Hilltop Motorcycles fact or fiction

[Beemerman59]

When this thread started, I thought the OP was a little bizarre. At the time I had read people's positive experiences about Hilltop and - as ignorant as I am about the mechanics of bikes - figured it was widely accepted that it was a good thing, thus thought it was saying "Hey is this good thing REALLY a good thing? Yes it is", which seemed a little pointless. On the back of what I had read, I mentally listed Hilltop on the shopping list of things to do when I have some expendable income.

What do I know? Fuck all really, as this thread has morphed into another UKGSers dramafest. Apparently, the OP wasn't such a daft thing to surmise as there wasnt the consensus I had perceived. Oh such drama.

The facts of the matter is that everyone who has had a Hilltop remap is very happy with the results with the general consensus being that their bike's seem much more responsive and without a power dip at the factory limited rev area of 4,500rpm due to emission controls or snatchyness at low revs. Everyone who has had a Hilltop remap also gets a dyno graph and typically this has shown healthy increases in bhp and torque. The seat of the pants reaction from Hilltop customers shows that everyone is happy with the increased ride ability of their bike. That's the bit that matters in the real world not the statistics.

The OP went for a PC5 upgrade instead of a remap to effectively produce the same results. This is an effective upgrade and he's is very happy with his seat of the pants results in the same way as with all the Hilltop customers. The difference appears to be that the dyno operator he went to has said he doesn't believe the HP and torque increases (the statistics) are believable from Hilltop and claims to have data from a couple of Hilltopped bikes to prove that. In defense of Hilltop, there are owners who have had their bikes on independent dyno's which do back up the Hilltop remap claims.

So basically, some are claiming "foul" for comments made by two different dyno operators who do different things in different ways to the fueling on BMW Boxers and everyone is getting hot under the collar because the debators refuse to acknowledge anyone else's opinions - which is all they are at the end of the day. The only thing which is consistent, and all that really matters, is that everyone is happy with the seat of the pants results for both Hilltop remaps and PC5 conversions. So really, everyone is happy and there really isn't any debate to have. The only decision you need to make is whether you want a remap which in my view is the most elegant solution to the fuelling problem as it's invisible and doesn't rely on external hardware which can fail, or go the external PC route which does exactly the same thing with a piece of hardware that you could potentially recoup some cost from by selling when you get rid of your bike.

 

[robb]

The facts of the matter is that everyone who has had a Hilltop remap is very happy with the results with the general consensus being that their bike's seem much more responsive and without a power dip at the factory limited rev area of 4,500rpm due to emission controls or snatchyness at low revs. Everyone who has had a Hilltop remap also gets a dyno graph and typically this has shown healthy increases in bhp and torque. The seat of the pants reaction from Hilltop customers shows that everyone is happy with the increased ride ability of their bike. That's the bit that matters in the real world not the statistics.

The OP went for a PC5 upgrade instead of a remap to effectively produce the same results. This is an effective upgrade and he's is very happy with his seat of the pants results in the same way as with all the Hilltop customers. The difference appears to be that the dyno operator he went to has said he doesn't believe the HP and torque increases (the statistics) are believable from Hilltop and claims to have data from a couple of Hilltopped bikes to prove that. In defense of Hilltop, there are owners who have had their bikes on independent dyno's which do back up the Hilltop remap claims.

So basically, some are claiming "foul" for comments made by two different dyno operators who do different things in different ways to the fueling on BMW Boxers and everyone is getting hot under the collar because the debators refuse to acknowledge anyone else's opinions - which is all they are at the end of the day. The only thing which is consistent, and all that really matters, is that everyone is happy with the seat of the pants results for both Hilltop remaps and PC5 conversions. So really, everyone is happy and there really isn't any debate to have. The only decision you need to make is whether you want a remap which in my view is the most elegant solution to the fuelling problem as it's invisible and doesn't rely on external hardware which can fail, or go the external PC route which does exactly the same thing with a piece of hardware that you could potentially recoup some cost from by selling when you get rid of your bike.

You are being much too sensible for this thread

 

[Toddmeister]

I Go on deluding yourselves about the so called hp increase which is just fantasy AFAIC. I will NEVER believe what Hilltop claim as far as HP increase is concerned, it just isnt that easy.

OK so do please explain the dyno figures I had done at an Independent Dyno facility (post 99) which give results pretty much identical to those which were achieved at Hilltop after my remap

 

[Nutty]

I got 125bhp out of a Hilltop'd 1200 twincam - seems good, without being too "optomistic"

125bhp out of a twin cam? That's more than bods are getting from their LC's!

 

[Deleted account 211025001]

125bhp out of a twin cam? That's more than bods are getting from their LC's!

Goes to show which has the better engine

Andrés

 

[Greenman14]

I wondered that too but I can assure you there is no flat spot that I can detect either before or after the fitting the PC.

Yes, I should have thought to ask Geoff about it but it's probably down to the gas flow characteristics of the engine: valve timing, inlet and exhaust duct geometry etc, all things that can't be changed by a remap or a PC. Now someone's going to say they have a PC and no dip in the torque curve at 5000 revs. Not that I'll give a toss, I'm more than happy with my remap.

 

[RedRick Esq.]

Yes, I should have thought to ask Geoff about it but it's probably down to the gas flow characteristics of the engine: valve timing, inlet and exhaust duct geometry etc, all things that can't be changed by a remap or a PC. Now someone's going to say they have a PC and no dip in the torque curve at 5000 revs. Not that I'll give a toss, I'm more than happy with my remap.

