Has anyone dyno'd back to back an exhaust with perforated baffles then installed louvered baffles to compare TQ/HP?. I've done all the internet home work I can and I can't find any direct comparisons. I'm not concerned with the sound aspect, just performance effects between the two.
I have a Fuel Moto Jackpot Road & Track 2-1. It came with a perforated baffle. I'm thinking of buying FM's RTX louvered baffle, with the intent of improving TQ/HP, however I don't want to lose power.
I understand perforated baffles have the lowest air flow restriction & generate highest horsepower. I've read that louvered baffles are designed to generate better pick up and throttle response at lower rpms.
I've seen a couple of comments from tuners stating they prefer louvered baffles, but have not seen dyno comparisons or explanations as to why.
D&D says this about their baffles.
The Louvered baffles are for 96" to 103" motors.
Perforated Baffles are for modified 103" to 131" motors and have a higher air flow than louvered baffle.
Khrome Works says this about their louvered baffle.
The louvered baffle raises low end torque. It does drop the high end horsepower level slightly on big inch motors.
I have a 107" in my 2002 RK
I can only speak to the Fat Cat perf baffle and Khromewerks slip ons on my 107 both tuned by the same gent a few years apart. With the Fatty everything started climbing hard at 3000 and continued well without a hit on the top end.
The fat cat recommends perforated baffles for Woods cams. Seems weird to me, but from their own mouths, the Louverd baffle supposedly suffers with a dip in torque. That's the only negative thing I know of.