Everything is a trade-off when you change cams.... you want more top end HP/Torque then you must give up the flat torque curve. Not a good thing on the street where it is best to have as flat of a torque curve as possible.

If ti were me I would put the OEM cam back in and improve performance in areas outside the cam, here are some ideas:

1. Over all vehicle-rider weight reductions. Things like carbon-fiber replacements for heavy steel fenders, etc. The more weight you can take off the bike in front of the front axle and behind it the more naturally stable the motorcycle becomes. Removing weight that is high on the bike lowers the center of gravity and further stabilizes the machine. Calculate your horsepower to weight ratio and compare to other performance motorcycles online and see where you are now. That is a good starting point.

2. Reduce air drag. Removing the bags and lowering the ape bars to you present less front-facing surface area and possibly adding some kind of aerodynamic valance to the front-end will make a difference that you can feel.

3. Lighten Wheels. If you could lighten the wheels... even the tires you can improve performance measurably. I lightened my tires by 6 pounds by simply moving to Pirelli (from heavier Dunlops) -- still OEM sized. The Pirelli Night Dragon tires have an improved radius design which increases tire contact patch about 10% over OEM tires. That is a side benefit. When you lighten tires you are reducing the torque required to turn the tires (accelerate and decelerate) --- you accelerate faster and brake faster to a stop.

4. Get a tuner and re-turn your ECM -- there are programmers with custom maps that can sit on your handlebars. You can dynamically re-tune in minutes for economy, regular riding, performance, etc. When you did the cam change you, in effect, re-turned for performance in a very hard to reverse way basically sticking you to the race track when you are actually on the road.

5. All performance improvements are cumulative so I would get a www.veypor.com performance monitor so I could establish a performance baseline. I think this is better than a dynometer because it can account for things like air drag, rolling resistance, weight, etc. that dynometers cannot account for. This device makes dynometers "old fashioned nonsense." Dynos also operate in stagnant air -- not a moving air stream so can't even account for air flow and air pressure zones that you might be drawing intake air from... and more.

 

Alan is right, pipe is a bigger problem than cam. It's large primary and very short. Actually I'm surprised it's not making more hp. That big dip you see til 3500 is what you're always feeling, that probably won't go away or even get much better with a cam change if the pipe stays. Pipe change and a good tune might be all you need. The 259 is not a low rpm torque cam but when it's used with a decent exhaust and a good tune it does fine, especially in a dyna. I just tuned one of these kits in a fat bob with big radius 2-2s that everybody says suck. No dip or flat spot, 100ft lbs at 2500rpm and made 115ft lbs. Couldn't ask for much more from a 103. Definitely no lack of torque on the road. A good longer 2-1 would have done even better.

 

I used to talk with Jim Leineweber at length regarding cams, everything anyone can imagine about them actually!

few things that have stuck in my mind is that none of (the other various eng. components) has as much effect on overlap as actually moving the centers! and that he has never found the "too soon" opening point when it comes to H-D intake valve opening. and things like how a longer stroke (same cubic inch displacement) will lower the power band because the motor now thinks it has less overlap (piston isn't hanging around as long at top is why) so (the direct correlation between R/S ratio and in/ex valve centers)

what has recently had me thinking that those 57H cams with high ratio rockers would be really sweet in my short stroke 88 if I could get a set ground on wider centers.

easy to make power where you want (kinda/sorta) by playing with longer/shorter primary pipe, but what is that doing to your BSFC?

maybe you should also be thinking about less overlap if you also want a motor that's efficient with it's fuel? food for thought anyway,huh