# Port question: Size vs. flare?



## BoomieMCT (Dec 11, 2006)

So I have an issue. For my center channel I'm building I ordered a 3" precision port. It is a well built port but I didn't realize that it was 6" at the open end! This makes it too large for my baffle and will make my speaker 2" too tall (block the screen). My other options right now is to use a 2" precision port or a 2.5" pipe with no flare. Which do y'all think would work better?

In Unibox simulations they draw lines at 5% mach and 8% mach for maximum port speed. With the straight 2.5 inch pipe I cross 5% @ 90 Hz and 120 watts, 8% @ 77Hz and 120 watts. A 2 inch pipe is 5% @ 102 Hz and 120 watts, 8% @ 96Hz and 120 watts. This is why I favor a large pipe option, even if it has no flare, I think it will work better. Since these are for HT only and will be crossed at 80Hz I think it would work better, but I'm not 100% sure.

So, to flare or not to flare?


----------



## mgboy (Jan 17, 2007)

What about the 3" with no flare? Eh eh?


----------



## BoomieMCT (Dec 11, 2006)

mgboy said:


> What about the 3" with no flare? Eh eh?


I didn't see a 3" without flare that is either screw-in or press-fit. I don't want to make my own flare. I have found a press-fit 2.5" port with a bit of flare I'll probably use. I'm still curious about my question though - what is better, a bit of flare or a bit more tube?


----------



## mayhem13 (Feb 2, 2008)

Did you model looking at port resonance? some of it may be in the passband but can be controlled with port diameter and flares.


----------

