Exhaust advice

[barbagris]

I enjoy the challenge,

Oh goody.

 

[Paul Bryant]

I really like the look of the black as it appears to be pointed up a little more than the chrome. I'd actually like it to be about another 1 inch or so higher at the tail. So the top of the can is just below the banjo on the caliper.

Beyond that, the spot where the taper ends about a third of the way back, it catches my eye and not in a good way. It's not ugly, just not my thing. I think if it were one taper to whole way back, with maybe the last 2-3 inches not tapered, I'd probably like it more. I just won't ask you to make a special one, not like it and you be out that time and money

Thanks for your feed back Anthony, this is good.

When I first built this twin muffler system I set it up like this, but I didn't like it (we agree to dis-agree here ) so I lowered them to as they are now.

The first incarnation of this system I built 5 years ago was made to get some sound out of the bike. I'd only had the bike about a year at this stage and it was waaaaay too quiet.

These mufflers worked well and sounded real nice.
The only thing was the long cones were REAL difficult to produce in a timely manner at low volume, so from a Business perspective they weren't viable.
An interesting point that I believe others have noticed as well, the bike was noticeable quieter when I fitted my Header to the above combination.

Re I just won't ask you to make a special one, not like it and you be out that time and money
That won't happen, we would decide on a design referring to different photos etc and would finalise this before I built anything.
You're quite welcome to put any idea's of what you would like to me ..... I'm sure that between us we can come up with something that works for you.
There are always options.

 

[WyldCFH]

I don't know if it is because yours seems to have more sheen to it, but i can't see the transfer from cone to cylinder, as obviously, in the Rinehart. Wonder how that would look in titanium. Plus this is just an inch or two shorter, which i also like.

Link Removed

 

[Paul Bryant]

I think that because the inlet of the Rinehart is larger (to suit Harleys) the taper is slower (less angle) so visually it looks smoother.

 

[barbagris]

I don't know if it is because yours seems to have more sheen to it, but i can't see the transfer from cone to cylinder, as obviously, in the Rinehart. Wonder how that would look in titanium. Plus this is just an inch or two shorter, which i also like.

Link Removed

I like that - it seems to sit up closer to the Footrest covers too - personally I prefer to be able to see/remove rear wheel spindles without zorst removal. Would love to see a rear view.

 

[Paul Bryant]

 

[Paul Bryant]

I like that - it seems to sit up closer to the Footrest covers too - personally I prefer to be able to see/remove rear wheel spindles without zorst removal. Would love to see a rear view.

Some interesting points here Chris.
When I first set up the tooling to make this Rinehart Silencer, I intended to make it straight as the Rinehart is.

Having read your post re "it seems to sit up closer to the Footrest covers too" I thought "why didn't I make this straight" (cone and barrel conical to each other)
Then I remembered that it had to have an angle in it (cone to barrel) to fit around the stock cross over pipe R/H mounting point.
John has removed this from his bike so the straight Rinehart can sit in closer to the Chassis, and up closer to the footrest frame covers.

Also I strive to build systems so that the axel can be removed with the pipe in place, but this is often not possible .... and for it to look correct as well

 

[barbagris]

Ah yes - compromises.

I know they won't fit a Roadster (ABS BOX) but imo - Sam got things pretty spot on with the Thugs.



I added the Supertrapp discs.

 

[mr hunt]

Dear Mr Greybeard,

It appears your electronic pictograph capture device has developed cataracts.

Yours sincerely

Mr Hunt

 

[WyldCFH]

Thanks for your feed back Anthony, this is good.

When I first built this twin muffler system I set it up like this, but I didn't like it (we agree to dis-agree here ) so I lowered them to as they are now.

The first incarnation of this system I built 5 years ago was made to get some sound out of the bike. I'd only had the bike about a year at this stage and it was waaaaay too quiet.

These mufflers worked well and sounded real nice.
The only thing was the long cones were REAL difficult to produce in a timely manner at low volume, so from a Business perspective they weren't viable.
An interesting point that I believe others have noticed as well, the bike was noticeable quieter when I fitted my Header to the above combination.

Re I just won't ask you to make a special one, not like it and you be out that time and money
That won't happen, we would decide on a design referring to different photos etc and would finalise this before I built anything.
You're quite welcome to put any idea's of what you would like to me ..... I'm sure that between us we can come up with something that works for you.
There are always options.

Looking at thes closer, compared to your new design and the Rinehart, you are correct about the angling. A more severe angle does not look better.

Re: the crossover mounting tab. Is that bolted on?

Re: the 2.5” Rinehart, could you make you muffler 2.5 and include the 2 > 2.5 adapter. And make is sit higher and straighter like the Rinehart and probably make it 1-1.5 in shorter.