bracing sealed enclosures

I ended up having to modify this design for a pair of CompVR 12's to utilize airspace and leave room to access the spare. It added extra sides to fit the trunk and I was thinking that they should be braced on the inside edge to the wall straight ahead. Is this true,
Here is the drawing


Box will be 3/4in MDF
Without bracing would the structural integrity and strength be affected since they have no support on the open side? Also does it matter which thickness overlaps the other, is that going to make a difference or are there standard practices when making non-rectangle shaped enclosures
I have bulit sealed designs befor but never had to add addtional panels. I figured that it could be done wrong Any opinions or thoughts about a similar design would be great.

I think that indented corners are structurally stronger than just the standard 90 degree corner.  There are three 90's there.

The middle partition (in white) is solid, I presume.  So this is a dual chamber box.  What is the air space on each side?  If they are in the range described by Alpine, then it looks to me that no additional bracing would be required.

I makes no difference which edge overlaps, as long as the interior volume comes out right.. .and what is ultimately easiest to build.  At quick glance, I think I would construct the sides and center partition first, then fit the top and bottom onto it.  The indented corners could be constructed as stand-alone pieces, then attached to the sides and back.

-------------
Build the box so that it performs well in the worst case scenario and, in return, it will reward you at all times.

thanks for the feedback. I updated the drawing and airspace is 1.221cu.ft per chamber unless I'm doign fuzzy math. The top and bottom panels are excluded here but I used internal dimensions to calculate it anyway.

What's this business about Alpine? I think you might have misread the CompVr 12's as Type R 12's. Sorry I should have put Kicker to be clear.

I also noticed that the recomended enclosures range from 1.0-4.6cu.ft. The response curves for each shown by kicker don't appear be dramatically different. The biggest i could go is about 1.735cu.ft per chamber.
The driver will be listening to mostly rap so will the larger enclosure make any significant improvement for that type of bass? (The subs get 300W rms each)

oops here is the updated drawing.sorry.



should I try for the larger air space?

What software is that?

-------------

I just used Autocad to draw the design. I would normally use Pro/Engineer to model it in 3D but my license at home isn't working since they updated versions. Basic license for it is $5k so I think I'll have to do it at work.

stevdart (or anyone) got any suggestions about increasing the airspace from 1.221 to 1.735 like I asked in my previous post? I don't want to lose any low end bass with the smaller one but don't want the impact to diminish with the larger one.