<html><body>
<DIV>So you are saying you have tried a comparison of a tuned pipe vs a muffler back to back? Any data?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: Rcmaster199@aol.com <BR>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR><FONT id=role_document face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 3/6/2006 6:57:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, jeffghughes@comcast.net writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>was going through the data on Ed Hartley's 2 stroke page and noted that there is virtually no difference between a piped OS1.40 and a muffled OS1.40 for the prop sizes being used. I assume that is because to get a nice linear throttle curve on a pipe, the pipe is deliberately set too long for peak horsepower. My question is why run a tuned pipe at all if you are going to set it too long for peak power?. Has anyone run back to back tests with same engine and plane with a pipe vs a muffler to see if there is truly a difference in power or feel?</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Yes and there is</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>MattK</DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>