I don't have a plot on-hand, but when mine was dyno'd back in 2016 it showed about 86rwHP.
So to set a few things straight:
Triumph figures are at the crank, as they're telling you engine power not drive chain, so 96HP is most likely about 85-87 at the crank, suggesting mine was pretty standard.
Manufacturers figures are from the best engine they have available. Some might be 2-8HP less from stock, depending on things like manufacturing tolerances and bad-luck. Race teams will buy five bikes and choose the best to race with.
Most bikes lose ~10-15% on gearbox and chain losses, so you gain more from a well lubed chain than you do from many modifications
Torque curves are vastly more useful than power curves. Look for peak torque in the RPM area where ride/race your bike.
The only useful dyno chart is a before/after on the same dyno. Ours read 8.5% low when I arrived, due to an invalid config file from DynoJet. Nobody noticed (or cared) for about seven years.
The difference between two bikes' performance is the area between the two lines on a power or torque curve (both will be equal).
*Don't* try and compare dyno charts between bikes. Always insist on a before/after on the same dyno.
Also *don't* try and compare dyno charts between bikes. Always insist on a before/after on the same dyno.
Did I mention that you should always insist on a before/after on the same dyno?
This means there's little point in posting "Wow, look at the gains my bike made by fitting an XXX!" if you didn't take a measurement beforehand. It's like raving that you "only" weigh 145Kg after 12 months of dieting. For all people know you might have weighed 120Kg at the start