# Best Shallow Mount Subs



## lordofthemixtape

Alright, so I got a new amp, a Power Acoustik BAMF-4000/1D because the deal was tooooo good to pass up, right, so here's the question(s). 

1. The obvious one: what is the best shallow mount subs to drop in to let this beast power? I have a single cab 2004 dodge ram 1500 and in the back I currently have 2 infinity 1252W in the back and I'm fixin to hook that monster up to them. But since I know i'm gonna probably blow them, I need y'alls input.  (I'm also flirting with the idea of taking out the plastic tray behind the seats and custom fabricating a box for 2 deep mounts, like 2 type R's perhaps)

2. This question is about the amp itself, it claims to be a monoblock but it has 2 positives and 2 negatives allowing for 2 channels, no? If so does anyone have some specs on the RMS rating per channel at 2 ohms? All I can find is that it's like 1700 w x 1 channel @ 2 ohm.

As usual, pardon my poor sentence structure, and thanks in advance. I appreciate any feedback.


----------



## stryfe

Well..most folks here are gonna tell you that the si bm mkiii is the best shallow sub on the planet.


----------



## lordofthemixtape

Are they really that good?


----------



## subwoofery

lordofthemixtape said:


> Are they really that good?


Confirm they are really THAT good 

Kelvin


----------



## 08Raider

I pre-ordered my MKIII. But I would like to know if anyone who got theirs is running it in the recommended .5 ft^3, because the Vas of the sub says it should be closer to a 2 ft^3 enclosure. 

The .5ft^3 claim is what attracted me to this sub over the Dayton or tang band.


----------



## subwoofery

I'm using 0.35cuft and it's good enough for me due to the cabin gain I have in my car. 
0.5cuft might have been too much (more low end, less kick) 

Kelvin


----------



## upperguy

I've heard great things about the JL shallow mount 13"(13TW5) though they a bit pricey. I've currently got a Kenwood Excelon KFC-XW1200F and I love it! I've only got a 300/4 bridged onto it and it's hitting loud and clear, though they claim it can handle a lot more.


----------



## Maglite

I like the look of the Polk 10" MM series sub. Only 4.5" deep and very well priced. Fits in a .66 cu.ft. box.


----------



## crzystng

stryfe said:


> Well..most folks here are gonna tell you that the si bm mkiii is the best shallow sub on the planet.


Anyone have a link to their website by chance?


----------



## miniSQ

crzystng said:


> Anyone have a link to their website by chance?


Stereo Integrity | Home


----------



## crzystng

miniSQ said:


> Stereo Integrity | Home


THX, those look REALLY nice for shallow mounts. Pretty impressive.


----------



## win1

For the money and output responce I would pick the Kenwood Excelon Shallow mount subs 12" 10" and 8". I have used these subs in multipule installs and they sound great, my 2 cent.
Kenwood - KFC-XW1200F
Kenwood - KFC-XW1000F
Kenwood - KFC-XW800F


----------



## miniSQ

win1 said:


> For the money and output responce I would pick the Kenwood Excelon Shallow mount subs 12" 10" and 8". I have used these subs in multipule installs and they sound great, my 2 cent.
> Kenwood - KFC-XW1200F
> Kenwood - KFC-XW1000F
> Kenwood - KFC-XW800F


they look nice too...but at $179 each for the 10, i stayed with the dayton at $119ea


----------



## glandnut

Anyone know the sensitivity specs on the SI sub? Can't seem to find it.


----------



## 08Raider

glandnut said:


> Anyone know the sensitivity specs on the SI sub? Can't seem to find it.


http://www.stereointegrity.com/images/SI_Driver_List.pdf


----------



## glandnut

83dB!?! Wow, had I known that it might have actually swayed my decision to pre-order. That significantly changes how much amp I'll need for this sub.


----------



## 08Raider

Yeah the SI MKIII does not need 450rms to perform


----------



## subwoofery

08Raider said:


> Yeah the SI MKIII does not need 450rms to perform


Agree. I have one under the passenger front seat. Was first sending 450rms but it was too much. 
I know have -4dB on my head unit. Much better. 

Don't get me wrong, with the 450rms, it still blended better than lots of subs I tried. And I'm using horns too. 

Hope that helps, 
Kelvin


----------



## DS-21

glandnut said:


> 83dB!?! Wow, had I known that it might have actually swayed my decision to pre-order. That significantly changes how much amp I'll need for this sub.


Why? Bass efficiency is determined by box size. Take a small box and expect to get bass out of it, efficiency will suffer.

Any other subwoofer will be basically the same efficiency at the relevant frequencies as the SI sub at the relevant frequencies in the same sized box. Now, some will simply publish misleading specs, such as sensitivity at 200Hz or sensitivity at the top of some inductive peak. And others will outright lie. But the end result will vary little to none.


----------



## audionublet

The Kenwood shallow subs aren't bad at all really if all that's available to you is mainstream stuff at a local shop.


----------



## audionublet

miniSQ said:


> Stereo Integrity | Home


I wonder how two of these would sound up against 2 8w7's ported ....


----------



## 08Raider

Not sure how they would compare on sound but 2jl 8w7's would take up 2 ft^3, and cost over $800, whereas 2 SI MKIII's would take up 1 ft^3 and cost about $500 with shipping.
The MKIII's fit the needs of many truck owners who do not want to give up space for sound quality.

But people have pulled over 140db with 2 SI BM MKIII's.


----------



## glandnut

Thanks for bringing up some points I had not considered. 
I suppose I had a knee jerk reaction when I saw the low sensitivity rating. 
Regardless, I had signed on early when the pre-order came up, so I'm in it to win it.


