<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><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></BODY></HTML>