fs, higher xmax, and more cone area.

Anyone know a home size and tuning frequency for the 16OV.2? The reason I ask is I got to thinking that may be better than doing 2 13O's. It would save me quite a bit of money and space.

Huh wow, my phone put home instead of good there earlier, sorry about that. I just put a 16OV.2 into WINISD with a 2.4 ft^3 box tuned to 30Hz and it looks really good. Louder than 2 13O's would be I think and better group delay. I also thought of a really good design to optimize my trunk space if I use 1 sub. Do you guys think 2 13OV.2's would end up being better or the 16OV.2?

Only thing is it doesn't go as deep, but in car I assume that would be taken care of.

basically depends on the budget. I have yet to hear the 160v.2, but with an assumption based on how the 130's sound, I would have to say that 1 should sound good. It obviously won't carry as much of a cone surface area, so some output will be lost, but I would have to say as long as you tune it accordingly, it should be good to go

Well, in WINISD anyways the 13O puts out around 115.5dB and the 16O puts out around 120. I've seen it said somewhere that theory says +3dB for each speaker added so the 16O should be louder than 2 13O's. And the 16O's group delay is 8ms better at 30 Hz and then obviously better in the slope around that but only a couple ms worse in the higher frequencies like 50Hz. All of this in 1 ft^3 less space than 2 13O's. All of this is theoretical by numbers obviously, but very promising. And as you said with the rep of the OV series it should most definitely sound great.

relying strictly on calculations will give a decent promise to what the actual output would conclude to, however, I have personally ran a single Alpine type R 12", in a .85 cube sealed enclosure, and hit 131 db, which totally blew my calculations out the window. Yes, it is calculated that each additional speaker added, or twice the power output will show a 3 decibel increase. It is also noted that the more surface area that you have, based on the same power supply, will increase the sound. Case in point, the square sub that you were looking into earlier, the square design pushes more air than a circular sub, therefore giving better numbers, the same with the combination of the areas of dual subs vs 1 larger single. You should see some better numbers, lower freq control, etc

You hit that 131 dB in car though right? You get a pretty large cabin gain to F3 and dB once the sub is in car usually don't you? Also the 16OV.2 has greater xmax and spl which mean greater potential output too right? It's not just cone area really but displacement isn't it? 16OV=183120mm and 91dB 13OVx2=199470mm and 89.1dB both are pretty close, I'd say one spec would probably offset the other making them almost equal.

a single 16Ov.2 is capable of hitting 140 in a trunk. A guy over on ROE put a system in his GF's car with a single 16Ov.2 and its pretty loud. I wouldn't look at the SPL numbers on WinISD. Two 13Ov.2s have more cone area and can handle more power. You are never going to get the sub to its xmax unless the enclosure is HUGE. So that doesn't really matter

Well, regardless now I am doing the 130V.2's I got one on Ebay for $80. I wanted to do the two 13O's, but I figured the 16O would be almost as good if not as good but for less money. But now I found a deal on one, so it's a go. Now I just need to take my measurements so I can figure out my box design, I hope to mount it off the floor. I do still have one question in my mind, does it matter which direction I aim my port? Should I aim it the same direction as the speaker or maybe the front of the car?