Funny how the people who know what they're doing are also the most fair and reasonable! When I had my bike touched up before with the FP3 I know that similar to you the overall gains were not huge. BUT, like you mentioned the changes made by a professional touch you (not in that way), in a much greater way than a canned or autotuned map can. For me it was slow speed throttle smoothness and fuel consumption.

Nice to hear that this stuff is finally working in your favor, it's been a long road!

 

Definitly Robby. Very happy with the results, and more so, happy to have a trustworthy tuner only 45 min away for the future. He really knows his stuff. Does a variety of bikes, but being a Road King owner, he favors HD. He spend a good two hours with me, and for $125 (even though he's the propriater, I gave him a nice tip) it was less per hour then some pay for a housekeeper around here (I exaggerate a bit of course). Overall very happy. And a bit disgusted at the previous "tuner" I used who charged me 3.5x the cost, for less results...

 

Vdop and I talked abut it, but since I had been talking to John at DS while he was moving locations, and as he just re-opened, I wanted to give him my business.

 

Looks good. Money well spent, Mchad.

 

That Torque increase is Sweet where it counts ..

 

Torque schmorque. It's a back calculated number attributed to your engine. Torque at the rear wheel is a result of gearing, not a piston going up and down. Your engine makes power. It makes very little more in the band you care about than it did before. I think it's mostly the placebo effect...you want it to feel stronger there.
Per your chart, where it IS stronger is at the top of the rev range. If you are riding hard and not short shifting the engine, the new state of tune will definitely get you where you're going faster.
I'm not a fan of this concept of discussing higher *peak* values. No one rides at any single rpm...or at least not for long. The area under the power curve tells the story. And yours tells a story of good times at higher rpms...

 

I don't quite know how to respond to this. Kinda contradicts everything I have learned about Harley tuning/performance? If torque doesn't matter, how is it my bike accelerates like a rocket at 2500+ rpms, when it's not making peak hp until 5000+ RPM?

 

You have nothing to worry about. The bike is making 95 ft lbs of tq @ 2200 rpm & your tuner got rid of that dip in the curve. Your seat of the pants dyno verifies your results that the chart shows.

 

I think what he is saying is you could increase rear wheel torque with a change of gearing. Go with a bigger pulley in the rear and the torque at the rear wheel increases. Your max hp is at the upper end of the RPM range where most of us don't normally ride. So it's not as usable unless you can keep the bike up there.

I think your results are pretty good. It's a nice smooth curve and the hp increases all the way through. I've had track bikes in the past where the hp would hit hard at a certain spot and just drop off at a different spot. I think the twins give a nice profile and smooth delivery.

One thing I was told by my dyno guy. HP is just a number. Don't be too concerned with its max. In the end you have a bike that is running properly (not too lean, not too rich) and you have a good graph. I would be happy with the results.

 

Because it makes a lot of power at low rpms compared to other other engine designs. An inline 600 will make more power *peak* power, but in a race to 100 mph or so, it might get smoked by a much heavier bike that makes more power in the rest of the rev range. Total power is the power under the ENTIRE power curve. An engine that makes a lot of low and mid range power may well make more total power than an engine that makes very little power until it hits the top of its rev range, even if it makes a higher peak value. When you ride a bike you don't ride it at one set rpm.
Torque is a force times a distance. Your engine creates a force when fuel ignites and pushes down the piston. The torque derived at the rear wheel is dependent on the distance which is created thru gearing.
When you ride a bicycle on flat ground, you are the engine. If you start to go up a hill, if your legs only have so much force, you will need to shift up a gear. The same amount of force provided by your legs will have an increased torque at the rear wheel allowing you to continue up the hill. What you don't get is free power. The price you pay for the additional torque is slower speed. The power your gams produced is the same.
The problem with specifying a peak engine torque value is that it is meaningless without knowing the rpm at which that torque is made. If you know the rpm at which the torque is made then you know the power, thus making the torque itself superfluous.
Let's say two engines both have a peak torque of 100 ft*lbs. One engine makes that value at 10 rpm, the other makes that value at 10k rpm. The second engine is going to be a thousand times more powerful at it's peak torque value. Knowing that both engines make a peak torque of 100 ft*lbs is useless without knowing the rpm it's created. Again, knowing both is knowing the power. But even this is pretty meaningless information by itself as it only describes the power of the engine at that one specific rpm. The power curve tells you the total power the machine is able to make. For whatever reason, no one has ever bothered to write a rather simple routine to sum the total power delivered by an engine over its entire rev range. Odd that. It's a bit like if the electric company sent you a bill based on your peak usage rather than your total usage. You may have been gone and turned off everything in the house for 29 days, but on the one day you were there you used a 1000 watts, so they just charge you for 30 days of 1000 watts. Without knowing what is going on under the rest of the power curve, you really have no idea how much total power the machine makes.
The motorcycle community uses the term torque to describe low end power. But ask them the magic rpm at which torque becomes power and they're liable to look at you cross eyed.