I mentioned this topic in another thread re IAW15M K line, and realised I had wandered off topic, so am re-presenting it here.
Back to my point, in the 60's I recall tuning a bike meant getting the motor as close as possible to what the designer wanted - blueprinting. Build quality was often bad, for instance I believe Norton twin barrels were bored on the same machine that bored the singles having to be unbolted from the jig and repositioned to bore the second barrel - excellent way of keeping them truly parallel. Running your finger down the inlet tract of a 650 BSA soon reveals the imperfections. Basically we used files and sandpaper to tune a motor. We could increase power but often at the expense of flexibility. Into the 70's and 80's production quality had improved to the point that polshing intakes and balancing cranks led to little improvement, we were now trying to remove the dip in mid range performance caused by noise and emission regulations, enter the DynoJet kits, freer flowing (noisier)exhausts etc. Then came fuel injection.... So what are we trying to do now? Here I am speaking of stock machines, surely the build quality is adequate, are we still trying to remove mid range power dips due to legislation , don't these clever factory maps cure this?
Why are folk re-mapping their ecu.
I have a 2004 V11 LeMans Rosso Corsa, bog standard with a crossover pipe under the alternater ( actually I wish it was under it as it seems impossible to remove the cover without removing the exhaust) and the standard centre section/crossover.