Jump to content

  • Follow us:

  • Facebook
  • YouTube
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Instagram
  • RSS Feed
  • Google+




Related Reviews

EJK Electronic Fuel Control Module


Last review by Mbagnal
* * * * -

Sisneros Speed Works remap


Last review by mchonda2
* * * * *

Dynojet Research Accessories For Power Commander III USB


Last review by Ren670
* * * * *

JD Jetting Power Surge 6X EFI Tuner


Last review by halo.spaceboy
* - - - -

Tokyo Mods ECU Remap


Last review by Dhuey92
* * * * *



Related Garage

jd_14_pow_sur_6x_fue_inj_tun.jpg

JD Jetting Power Surge 6X EFI Tuner


Owner: halo.spaceboy
Added on March 21, 2016
Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

WR Maps Only

Fuel & Air EFI Programmers

  • Please sign in to reply

136 replies to this topic
  • mebgardner

    TT Silver Member

574 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted February 11, 2014 - 07:00 AM


I've decided to try this next:

 

 -1 -1  -1      0   0   0

-2  -2  -1     -1  -1   0

-2  -2  -1     -1  -1   0

...with a goal of increasing range, by decreasing fuel charge by -1 from previous results, over the entire Fuel map.  No change to Ign. advance / retard settings. I am not expecting "too lean" behavior, but I'll be watching closely for it. I'll post results when they're available.



  • mebgardner

    TT Silver Member

574 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted February 16, 2014 - 01:16 PM


I've decided to try this next:

 

 -1 -1  -1      0   0   0

-2  -2  -1     -1  -1   0

-2  -2  -1     -1  -1   0

...with a goal of increasing range, by decreasing fuel charge by -1 from previous results, over the entire Fuel map.  No change to Ign. advance / retard settings. I am not expecting "too lean" behavior, but I'll be watching closely for it. I'll post results when they're available.

 

I've been "schooled" recently that, to increase range and MPG, I should advance the ignition up to a certain amount, not retard it.  So, I'm changing the ignition part of the map above to incorporate that new info:

 

-1  -1  -1      2   2   1

-2  -2  -1      3   3   2

-2  -2  -1      3   3   3

 

I've also changed out my pipe this weekend to an FMF Q4, so I'm using the GYTR FMF Ignition part of their FI Map as a baseline Ignition part of my Max Range map effort. Note the center number is not "FMF map". I'm leaving this slightly more advanced than the FMF in hopes that is where I "land" most of the time when using these Throttle / Power curves.

 

No change in objectives.

 

My cycle:

2013 WR450 F.

GYTR ECU

FMF Q4 w/ Quiet insert.

Snorkles Out.

Throttle screw limiter out.


Edited by mebgardner, February 16, 2014 - 01:21 PM.


  • mebgardner

    TT Silver Member

574 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted February 18, 2014 - 06:50 AM


I've been "schooled" recently that, to increase range and MPG, I should advance the ignition up to a certain amount, not retard it.  So, I'm changing the ignition part of the map above to incorporate that new info:

 

-1  -1  -1      2   2   1

-2  -2  -1      3   3   2

-2  -2  -1      3   3   3

 

I've also changed out my pipe this weekend to an FMF Q4, so I'm using the GYTR FMF Ignition part of their FI Map as a baseline Ignition part of my Max Range map effort. Note the center number is not "FMF map". I'm leaving this slightly more advanced than the FMF in hopes that is where I "land" most of the time when using these Throttle / Power curves.

 

No change in objectives.

 

My cycle:

2013 WR450 F.

GYTR ECU

FMF Q4 w/ Quiet insert.

Snorkles Out.

Throttle screw limiter out.

 

This map attempt (above, in quote) was awful. At low throttle settings, it's like an on / off switch, very difficult to modulate at low speeds. At moderate to high throttle settings and power, it's relatively benign and soft. So, I think the upper ends of this fuel map may work for those that want fuel sipping behavior at moderate to high power throttle settings. I had some problems with stalling at low throttle / (relatively) high power (lower right corner, I think) where I would normally want some "grunt" to help me through technical low speed single track in lo to mid-gear. So, I'm bumping the lower right corner of ignition by an additional -1 to reduce Ignition Advance at those settings. I'm willing to sacrifice a small amount of fuel sipping behavior to not stall at high work / low speed throttle settings.

