11 hours ago, ///M5 said:

I thought I understood, but you used the terms so interchangeably I wasn't positive the OP followed.  It also isn't the first thing you should do.  Somewhat of a bandaid and one with minor benefits.

Reason being is that the biggest difference in a bigger pulley is that it will increase the tension on a fixed length system.  With a tensioner of course it shouldn't change or only minimally based on the spring constant of the device.

As for surface area that the belt adds.  In a perfectly simple world (ie only two pulleys so maximum pulley contact) you would only gain the amount (1/2 circumference of big pulley - 1/2 circumference of smaller pulley).  Which would mean going from a 4" to a 4.5" pulley you would gain less than .75" of contact along the length of the belt.  If the angle of incidence is such that it normally only touches 25% of the pulley (more normal) you can cut that number in half.  The 6-12% contact patch gain while significant is probably less effective than a clean new pulley and non-glazed belt.  

Just replacing things isn't the approach I'd take.  Making sure everything is setup right is the first step.  Most people are lazy and skip this.  Don't.

Says a pulley and non glazed belt is his best bet, then in the next sentence says replacing things wouldn't be his approach. Your tactics confuse me! And who cares about contact patch, that's not the problem. The problem is he needs a larger pulley so the alternator is easier to turn and this isn't going to change much except the alternator will actually be turning instead of just setting there while a belt slips over it. But like I already said a wider pulley and a good belt like the Goodyear above wound be his best bet, then if it's still slipping then his only other choice would be to go to a slightly bigger pulley. But deffinetly try a wider racing belt if you don't mind the expense. 

Edited February 24, 20178 yr by Billy Jack

10 hours ago, edouble101 said:

I had a similar issue with my aftermarket alternator. Your belt squeal is caused from the smaller diameter aftermarket alternator pulley. The only way I was able to overcome this was with a 0.3" smaller OD diameter belt along with a better belt. The belt that I used was a Goodyear Gatorback. 

Another option is to use an idler pulley on the bottom bolt on your alternator mount. This will drastically increase belt wrap around the alternator pulley. I did this on a previous vehicle I had.

 

Not a good pic of belt wrap but the difference was significant. 

I you use a larger pulley you might as well put your stock alternator back on.

I ordered a gator back thats .5" shorter than the one I have on, so hopefully that does it. I do like the idle pulley on the mount though, Ill have to keep that in mind. Thanks for sharing that, never really thought of it.

Part of the problem is a longer than stock belt is needed to fit onto the pulley. The alt is a much larger case and swings a bit further away from the system in order to fit the bracket on the engine.  Has to be long enough to even get the belt on at all, but at the same time short enough to keep it from slipping. 

Edited February 24, 20178 yr by afearlesshunter

1 hour ago, afearlesshunter said:

I ordered a gator back thats .5" shorter than the one I have on, so hopefully that does it. I do like the idle pulley on the mount though, Ill have to keep that in mind. Thanks for sharing that, never really thought of it.

Part of the problem is a longer than stock belt is needed to fit onto the pulley. The alt is a much larger case and swings a bit further away from the system in order to fit the bracket on the engine.  Has to be long enough to even get the belt on at all, but at the same time short enough to keep it from slipping. 

Now the iderly pulley does sound like a good idea never tried that before. 

UPDATE: The good. New gatorback belt is on and no slipping. Woot! Pac lc-1 around halfway and holding 14+ easy while driving. 

The bad. I need to get the SDA3's into different boxes. Excursion limit is reached super fast between 34 and 38hz. Thinking of going down to 4 cubes tuned to 32 single chamber, probably using an 8 inch aero. Not sure if I should pursue the trunk wall still or go with something different such as port side subs forward or back. Maybe just subs rear with port rear aswell. 

More power smaller enclosure...in my testing experience. With the increase in voltage & amperage you amp with be able to deliver a more constant amount of quality power

2 hours ago, Jay-C76 said:

More power smaller enclosure...in my testing experience. With the increase in voltage & amperage you amp with be able to deliver a more constant amount of quality power

Thats what Im thinking. Although, I can't get winsd to show the excursion that Im getting currently. With 4k input into each, its only showing just under 23 mm of excursion yet I keep having problems with what sounds to me like bottoming out. 

Alrighty, about to get back on this build. Starting hopefully this weekend. New enclosure should be 3.76-3.9 net depending on port length I end up at. One box this time, common chamber. Starting orientation will be subs firing forward, port to the drivers side. Ill test drivers back as well. 

Box outside dimensions frame. worth the $3 to see if the stupid thing will fit.

Audible Engineering adjustable port.

And finally have some answers and more questions on the noises that seems like bottoming out in the previous enclosures. I have been testing the drivers free air and have found that the cone hits the leads. I haven't made an exact measurement but I do not believe this driver will ever be able to reach xmax (stated to be 29mm) due to the leads being so close.  I have not yet brought this up to the company but I will be shortly after I measure the distance of actual travel. Kinda sucks because it happens WAY before mechanical bottom and it is very loud in the enclosure.

A linky for the vid of the leads.... they're close af.

 

Edited May 9, 20178 yr by afearlesshunter

Sucks about the sub, i know how annoying tinsel slap can be.

Poor woofer design...

2 hours ago, jcarter1885 said:

Sucks about the sub, i know how annoying tinsel slap can be.

Yep, I might as well have some pa subs with this amount of throw.

1 hour ago, Jay-C76 said:

Poor woofer design...

Pretty tasty other than this. But yep I feel that neither damien or the build house really tested the smaller woofers. All I ever saw decent testing on were the 15's and 18's. I can't imagine the 10" version.

37 minutes ago, afearlesshunter said:

Yep, I might as well have some pa subs with this amount of throw.

I've got an original JBL 1500GTi if you want an upgrade.  Hasn't been used since 94.

Just spoke with Damien. I measured 5/8" ~ 15-16 mm from cone to lead. He said to start with bending them outwards towards the basket spokes more and maybe outward a  little. He's said he'll be sending the pics and measurements to nick at IA to make sure the rest are gucci.

28 minutes ago, ///M5 said:

I've got an original JBL 1500GTi if you want an upgrade.  Hasn't been used since 94.

Lol thanks but don't need more drivers until I get rid of some, nearing 15 atm and most don't get used.