It was a bad combination of parts, but no other changes between those runs other than slip ons. Mufflers have a big impact on not only power, but how well the bike runs.

 

Lonewolf,
I always appreciate your tuning input and I have great respect for you tuning knowledge, but I feel this post is a bit misleading. With no other changes other than the muffs, and that much difference amongst the three, that means their was an effect on volumetric efficiency. Hence only one of those sets of slip-ons, likely the top performer, was actually "tuned" to peak performance. For a true apples to apples comparision each slip on would have to be re-tuned for max performance. I swapped a FM headpipe back to the OEM head pipe with a little drop in power, until I tweaked the tune for the actual pipe I was running, then the difference in performance was negligible. no matter how small, any change to intake or exhaust will effect the tune. Just putting a clean air filter on will make a difference that you can see on a graph.

Hippie, 5% is only 5 horsepower if you are actually making 100hp ballpark, on a stock bike 5% is more like 3hp, barely noticeable, so I'm going to have to agree with you here.

 

That was a combo of cams and pistons that needed headwork to work. All 3 sets were tuned. The one with the biggest numbers was horrible to ride. Here is another,96" 204 cams and air cleaner. The knock offs were awful to tune and the bike just did not run very well. The bike now runs great with the mellows. That first pic is proof that you don't ride the dyno sheet.

 

Hmmm. Curious, in that the one with the best #'s was " horrible" to ride, what was it that made it horrible?

 

Very "soft" down low. It just didn't have any power, almost slip the clutch to get going. It had very low ve #'s in the lower rpm's.