(me)...But if it is too rich the extra fuel will wash away lubrication and contaminate the oil causing early failure and excessive wear...
(Cowtipper) Yes, you are correct, but doesn't that have to be waayyyy rich? Can you smell it in the oil at that point?
(me)Yes it has has be pretty rich for it to have that effect and you should be able to smell it in the oil at that point. To effect the lubrication of the rings to cyl. wall it doesn't have to be righ enough to smell it in the oil but you should be able to smell the unburned gas in the exhaust and the plug will be extremely black with soot.
(me) If you do as Cowtipper suggests you basicly have a reducer cone and I think that is probably what you want. Won't do much for the loudness though if you are after a quieter pipe.
(Cowtipper) Touche, Ian. It's actually a little different and has a bit of a different effect. With the Baffle, it points into the pipe towards the head. With the stock reducer, it points towards the exit, which is basically just a choke (or bottleneck). Using the baffle, the exhaust pulse is forced to flow through the choke
and around it. Cutting the tabs off allows for a very free path since the air flowing around the baffle can also flow back through the holes in the baffle. I found it to be very efficient and it cuts down the db at idle.
Just one (from some of the recent posts from others) apparently ignorant tinker's experience. Take it for what it is.
(me)I know apparently I'm ignorant too. I didn't realise you had put them in backwards. That should offer extra back pressure as to the performance end or the sound end I can't say since I have never tried that.
I got the darn quote boxes all messed up and this was the easiest fix!
