I’ve been Hilltopped

Yox said:
I know, I have read most of them :thumb:
Every Hilltop thread on here reads roughly the same, happy customers and people who don't believe it but don't post any evidence, so I can't be bothered either. Even if one doesn't believe the figures the bike rides better, hence why people are happy.
Click to expand...

I had my RT Hilltopped and it was nicer to ride - but no way was the feel equal to the claims.
 
Yox said:
Every Hilltop thread on here reads roughly the same, happy customers and people who don't believe it but don't post any evidence, so I can't be bothered either. Even if one doesn't believe the figures the bike rides better, hence why people are happy.

Out of interest, are there any other mapping options for the LC engine?
Click to expand...


I think the lack of pretty much anyone else having dyno figures as low as the hilltop pre runs consistently do anywhere in the world (pretty much every dyno chart I can find for them gives a low pre tweak figure) and the fact the OP has a bike that supposedly makes more torque at 2000rpm than a stock bike at 6.5k is not casting a shred of doubt ? (That is beyond fantasy)

As I mentioned there are dynojet options amongst others which allow for a full per cylinder map. They claim about a 7-8hp peak gain. from a stock base of about 112

My take on the hilltop is that is undoes the emissions restricted areas of the fueling which will add a bit of hp and torque and improve ride ability but jazzed up a bit because numbers sell. That may well be worth the cost for many and that's their choice.

Me personally, if my LC made a genuine 97bhp after the break in period, i would take it back to the dealer and tell em it's broke.
 
I've only got 600 miles on mine so a tadge early for a dyno run. Once I've got some more on I'll run it on a dyno to see what's lurking in there as standard just to see.
 
Just my take on it:
I had my KTM 1190 Adventure done by Hilltop 6 months ago. On the initial run the bike was stopped at 6k revs as Geoff thought it was running too lean to max it out - therefore I didn't get a pre-tweak printout. He then did his stuff and the results were 131rwhp and 89lb/ft of torque which I'm happy with, as the engine is marketed as a 150bhp lump at the crank.
The fuelling is less snatchy low down and I'm pleased with the response from 3k up, although the powerband kick at about 6k has been smoothed out which I'm not so happy about, but hey-ho it is pretty seamless and indeed relentless when you hang onto the revs.

I'm not sure it's worth £300 but impossible to tell whether he's saved my engine as he said it was running dangerously lean pre-tweak - I had already had it de-catted and running a Wings end can. Could he just have been saying it was too lean as the gains would have been minimal if I'd seen both pre- and post- runs?
I'll never know but I have seen others on youtube who had their pre- run cancelled due to fuelling issues. I do wonder whether it's the GS that delivers the best incrrease and so all of them get both runs as it looks good on paper - other bikes might not respond as well and so it's just the "after" run that gets the headlines.

In short - if I had a GS I'd probably get it done but I wouldn't if I get another KTM, SuperTen etc
 
Five more pages of the usual speculation. With all the engineers around why doesn’t someone mount wideband O2s and measure the before and after fueling?
 
Roger 04 RT said:
Five more pages of the usual speculation. With all the engineers around why doesn’t someone mount wideband O2s and measure the before and after fueling?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what that would tell you as it seems from my searching that the Hilltop alterations do indeed improve the afr and smooth things out etc as verified by other dyno operators.

The contentious bit for me is the abnormally low pre tweak figures which essentially make there appear to be frankly fanciful gains when really the post tweak figures in terms of power are what most people seem to get on a stock bike. Just potentially made to look good by dumbing down what came before.

There are dyno variations for sure which have to be taken into account but things like a 25ft lb torque gain at 2000rpm or equivalent to a stock bike at 6500rpm. That's just out there and not credible for even a major upgrade of the bike (exhaust, map, etc etc). I can't find that sort of gain anywhere from anyone regardless of mods on that bike. Nor a 15% bhp gain from just fueling tweaks alone to a boxer motor.

I might look into having my dynoed over the winter as it's bog stock and might be a good benchmark as to stock power. Despite how it might seem I do think there is value in their service in terms of rideability, i'm just pretty sure it is not all that it says on the tin.
 
Roger 04 RT said:
Five more pages of the usual speculation. With all the engineers around why doesn’t someone mount wideband O2s and measure the before and after fueling?
Click to expand...


