Timon
Junior Member
I'm still waiting on the e-mail with the graph included, but I have the print out I might have to scan and upload.
Anyway, during the initial dyno run I pulled 88.27 HP (no TQ indicated) using the OTS map for my setup, and then after tuning I'm pulling 88.14 HP and 41.72 TQ. My current mods include: LeoVince Slip-ons (w/ Cat-Delete), KN Drop in, PCIIIUSB, and airbox mod on 91 octane. It's also probably good to note he said his dyno had been calibrated the previous weekend.
I'm just curious if this sounds about right given the elevation is roughly 4800 ft. I know the dyno, air flow, mileage, etc. can all impact numbers, but this does seem slightly low compared to some of the other numbers I looked up (one person claiming 94 bone stock).
The bike runs fine, no issues at all, it's pretty smooth, but I didn't really notice a change from before/after. In fact according to the run I technically lost HP.
Just looking for some thoughts/opinions and if anyone else has had similar experiences. I'll try to scan and upload the graphs when I get a chance.
Anyway, during the initial dyno run I pulled 88.27 HP (no TQ indicated) using the OTS map for my setup, and then after tuning I'm pulling 88.14 HP and 41.72 TQ. My current mods include: LeoVince Slip-ons (w/ Cat-Delete), KN Drop in, PCIIIUSB, and airbox mod on 91 octane. It's also probably good to note he said his dyno had been calibrated the previous weekend.
I'm just curious if this sounds about right given the elevation is roughly 4800 ft. I know the dyno, air flow, mileage, etc. can all impact numbers, but this does seem slightly low compared to some of the other numbers I looked up (one person claiming 94 bone stock).
The bike runs fine, no issues at all, it's pretty smooth, but I didn't really notice a change from before/after. In fact according to the run I technically lost HP.
Just looking for some thoughts/opinions and if anyone else has had similar experiences. I'll try to scan and upload the graphs when I get a chance.
Last edited: