It was my understanding that the rear cylinder receives an adequate oil supply from oil being flung off the flywheels, but that the front does not receive as much "flung" oil, and so the front cylinder is baffled so as to pull/suck oil into the cylinder on the upstroke of the piston...?? Is that not correct?
I didn't realize that the rear cylinder(s) was/were ever baffled, and it kind of baffles me that both would be. ?? I did not know they were ever there to restrict oil to the cylinders. ?
As I understand it, at least in terms of the big-twin, the reason to remove the front baffle, and install oilers is partly to gain a couple of HP because when the baffled cylinder is on the upstroke, it's sucking/pulling oily air and oil up past the baffle due to a suction effect...which costs a couple of ponies. ? Again, just my understanding of the whole baffle thing. Seems to me that the little and big twins are just about the same animal, other than the actual displacement, in terms of how the engine really works, or functions.
As I bought my big-twin engine as a already complete and rebuilt unit, I've never seen inside it, but I don't think I'd take any of the baffles out for that small a gain in HP. Unless one is really hot-rodding the engine, getting every last pony out of it, and reliability is not an issue, I'm pretty sure I'd stick with the baffles...Harley must have had some reason to do it that way. Also with the engine stroked to 54", seems like longevity and reliability would outweigh the cost of a couple of HP...assuming that the baffles in some way are good for the engine. But I guess it all depends exactly on how the whole baffle thing actually works. ??
Just brain-storming...or...trying to!