The Dyno chars in post #37 also includes the AFR values
 
spoonz said:
The contentious bit for me is the abnormally low pre tweak figures which essentially make there appear to be frankly fanciful gains when really the post tweak figures in terms of power are what most people seem to get on a stock bike. Just potentially made to look good by dumbing down what came before.

There are dyno variations for sure which have to be taken into account but things like a 25ft lb torque gain at 2000rpm or equivalent to a stock bike at 6500rpm. That's just out there and not credible for even a major upgrade of the bike (exhaust, map, etc etc). I can't find that sort of gain anywhere from anyone regardless of mods on that bike. Nor a 15% bhp gain from just fueling tweaks alone to a boxer motor.
Click to expand...

I am not sure that all bikes going through Hilltop get abnormally low pre-tweak figures. I gave the example of my bike earlier, where pre-tweak was only a shade under 106 bhp and post-tweak was 111 bhp. This seems fairly realistic to me, with a gain in peak power of less than 5%.

Regarding the low rev torque gains, at 2000 rpm my bike shows a gain of about 19 ft/lb up from about 45 to about 64. That is admittedly a much bigger percentage gain than the peak power, but before dismissing it as unrealistic you have to ask whether BMW have deliberately under-tuned the bike in this part of the operating range, for whatever reason, possibly to protect the transmission in the lower gears. If so a largish increase may be explainable, and I certainly feel that the 2000-4000 rpm range is the area where my bike is most noticeably improved.
 
So much focus on the figures. :rolleyes:

To any sceptic, just ride a Hilltopped bike, then you’ll understand. ;)
 
The Nutty KTMer said:
So much focus on the figures. :rolleyes:

To any sceptic, just ride a Hilltopped bike, then you’ll understand. ;)
Click to expand...

I don't doubt it'll feel 'different'

I'm not interested in Hilltop for my 2017 GSA for several reasons.

a) No point messing around with power on this type of bike. Period. If you want a fast bike, go buy something else, or better to reduce weight instead. Even compared to a standard bike on the road, it wont be any noticeable difference in acceleration, it'll just 'feel' faster.

b) I have no issues with the fuelling. So changing the mapping can result in void warranty, ECU damage, Rear Tyre Damage strapped on the rolling road, potential fuel octane implications when travelling abroad (low grade fuel, extreme temperatures, high altitude) may be outside remapping parameters and endanger engine performance. Which is always a possibility on this type of 'Adventure' bike. I'd rather have a factory map and able to use a wider range of fuel quality for travelling.

c) Increase in torque for road riding will also increase wear on tyres, gearboxes, transmission, clutches, final drive, brakes, 'dare I say it... spokes'. Especially when under load like carrying pillion or luggage. Also, using this off-road with a lot more torque could break something.

d) Price consideration. £250 isn't a lot really, but it would pay for 3000 miles of petrol, or 6000 miles of major service, or 12000 miles of minor service, or 12000 miles of rear tyres, or 3 years of road tax, or a couple of days off-road training which would last you a lifetime... or mostly pay for an Advanced Rider Course and make you faster that way.
 
Warlord said:
I don't doubt it'll feel 'different'

I'm not interested in Hilltop for my 2017 GSA for several reasons.

a) No point messing around with power on this type of bike. Period. If you want a fast bike, go buy something else, or better to reduce weight instead. Even compared to a standard bike on the road, it wont be any noticeable difference in acceleration, it'll just 'feel' faster.

b) I have no issues with the fuelling. So changing the mapping can result in void warranty, potential fuel octane implications when travelling abroad (low grade fuel, extreme temperatures, high altitude) may be outside remapping parameters and endanger engine performance. Which is always a possibility on this type of 'Adventure' bike. I'd rather have a factory map and able to use a wider range of fuel quality for travelling.

c) Increase in torque for road riding will also increase wear on tyres, gearboxes, transmission, clutches, final drive, brakes. Especially when under load like carrying pillion or luggage. Also, using this off-road with a lot more torque could break something.

d) Price consideration. £250 isn't a lot really, but it would pay for 3000 miles of petrol, or 6000 miles of major service, or 12000 miles of minor service, or 12000 miles of rear tyres, or 3 years of road tax, or a couple of days off-road training which would last you a lifetime...
Click to expand...

All four of your points are nonsense. :rob

A. It’s not a power modification, it’s getting the correct fuelling for the bike. If you’re going to Hilltop for more power, you’re on the wrong bike.