----------



## joeymac

the jl 13tw5's are nice..yeah they were very pricey. i got them when they first came out...
if i had it do do over...wow...a grand for 2 thin subs...i'd prolly go a different route with that much money.....so imo...the jl's r great, but def overpriced


----------



## 08Raider

Yeah the JL's are great, but the price is high for the 13Tw5's. They also take up a little more space than the MKIII. (JL .8 ft^3 compared to SI's .5 ft^3) 

Now that I have heard both side by side, I would give the MKIII the edge in sound quality and the 13Tw5 the edge in raw SPL. 

I also have also heard the new Kenwood Excelon shallow subs, and they are pretty good. A lot better than some of the others on the market, but I would not put them in the same category as the MKIII or TW5 and they cost almost as much as the MKIII, but more people would have ready access to them.


----------



## lawrence131

Are the SI's able to go in IB or any other shallow subs good for IB?


----------



## Danometal

I have 2 of the Kenwood shallow 12s. They sound amazing for what they are. Very clean and great output.


----------



## lawrence131

Will the Kenwood's do IB though? 

They are well reviewed for small sealed or ported enclosures, but not sure how they would do without a box. I'm replacing the stock rear-deck sub and if it needs to be in a box the space requirements will make a big difference and the install will be much harder.


----------



## Danometal

lawrence131 said:


> Will the Kenwood's do IB though?
> 
> They are well reviewed for small sealed or ported enclosures, but not sure how they would do without a box. I'm replacing the stock rear-deck sub and if it needs to be in a box the space requirements will make a big difference and the install will be much harder.


Dunno about that. At first I had them in .65 cubes each, and the low notes suffered. I built a box whereas they had a full cube each, and it was like I got different subs. Sounded awesome. They may unload IB though. Not sure.


----------



## 08Raider

What is your application for the shallow mount sub? if you have 1ft^3 per sub there might be other subs available to you now that will perform well. (unless you are a truck owner that can only build a box 5" thick but 50" long). 

The Polk MM1240dvc is pretty impressive and although it is not a true shallow mount sub it's mounting depth of just under 4 3/4" and .88 ft^3 requirement is pretty attractive. And you can pick them up for about $130 per if you shop around.


----------



## Danometal

08Raider said:


> What is your application for the shallow mount sub? if you have 1ft^3 per sub there might be other subs available to you now that will perform well. (unless you are a truck owner that can only build a box 5" thick but 50" long).
> 
> The Polk MM1240dvc is pretty impressive and although it is not a true shallow mount sub it's mounting depth of just under 4 3/4" and .88 ft^3 requirement is pretty attractive. And you can pick them up for about $130 per if you shop around.


It was a truck box about 51 inches long by 19 inches high. I did see the Polks sometime after my purchase of the Kenwoods. They look very nice. I can personally recommend the Kenwoods from personal experience though. They sound very clean, with great output. The glass carbon cones are pretty cool too. The efficiency is a true 91 dbs @ 1W/1M as well.

Heck I thought about putting them in my Saturn, but I wanted to try a 15 inch sub since I had so much room.


----------



## miniSQ

08Raider said:


> What is your application for the shallow mount sub? if you have 1ft^3 per sub there might be other subs available to you now that will perform well. (unless you are a truck owner that can only build a box 5" thick but 50" long).
> 
> The Polk MM1240dvc is pretty impressive and although it is not a true shallow mount sub it's mounting depth of just under 4 3/4" and .88 ft^3 requirement is pretty attractive. And you can pick them up for about $130 per if you shop around.


X2...I picked up a polk MM1240 and it sounds GREAT.


----------



## 08Raider

I was going to pick up the Polk for a fill in until I get my MKIII but it would be a lot of work building a different box and trying to fit it behind my seats. 

So for now I am stuck with a Niche Audio 10" shallow mount that I picked up from a local shop for now. ( the Niche is not very impressive at all, it has a horrible tone and really struggles with low notes. The more power you put to it, the more it distorts to the point of sounding like total crap at moderate to high volume levels.)


----------



## miniSQ

08Raider said:


> I was going to pick up the Polk for a fill in until I get my MKIII but it would be a lot of work building a different box and trying to fit it behind my seats.
> 
> So for now I am stuck with a Niche Audio 10" shallow mount that I picked up from a local shop for now. ( the Niche is not very impressive at all, it has a horrible tone and really struggles with low notes. The more power you put to it, the more it distorts to the point of sounding like total crap at moderate to high volume levels.)


why not grab the Polk INSTEAD??


----------



## 08Raider

miniSQ said:


> why not grab the Polk INSTEAD??


I already pre-ordered the SI MKIII,, but with all the delays in this production run I could not go any longer without some sound in my truck. And if I had actually decided on the Polk before I ordered my MKIII I probably could have found a way to make it work , although it would have caused many headaches. But with the Polk being just a fill in sub until the MKIII ships I did not want to have to deal with that headache of trying to make it fit.


----------



## mSaLL150

lawrence131 said:


> Will the Kenwood's do IB though?
> 
> They are well reviewed for small sealed or ported enclosures, but not sure how they would do without a box. I'm replacing the stock rear-deck sub and if it needs to be in a box the space requirements will make a big difference and the install will be much harder.


If you are stuck with IB look at the Exodus DPL 10. XBL motor, shorting rings, shallow mounting depth and designed for IB use. Best of all it isn't expensive. Should be an excellent sub for you.


----------



## Danometal

Sonicelectronix has the Polks for a good price.


----------



## snaimpally

Is mounting depth the reason you are going for a shallow sub? Because as someone mentioned, he is using a full cube per sub so presumably its a large, shallow box. That is the problem with most shallow subs, they still need the volume of a regular sized sub so you are basically squishing the box to make it thinner. If you can do it, look for a modest mounting depth, such as 5" AND smallish box requirements.


----------

