while you are right that the devastator cab is not a true horn in the eyes of many, what constitutes a true bass horn isn't actually well defined.
i've attached a couple of simulations that may be helpful in understanding this design. admittedly, simulations are not reality and measured results don't always conform to modeled results, but nonetheless they may be helpful in shedding some light on some key points, so here goes.
in the first simulation, the black line represents one model of the devastator cab--with its non-flared 'horn section' and ported rear section. if we were simply to change the 'horn section' to have a flare that would make it look more like a traditional horn, the upper end shifts toward the light gray line. output above 90hz rises, but at the expense of output below 90hz.
on the low end, if the port is removed, output also falls. those two effects together give the light gray line. given that most folks who are running subs are looking for a good solution from about 20hz to about 80hz , we thought the design hit the target for that audience pretty well.
the second simulation shows the efficiency (again, just a model) of a 390hf-loaded f20 horn (top chart) and a devastator model (bottom chart). the first efficiency peak occurs at different low frequencies owing to the different designs. the f20 has its first efficiency peak at 20hz, while the devastator having a ported rear section has an efficiency minimum at about that point. working up from there, both begin to rise in efficiency at 40hz. the intermediate drop in the devastator is much less that that of the f20 owing in part to the enormous motor that is on the driver. peak efficiency occurs at slightly different points, but overall the devastator seems to present a compelling efficiency case in the upper bass as compared with a traditional horn.
all that efficiency translates into higher sensitivity too. the devastator has about 6db greater 1w1m (2pi space, power based on dc resistance of driver) sensitivity in the upper bass as compared with the f20 and with its much more massive driver has greater output capability across the entire bass range (about +6db or so on the low end to about 15db or more on the upper end depending on how much amplifier is put on it).
all this is in no way picking on the f20. it is a good design and doesn't require as expensive of driver as the devastator. i've recommended it to lots of folks.
i suppose my point with all of this is to suggest that folks not get locked into specific definitions of subwoofers and what may or may constitute a particular configuration, but rather consider the performance characteristics of each against the target and choose the design that comes closest to hitting it.
I agree with all of this, in a covered area it should be good, you could always put another cover over it when it not being used to keep dampness off of it.
TV's today are pretty much disposable, if you don't go to big or silly with fancy features there not that expensive.
Just looked some up for fun, and this is BB, you can find better prices than this.
50" 4K smart tv $300 Vizio
50" 4K smart tv $300 LG
43" 4K smart tv $279 Samsung
40" smart 1080P $190 Vizeo
He$$ no. It’s has never worked anywhere in the world, so what makes you think it would work here in the USA My insurance payments went from 400 a year for a family of 5 and now it’s 17,000 a year. Yes that’s. 17K and only 1/10t the benefits. Dollar for dollar Klipsch has no equals Name one other speaker company that can build a speaker and keep working like new after 45 plus years of service. Answer NO ONE !!!!!!
What’s the price? Need to check my trust fund. Lol Dollar for dollar Klipsch has no equals Name one other speaker company that can build a speaker and keep working like new after 45 plus years of service. Answer NO ONE !!!!!!