 

The fuel lower left end still needs work.

 

Next attempt:

 

0   0   0      2   2   1

1   1   0      3   3   2

1   1   0      3   3   2



  • mebgardner

    TT Silver Member

574 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted February 22, 2014 - 03:59 PM


This map attempt (above, in quote) was awful. At low throttle settings, it's like an on / off switch, very difficult to modulate at low speeds. At moderate to high throttle settings and power, it's relatively benign and soft. So, I think the upper ends of this fuel map may work for those that want fuel sipping behavior at moderate to high power throttle settings. I had some problems with stalling at low throttle / (relatively) high power (lower right corner, I think) where I would normally want some "grunt" to help me through technical low speed single track in lo to mid-gear. So, I'm bumping the lower right corner of ignition by an additional -1 to reduce Ignition Advance at those settings. I'm willing to sacrifice a small amount of fuel sipping behavior to not stall at high work / low speed throttle settings.

 

The fuel lower left end still needs work.

 

Next attempt:

 

0   0   0      2   2   1

1   1   0      3   3   2

1   1   0      3   3   2

 

So, this map:

 

0   0   0      2   2   1

1   1   0      3   3   2

1   1   0      3   3   2

 

...was much easier to modulate at low speed. On / Off "Switch" effect is mostly gone.

 

But, apparently MPG / Range has taken a beating using these settings.  I measured 35 MPG, down from high 40s low 50s from other maps. I think this map still runs pretty lean, because I get a small amount of "popping" during decel, rowing thru the gears on the way down. Just a little bit... So, I'm surprised that range seems to have taken a dump.

 

No other issues showed up:

 

No overheating / red header (gone since I upped the CO / Idle fuel mix setting to "8").

I'm thinking of moving back to my previous setting of "retarded ignition" that I measured previously, to see if they will cooperate with the FMF Q4 pipe that I have since installed, and still provide better range numbers (and still be able to live with the cycle behavior).



  • mebgardner

    TT Silver Member

574 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted February 24, 2014 - 11:05 AM


So, this map:

 

0   0   0      2   2   1

1   1   0      3   3   2

1   1   0      3   3   2

 

...was much easier to modulate at low speed. On / Off "Switch" effect is mostly gone.

 

But, apparently MPG / Range has taken a beating using these settings.  I measured 35 MPG, down from high 40s low 50s from other maps. I think this map still runs pretty lean, because I get a small amount of "popping" during decel, rowing thru the gears on the way down. Just a little bit... So, I'm surprised that range seems to have taken a dump.

 

No other issues showed up:

 

No overheating / red header (gone since I upped the CO / Idle fuel mix setting to "8").

I'm thinking of moving back to my previous setting of "retarded ignition" that I measured previously, to see if they will cooperate with the FMF Q4 pipe that I have since installed, and still provide better range numbers (and still be able to live with the cycle behavior).

 

So, since I'm not very pleased about losing so much in range potential using the map given in the quote,  I'm stepping back to a map I posted in #19 (above):

 

 0    0   0      0   0   0

-1  -1   0     -1  -1   0

-1  -1   0     -1  -1   0

 

I was pleased with this map, and then I did two things:

1) I changed it to accomodate some training about ignition retard / advance, and

2) I changed it to accomodate a new pipe (I installed an FMF Q4).

 

So, I'm going to "step back" to the map shown above (all 0's and 1's), and have another go at improving range.

 

It may be a bust, but I wont know untill I try it.



  • Navaho6

    TT Gold Member

1,372 posts
Location: Louisiana
Garage View Garage

Posted February 25, 2014 - 10:10 AM


I tried two maps last weekend that were almost identical.  Used the Sand map on the first loop and then the Motocross map on the 2nd.  I was amazed at how different they were.  I was not expecting to feel a difference but I definitely could.  Love the MX map for singletrack.  Makes 3rd gear very useful.



  • vlxjim

    TT Bronze Member

343 posts
Location: California
Garage View Garage

Posted March 01, 2014 - 08:07 AM


Ok here is my map. I call it power with control. Nice and smooth give it a try. This is with a FMF Q4 HEX. I have no idea about MPG's with this one over any other one. 

