what sub to go with?

Most here are true SQ nuts. They will take any SQ driver over one that is louder but sacrifices some SQ, just about every time. I disagree with the JL W7 outclassing everything RE makes. The MX and XXX line from RE are very clean, loud subs. What did this guy say he was looking for? "I want something that will sound well but when I turn the bass up I have the ability to make it hard to breathe"! I would go with RE. It fits the bill of this build better IMO. BTW with the amp that is being used JL could refuse warranty of the subwoofer. It falls in the black zone of there power chart by 500rms.

which person. the w6 or w7 with 500 watts?

pcana11 wrote: which person. the w6 or w7 with 500 watts?

that was for James.Jaros and just a little FYI. JL says warranty is void if you go over there rated recommended table. For the W7 12 that is max 1000rms. They also do not cover burnt coils. Will the W7 handle more than 1000rms? yeah it will, but should something happen to the speaker your warranty is void.

yea, i didnt know if you were talking about me and the w6 or him. mine is rated right around 500 i do believe

I agree I have heard some re subs before and they sounded like they were good all around. You see my goal is to have total sq but some raw power too. I have already installed 100 sq ft of fatmat and bought component speakers for up front. When the money allows I plan on getting some 6x9s for the back as well. Do you think one re mx 12 will have enough umph to give me good sound but also get stuff shaking if I feel like it? Its price is far more attractive than the xxx-under_lucky-

Really you can't go wrong with either an RE MX or JL W7. Both will get the job done. One a bit more SQ. The other a bit more SPL. Even then it really comes down to enclosure design.

I have decided to go with the RE MX 12.  Im going to build a box that will be about 2 to 2.25 cu ft tuned to 33.  Do you think this will work well?-under_lucky-

There recommended air space is NET. So you want to ADD port displacement, driver displacement and any bracing to that 2 cube for your Gross volume. 15 square inches of port area per cubic foot. So for a 2 cu. ft. enclosure you will want 30 inches of port area. If you need help with figuring what the GROSS enclosure needs to be. You can hit me up here or PM. Just need your max dimension to start working figures for you. If you want to contact RE directly you can contact greg@usamps.com for any further help with the enclosure specs.

Ok, I measured the trunk I have a maximum height of 14" a maximum width of 38" and depth is not a problem.  I have been told many times that going slightly larger such as 2.25 would be better than 2.0.   I was running some thoughts and came up with a box that is 25" wide 14" high 16" deep with a port at one end that is 1" wide and 11" deep.  All measurements are coming from the outer most dimensions of the box and figuring in for the .75" thick board and considering an additional brace of .75" where the sub will mount.  What do you think?  I believe this will give me roughly a 2.3 inthernal volume tuned at 32-under_lucky-

Thats only 12.5 sq inches of port area. You need WAY MORE! 1 inch port would be noisy as all get out. Port would only be if your height is 14" minus your width of MDF at .75 top and bottom, would make your port height 12.5" x 1" = 12.5 sq. inches of port area. Thats not even enough port area for 1 cube. You figure sq inches of port area by height and width of port not length. Length is for tune. Let me run some figures and i will find a workable solution.