2018 yz450fx fuel maps

[wallstreet]

I browsed quite a few different threads and forums as well as some searches on google but didn't find quite what I was looking for. Last year was the first year I put a track on my bike and I loved it, however I would like to get some more low/mid range power. I have the GYTR tuner now but I am not sure what map to run. Most of what I have seen is for years is 2010-2015 maps. I have read up on the Jay Marmont map and people seem to love the low end response that it gave them but that was also for earlier year bikes. A nudge in the right direction would be helpful or even a thread that I may have overlooked.
thank you!

Bike: 2018 YZ450FX
Addons: thermo-bob 2, coolant temp display, PST engine blanket, wrapped header, headlight, hand guards, radiator fan(for summer)
Track: 2018 Timbersled ARO 120

 

[00Tundra]

This is what I run on same bike With HMF pipe Really pulls hard for me.

 

[wallstreet]

Thanks, I will have to give that a try. I saw that map but I couldn't find anyone who ran it, I will have to give it a try on my next outing. It seems like quite a bit of fuel, do you ever find yourself lower than what you should be during any rides or any heating issues?

 

[00Tundra]

Running them a little richer is way better than lean. I run the selkirk engine armor so I have no issues over heating unless I forget to take off the front air blocker. I have seen and heard of guys blowing pistons and when I find out what map there running it seems to always be to lean.

 

[00Tundra]

Keep that engine hot and don't try to save fuel by running a lean map.

 

[wallstreet]

I don't seem to have an issue with heat, it runs hot even when its real cold out. Even on the stock map i didn't have an issue. i was more concerned about over fueling and getting it in the oil

 

[00Tundra]

I have zero issues with that. They only over fuel when you run them too cold with makes the ecu go into choke mode

 

[wallstreet]

Alright, thanks I'll give it a run. I have to make some slip in covers for my rad on the real cold days still. Didn't need them last year but I only got one run in

 

[raleigh111]

I have a 2016 yz450FX so does not really apply (different ecu map) but i do want to add I tried adding fuel and timing from 8-11k and it was not so good. I ended up -1 to 2 on fuel and + 1 to 2 on timing and was much better power wise. The added fuel for me on the FX was bad, lost power. Was thinking of installing a afr gauge this year and doing a little monitoring, well see. Seems most maps i see are all about adding fuel and maybe okay at lower elevation but it did not like it from 8-11? BTW i could care less about saving fuel. All about giving the bike what it wants. Too much fuel can be bad also, wash cylinders down and mixs with oil. Just food for thought but i see you guys all ready discussed that. Good luck.

 

[wallstreet]

I have a 2016 yz450FX so does not really apply (different ecu map) but i do want to add I tried adding fuel and timing from 8-11k and it was not so good. I ended up -1 to 2 on fuel and + 1 to 2 on timing and was much better power wise. The added fuel for me on the FX was bad, lost power. Was thinking of installing a afr gauge this year and doing a little monitoring, well see. Seems most maps i see are all about adding fuel and maybe okay at lower elevation but it did not like it from 8-11? BTW i could care less about saving fuel. All about giving the bike what it wants. Too much fuel can be bad also, wash cylinders down and mixs with oil. Just food for thought.

Interesting, I would assume more fuel would be better at the higher RPMs. I gave the one posted above a try on dirt and it pulled noticeably harder throughout its entire range compared to the stock map, however that is also completely different than snow. I might just throw the tuner in my bag on the first couple outings to see if it needs to be adjusted. thanks for your input. I didn't think the maps changed until 2019, I very well could be wrong though.

 

[raleigh111]

I am not talking about higher RPM range of engine when i say 8-11 I am talking about elevation. I think we unload around 7500 feet, Ran okay to about 8500 feet then started to load up. Pulled out the tuner and took the fuel away and it cleaned up. Since then I changed to - on fuels and plus on timing. but just by 1 or 2.