 

Vlxjim Map

 

 Fuel         Timing

3  4  4      0   0   0

3  5  3     -2  -1  0

3  4  3     -2  -2  0



  • mebgardner

    TT Silver Member

574 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted March 05, 2014 - 11:59 AM


I see a trend.  Most of these maps "plus up" the fuel by many units (3-5), and advance the Ig by many units (2-3) at the same time.

 

It's no wonder these cycles are developing a reputation for being fuel pigs. With these settings, I'm not surprised.

 

Some of the rest retard the Ig. by 3-5 deg's.  That's a big move!

 

I understand this is a "Maps Only" thread.

 

However, I offer a word of caution to Low Saddle Time types eyeballing these maps. There are unintended consequences to using some of the "leaner" maps posted here that you should become aware of. 

 

See this thread for details :  http://www.thumperta...newbie-caution/



  • mebgardner

    TT Silver Member

574 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted March 09, 2014 - 03:51 PM


Ok here is my map. I call it power with control. Nice and smooth give it a try. This is with a FMF Q4 HEX. I have no idea about MPG's with this one over any other one. 

 

Vlxjim Map

 

 Fuel         Timing

3  4  4      0   0   0

3  5  3     -2  -1  0

3  4  3     -2  -2  0

 

My cycle:

 

2013 WR450 F.

GYTR ECU

Stock Pipe, uncorked.

Snorkles Out.

Throttle screw limiter out

G2 Ergo Cam: 400 series.

3.0 Gal. IMS tank.

 

I tried vlxjims map today (above).

 

It responds as he says: Smooth from the first application of throttle opening, good power throughout.  This, in addition to the G2 400 cam, allowed me to perform a very precise application of throttle, yet still get a good surge of power when opening it past about 1/4th. That is, the abruptness was essentially gone, and it makes for a very good "newbie" map for this reason alone.

 

Range was better than I had suspected it would be, around 35 MPG with me in 2nd and 3rd most of the ride.

 

Even this map's detractors says "it works" to the benefit of the new guys on this cycle.  It's not best: It's not great range numbers, and the initial "hit" an advanced / expert rider would demand is not present.

 

The usual stuff:

No Red Header (I will no longer report this unless I see it. I will continue to look / test for it).

No overheated gas (new IMS tank this ride).

No overheated coolant.

 

As an aside, I was pleased with the (new this ride) G2 Ergo throttle cam.  It performed exactly as advertised, and was just what I needed. The combination of G2 400 cam and "soft" FI map made this cycle Very Tractable for me. I highly recommend it for Low Seat Time types (like me).



  • vlxjim

    TT Bronze Member

343 posts
Location: California
Garage View Garage

Posted March 09, 2014 - 09:31 PM


Glad you like it.  You can also try these other two maps with small changes.

 

All the guys I ride with are on very nice 2005-2011 CRF's and love this WR's power and response the way its set up.

The only guys that would want a hard hit are MX'ers needing a hit out of a turn into a triple. Even then most top riders want lots of smooth predictable power.

 

Keep in mind if a bike is tuned right it well run smooth, cooler, and be reliable. There's only so much you can do as far as tuning go's and keep the three things. Run to much timing, bike runs hotter. Run to lean, bike runs hotter.  Run to fat, bike runs like crap. Bike run's hotter, bike losses power and reliability.

 

Vlxjim Map

 

 Fuel         Timing

3  4  4      0   0   0

3  5  3     -2  -1  0

3  4  3     -2  -2  0

 

 

Vlxjim Map more bottom hit

 

 Fuel         Timing

3  4  4      0   0   0

3  5  3     -1   0  0

3  4  3     -1  -1  0

 

 

Vlxjim Map leaner better mpg

 

 Fuel         Timing

2  3  3      0   0   0

2  4  2     -2  -1  0

2  3  2     -2  -2  0


Edited by vlxjim, March 09, 2014 - 09:53 PM.


  • revxp_800r

    TT Newbie

14 posts
Location: Ohio
Garage View Garage

Posted March 19, 2014 - 07:55 AM


I just run the yz mod map. Woods riding, open fields whatever. Seems to work for me. Coming off a yz400f makes wr a dream and really easy to ride.