B. Several dealers will now install a Hilltop map, so that blows the warranty argument. I’ve travelled all over Europe on my Hilltopped bikes, and had to put some really crap petrol in, on occasion, and there’s been no fuelling problems whatsoever.

C. The torque/ power figures are still less than the manufacturer quotes. Don’t forget that these bikes are tested with full power/ torque when developed, before the Euro dumbing down of power before they are released to the customer.

D. As the fueling has been corrected, the bike doesn’t burn as much fuel. Most people that have had the bike done have reported much better MPG from their bikes. And besides, you keep telling us how rich you are, so £250 is a drop in the ocean to you! :p

Either get on with it and do it, or stop talking about something you have no experience of, as if you do have experience.
 
Oh... and what makes me laugh as well.

People say, yeah but I get an extra 40 lb/ft of peak torque at 3000 rpm compared to standard... that's huge....

But when you are racing through the rev range, your only exposed to the 3000 rpm peak torque for a nanosecond as you race past it lol. And if you race to the red line and change gear, the next gear might start at 4000 rpm and you don't get the benefit of it at all.. :blast

If it's only 5% increase on average across the rev range, that's all you're going to see as a comparison to the standard bike next to you.

Yeah but yeah but.... the pull from 3000 rpm in 4 gear is amazing.... :comfort

Using torque in high gears at low speeds will just run the risk of unnecessary load on the gearbox and clutch, so whats the point? the bike next to you drops another gear lower and is just as fast?
 
The Nutty KTMer said:
All four of your points are nonsense. :rob

A. It’s not a power modification, it’s getting the correct fuelling for the bike. If you’re going to Hilltop for more power, you’re on the wrong bike.

B. Several dealers will now install a Hilltop map, so that blows the warranty argument. I’ve travelled all over Europe on my Hilltopped bikes, and had to put some really crap petrol in, on occasion, and there’s been no fuelling problems whatsoever.

C. The torque/ power figures are still less than the manufacturer quotes. Don’t forget that these bikes are tested with full power/ torque when developed, before the Euro dumbing down of power before they are released to the customer.

D. As the fueling has been corrected, the bike doesn’t burn as much fuel. Most people that have had the bike done have reported much better MPG from their bikes. And besides, you keep telling us how rich you are, so £250 is a drop in the ocean to you! :p

Either get on with it and do it, or stop talking about something you have no experience of, as if you do have experience.
Click to expand...

Nutty, I do have experience. I spent 6 years racing cars petrol and diesel, and more times in rolling road sessions than I should have, using all sorts of additives including Nitrous Oxide.

Riding around Europe is not the same. I'm talking about 3rd world travel, not 1st world travel.

Anyways, I made my points very clear, regardless whether you agree or not :D
 
Warlord said:
Oh... and what makes me laugh as well.

People say, yeah but I get an extra 40 lb/ft of peak torque at 3000 rpm compared to standard... that's huge....

But when you are racing through the rev range, your only exposed to the 3000 rpm peak torque for a nanosecond as you race past it lol. And if you race to the red line and change gear, the next gear might start at 4000 rpm and you don't get the benefit of it at all.. :blast

If it's only 5% increase on average across the rev range, that's all you're going to see as a comparison to the standard bike next to you.

Yeah but yeah but.... the pull from 3000 rpm in 4 gear is amazing.... :comfort

Using torque in high gears at low speeds will just run the risk of unnecessary load on the gearbox and clutch, so whats the point? the bike next to you drops another gear lower and is just as fast?
Click to expand...
Just think, 2 up fully laden, all that extra torque destroying my transmission.

Thank goodness for my rr how do I cope.



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
 
Nippy Normans supply Touratech, Wunderlich, Desert Fox and many other makes of accessories.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hartley
High frequency vibration?
Replies
5
Views
552
Hartley
Hartley
LockieP
I’ve been considering getting a Carpuride. Does it need hard wiring or can you power it via a USB?
Replies
3
Views
354
rjsmith26
Wapping
411 Himalayan - Relays, iridium exhaust, free air flow filter, EBC sintered pads….. next up, exhaust…. And other bits that have worked
Replies
2
Views
163
Wapping
Wapping
Hartley
Little ride on the competition
Replies
14
Views
2,571
kennyc
grantmac
GSA 2021 Alarm issues
Replies
3
Views
516
grantmac
grantmac


Back
Top Bottom