Going Backwards?
 

For the looks and sound of the bike,
a few weeks ago I went form Rinehart’s 2 into 1 ($$$)
back to stock header pipes with Cycle Shack Slip On Turn Outs.

Also had a completely new Dyno Tune and a different AC cover.
I now have the look and sound I should have done in the first place.

As a unexpected bonus I now have more HP and higher torque
across the board. Runs strong as before without popping on decal.

This does not tell me that Slip Ons are better than 2 into 1’s.
It only tells me in my case with the variables I have, it was a good move.

It does make me wonder if the tune up I got with the Rinehart’s
was the best they could have done?

All bikes and service departments are not created equal.

Rinehart’s 2 into 1 Video
http://s132.photobucket.com/albums/q5/twofish8/?action=view&current=Rineharts2ino1.flv

Cycle Shack Video
http://s132.photobucket.com/albums/q5/twofish8/?action=view&current=CYCLESHACK1.flv

Going Backwards?
Got lucky not this time.

For me getting it right the first time is something other people do.

Update from:
https://www.hdforums.com/m_3246177/tm.htm

http://img2.putfile.com/main/5/13409313783.jpg

RE: Going Backwards?
 

I did the same thing but for different reasons. I need to ba able to pass the sound restrictions in Germany and the Big Shots woul dnot pass. I went with lip ons that way if those do not pass I can easily swap them out for the stock mufflers.

RE: Going Backwards?
 

I like the look in the after picture...... sans the WS. Sharp!

RE: Going Backwards?
 

I like the looks and functionality of the stock headers and CS mufflers better. It's cleaner looking to me. I went from CS mufflers on my Bob to Rinehart slip-ons and have no regrets. If I dump the Rineharts, I'll put CS muffs on again. Excellent bang for the buck, good sound and performance.

RE: Going Backwards?
 

I guess I'm partial to 2-1, but that's just me, glad you are getting better results! Both pictures, before and after, are great looking!

I am a bit puzzled, however, I have researched the 2-1 and many dyno sheets have shown 2-1 to be pulling highr torque numbers in the mid-range, but that's with different 'variables'.

Nice work, man! Looks awesome!!!:D

RE: Going Backwards?
 

Sometimes simpler is better.

RE: Going Backwards?
 

Yeah I really prefer the After shot. It looks .....right to me!

For me Harley is meant to look that way! As the saying goes .........if it makes ya happy!

RE: Going Backwards?
 

Looking good twofish. Lots of subtle touches going on, i like the battery cover what did you use? Much better without the reflectors as well.

RE: Going Backwards?
 

Did either shop have a dedicated, fully-enclosed dyno room?

I suspect the second one did and the first one didn't. Right?

RE: Going Backwards?
 

labfreak
“I am a bit puzzled, however, I have researched the 2-1 and many dyno sheets have shown 2-1 to be pulling higher torque numbers in the mid-range, but that's with different 'variables'. “

That’s the impression I was under also, and still am.

I’m still thinking something wasn’t done right when the Dyno was
done on the Rinehart’s.

stagolee
“Did either shop have a dedicated, fully-enclosed dyno room?’
Yes, they were both done at the same HD delaership.

Different mechanic, I think so.

http://img2.putfile.com/thumb/5/12119032053.jpg