Interesting, I would assume more fuel would be better at the higher RPMs. I gave the one posted above a try on dirt and it pulled noticeably harder throughout its entire range compared to the stock map, however that is also completely different than snow. I might just throw the tuner in my bag on the first couple outings to see if it needs to be adjusted. thanks for your input. I didn't think the maps changed until 2019, I very well could be wrong though.

 

[raleigh111]

BTW
IMHO I think the correction factors built into the ecu are off at elevation as they do not test these in the winter and elevation. Could be totally different ecu map that works great at sea level. I would not expect any map you find for summer lower elevation to be spot on up at 8-11k feet. Hope i made sense. You map above may be great in summer lower elevation. Not sure if 00tundra has a FX or a F but ecu programming is different between the 2 bikes. They may be some bikes you have to add fuel and some you take away thats why i was going to run a afr gauge this winter and monitor. Timing is a whole different animal but in general you usually can get by adding a few degrees to any stock tune but that dont mean it will help. Rule of thumb is you add timing with elevation. You really are guessing with a butt dyno and you need a real dyno to dial in in the elevation range you ride in. As the air changes the ecu use stored correction factors that can be off.

 

[wallstreet]

I misread that the first time. I figure I will just have to change as I go, I don't believe I will be hitting that high of elevations when we go out

 

[00Tundra]

I ride 2500-7000 ft so I do not have a clue how it would do at higher elevations

 

[wallstreet]

That's about where I will be, I think the highest that i can go is a little under 9k (where I typically go). That's only if I want to climb a mountain. Hoping to drop a 500 kit on it maybe next season for a little more power, still need to read up on how they handle with the kits.

 

[raleigh111]

I made up a 9 maps to try this year from 4-11k feet and stored them in the tuner. Started out with +4 on timing and 0 on fuels and worked my way down to +2 timing -2 on fuels. You should not have any problems with a stock bike and +4 timing up high because of the slower burn rate. Probable could go more. I am going to install AFR gauge and give it a go. These snowbike ecu all they are really doing is close to the same thing you can do with the gytr tuner except I am sure they have more tables and rows for more exact timing and fueling. I am sure they have premium fuel maps which will have a lot of timing, maybe even more then i can add with gytr? I will report back after the season if anyone is interested. In my case with my bike 16 yz450fx I all ready know it does not like the extra fuel up high. I will be playing with a 18 yz450f also. Curious how different they will be.

 

[wallstreet]

I would be interested to see how it plays out, I am hoping to try a couple to get a good baseline for what the bike likes. Unfortunately next year I am hoping to do some more mods to the bike so that will mess with my maps (468 BB, header, new slip on, maybe some cams if I can find a set for the bike that isny GYTR). I need to do some more reading on the BB kits of that size, it seems it wont be overly large to let it rev still. I also have a yz450f also (2007 though) and I feel like the short ratio trans would be good in some situations but I feel if you are not racing it the wide ratio FX is ideal for me on snow. I would try to go up in compression with higher octane fuel but we only have 90 up here or mix it with racing fuel, which is a large expense for what it is.

 

[raleigh111]

wide ratio sucks on snowbike. Toooooooo big a gap between 2nd and third. You really can only narrow down to 1 sweet spot but thats a different thread.

 

[wallstreet]

I haven't had any issues with the wide ratio however I haven't tried anything else but that so I suppose I don't know. I was able to pull third in pretty much anything last season, rarely did I downshift

 

[raleigh111]

I like to get third set up for max speed in pow that engine will pull by gearing or what ever way then be able to down shift to second in tight trees if need be. On the wide ratio when you get third set up and you downshift to 2nd the gap is to big and it is way to slow in trees? Just me opinion but I have had 3 wide ratio trans and they all are like that. The mx trans is much closer between second and third. You can get third zinging in the pow then when you shift to second it tight stuff it does not feel like a over reving turd. Kinda depends how you ride also. just my opinion.