My LC had flat spot at about 4k the remap pretty much did away with it and my old TC had one very similar to delays graph and the remap pretty much got rid of that too

 

[Deleted account 211025001]

Yes, I should have thought to ask Geoff about it but it's probably down to the gas flow characteristics of the engine: valve timing, inlet and exhaust duct geometry etc, all things that can't be changed by a remap or a PC. Now someone's going to say they have a PC and no dip in the torque curve at 5000 revs. Not that I'll give a toss, I'm more than happy with my remap.

I think you'll find there's a dip at that point on most bikes and it's to do with where in the rev range emissions are measured as well as stuff like drive by sound levels..........

Here's my 1190 with a very noticeable dip, pre re-map



and post re-map it's gone, just a nice linear torque curve



Andres

 

[xantamisch]

well - the suspicion seems to be that the initial run is set artificially low

my bike (2015 wc) was 82bhp on first run, 115 bhp after remap, so yes that looks a massive increase. However, bike before me was 99 bhp before - 118 bhp after

so if my first run was artificially low why not the other?

 

[Mistacat]

You just enter a different correction factor. simples.

 

[Fluffmeister]

Forget poser / power gains or otherwise, it's all about the curve. I need to get the RT done as its dipping / flat spotting around 5k then goes like a stabbed rat.

 

[Roger 04 RT]

I really enjoy Dyno posts. A typical fuel map is a matrix of about 300 points that cover 0-100% throttle and 500-9000 RPM. A typical dyno run exercises 10 points in the fuel map, all at WOT, which means about 3% of the points, none of which you regularly ride at. Of those 3%, with a pull that lasts, say, 5 seconds, each point is exercised for half a second. Also of those 10 points "tested" by the pull, a third of them are usually taken at artificially lean AFRs caused by the dyno wheel decelerating prior to the pull.

Great result from my HillTopping, was 78.5 BHP at the rear wheel, now 101 ! A fair bit smoother and sounds great, and loads more grunt obviously !!

The "before" AFR was so lean ( below 3000 RPM ) that Geoff's analyser could pick up nothing at all, and even at full revs was too thin ! He has done over 600 boxer engines, are you going to be next ?

Does anyone really believe a 30% increase in peak HP or AFR so low it can't be measured? FWIW, if those AFRs were true, the bike wouldn't run, the engine would die.

I think you'll find there's a dip at that point on most bikes and it's to do with where in the rev range emissions are measured as well as stuff like drive by sound levels..........

Here's my 1190 with a very noticeable dip, pre re-map



and post re-map it's gone, just a nice linear torque curve



Andres

Aren't you the guy complaining about my squiggly lines earlier?

That DIP that you're showing was measured at WOT. If true, since it was at wot, it would be richly fueled and not in any way be related to "sound level engineering".

well - the suspicion seems to be that the initial run is set artificially low

my bike (2015 wc) was 82bhp on first run, 115 bhp after remap, so yes that looks a massive increase. However, bike before me was 99 bhp before - 118 bhp after

so if my first run was artificially low why not the other?

You're on the right track. There are many ways that a dyno operator can get an artificially low "before" run.

To your question about why the run before you wasn't as low as your massive 40% gain (but it showed a massive 20% gain too), I would say the operator didn't do a good enough job getting a low initial reading.

By having the dyno wheel's inertia decelerated by the bike engine before a pull, the engine goes into a non-fueled state, overrun fuel cutoff. Then when the pull starts the engine is extremely lean and takes a couple seconds, which is half the run, to recover. Change the deceleration profile before the pull and you change the results.

 

[Deleted account 211025001]

................

Aren't you the guy complaining about my squiggly lines earlier?

That DIP that you're showing was measured at WOT. If true, since it was at wot, it would be richly fueled and not in any way be related to "sound level

...............


.

Nope, it wasn't me 'complaining' about squigly lines. I was the guy that said that whatever squigly lines were posted up those that took a particular stand point would not change their minds and would carry on sitting at their keyboards typing the same old stuff.

Me? I've just got in from work, it's a lovely day out there and I'm off out to ride my beautifully fuelled bike. The one with a creamy smooth torque delivery and a scary yet addictive top end. I'm more than happy with where my money went and what it achieved.

I'll leave you to argue the toss from your keyboard

Andrés

 

[RedRick Esq.]

Me? I've just got in from work, it's a lovely day out there and I'm off out to ride my beautifully fuelled bike. The one with a creamy smooth torque delivery and a scary yet addictive top end.Andrés

Have you got rid of the KTM then

 

[Deleted account 211025001]

Have you got rid of the KTM then

Fuck off

Andrés

 

[RedRick Esq.]

Fuck off

Andrés

You must have known it was comming
I was lucky and got in first

 

[Deleted account 211025001]

Having just got in from a 4 hour meeting on trends in the soft drinks market my brain is incapable of seeing anything coming - maybe I shouldn't go out on the bike



Andrés

 

[MWH]

Roger, having read your thread on another site from a couple of years ago it appears modifications are adapted out from boosterplugs etc, do you think the Hilltop tune would be adapted out in time? It seems after lots and lots of reading that only Lambda shift devices won't get adapted out, or is my assumption wrong? I've been known to be right occasionally in the past!

 

[cammy5477]

Roger, having read your thread on another site from a couple of years ago it appears modifications are adapted out from boosterplugs etc, do you think the Hilltop tune would be adapted out in time? It seems after lots and lots of reading that only Lambda shift devices won't get adapted out, or is my assumption wrong? I've been known to be right occasionally in the past!

Mwh.....I can't pm you mate? Any reason you disabled it?
I'm riding to hilltop on Thursday was going to email you a couple of weeks back to see if you wanted to join me.

 

[MWH]

Not a subscriber at mo, hopefully that will be changing soon. Would've been up for the trip as well but have arranged to go into Edinburgh on the 12th for birthday beers! Have to hook up when you're back and get your opinions on the remap. You doing it in one day or overnighting anywhere?