I know there's a million talks over the pv vs thunder max but most forums i see are old and seemed to push tords the thumdermax but last few mons I don't here anything about the thunder max maybe the pv it's now had enough time to take over the market?? ...so how does this power vision in 2015 ..now that it's had alot of time to be out there hold up to the thunder max??

 

Are you familiar with the new PV option called Target Tune? Essentially dynamic real time wide band tuning on the fly.

http://www.dynojet.com/powervision/p...rget-tune.aspx

 

I am looking for similar information. I am in the market for a tuner...and I have some screaming one and some screaming the other...and I am just going nuts trying to figure out what direction to go....

so...yea...lets here what ya got!!

 

This topic comes up about once a week. I've had Thunder Max on 5 touring bikes, the last were 3 2012 Limiteds, ( 2 I rebuilt that had been wrecked). All my bikes were stage one and they ran great with the Tmax. I thought they were easy to install and auto tune.
It was a small pain to have to install the larger bungs up near the heads for the wide band O2 sensors. I never got good fuel mileage with the Tmax. 35 -40 mpg.

This year we bought a 2015 and 14 limited and I put the Dynojet Power Vision 2 on each bike. The new bikes have Stage one and even with the narrow band O2 sensors I have all the power I need and want. My fuel mileage on back roads under 70 mph is 45 -50 mpg. Just get a close map and auto-tune until you like the results.

I'm hooked on the Power Vision 2,

 

It's hard to get good mileage when the bike is running good lol.. I have had the pv for 8 months and it was well worth the money for me.. The little bastard does soo much

 

Power Vision would be my choice and my tuner's at J&B Performance like's the PV over anything on the market, they will tune other tuners such as TTS, SESPT,PV and even the Thunder Max but it's the least favorite of any next to the TTS.

 

Ok thanks guys sounds like the pv is way better

 

the inclusion of the 50 miles per gallon on any road under 70 is IMHO... couch couch... lets just say, back roads that were down hill.

So a device that richens (basically) and tweaks the AFR at a multitude of parameters improves fuel efficiency. whew...

 

I do believe in this also.

 

Yea I do thanks