  • mebgardner

    TT Silver Member

574 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted March 19, 2014 - 09:05 AM


I just run the yz mod map. Woods riding, open fields whatever. Seems to work for me. Coming off a yz400f makes wr a dream and really easy to ride.

 

Ummm, what is that? Numbers, please?



  • revxp_800r

    TT Newbie

14 posts
Location: Ohio
Garage View Garage

Posted March 19, 2014 - 09:43 AM


3 3 3 2 2 2
4 4 3 3 3 2
4 4 3. 3 3 2

  • bradgross71

    TT Bronze Member

274 posts

Posted April 18, 2014 - 06:01 PM


Fmf slip on. All +3 on fuel side and all +1 on ignition side. Bike flat rocks.

  • mc1hd

    TT Bronze Member

198 posts
Location: Other

Posted April 27, 2014 - 08:57 AM


Is this jdlowrance's map that I have heard good things about?

 

+2+3+3          000

+2+4+4          000

+2+4+4          000

 

Tried the aussie woods map and want a little more without too much hit off bottom for tight woods riding.

Big difference after making sure the clutch cabe is not binding at the bars and lubing cable, very usable now.



  • mebgardner

    TT Silver Member

574 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted April 28, 2014 - 12:09 PM


An update for my use of the map I posted in #29, above (the vlxjim map).

 

I continue to use this map now. I can get very precise throttle control from this setup, and still get good (not great) gas mileage.

 

I'm using it during mostly low speed (1st and 2nd gear) training exercises, fundamental type stuff: standing low speed counterbalance turns, standing low cliff climbs in loose gravel / sand,  slalom, etc).

 

I think likely, the gas mileage will improve when I begin (again) to use higher gears. I've put this part (the "improve gas mileage" part) on hold until I'm better aquainted with this 'dance partner'.

 

But, to the point: There's no backfiring, the cycle does not overheat during these low speed manouvers, the cycle is well behaved during "lugging" in low gears, and the throttle is easy to control for those of limited skill.

 

A very good newbie map.



  • funt

    TT Bronze Member

105 posts
Location: Other

Posted May 01, 2014 - 07:55 AM


I was running the FMF map with a powercore and quiet insert.  I was getting 35mpg.  I pulled out the insert and went up to 40.  I switched to this map

2 1 1   2 3 4

2 2 1   3 2 2

2 3 1   3 2 1

sort of a cross between the FMF and the motocross map.  I gained another 2.5 mpg.  Light didn't come on until 50 miles.  I don't think the quiet core is going back in.  I don't think I will go deaf as long as I wear a helmet.



  • mebgardner

    TT Silver Member

574 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted May 08, 2014 - 03:30 PM


0  0  0    0  0  0

0  0  0    0  0  0

0  0  0    0  0  0

 

 

The "All 0's" map, text courtesy of vlxjim:

 

All 0's is the base map of the Comp ECU. Its a starting point for the maps to build off of. It works with the stock muffler but still a little lean and hits a little hard off the hit. These 450's can make a lot of power and to have a hard switch like hit off the bottom is not so good with your needing controlled trackable power. BTW changingicon1.png the CO level helps blend idle with the lower part of the map. And do make sure the Idle is set to1900 - 2100 RPM's. I like 1950.



  • ram450

    TT Newbie

2 posts
Location: Washington

Posted May 11, 2014 - 07:08 PM


Don't know if this topic is still alive but I just bought a 2012 WR 450F and want to purchase the ECU for it.  I am running stock exhaust with only the small tube removed and want to keep that setup for trail riding.  Of course the throttle screw has been rezsized so that I can achieve full throttle.  My question is what map choices will I find and how can I determine which map/mas would deliver the greater fuel mileage.  I'm not concerned with the most power as the WR has enough for me even without the ECU change.  I do expect the motor to start easier as well...



  • Navaho6

    TT Gold Member

1,372 posts
Location: Louisiana
Garage View Garage

Posted May 13, 2014 - 11:03 AM


I was running the FMF map with a powercore and quiet insert.  I was getting 35mpg.  I pulled out the insert and went up to 40.  I switched to this map

2 1 1   2 3 4

2 2 1   3 2 2

2 3 1   3 2 1

sort of a cross between the FMF and the motocross map.  I gained another 2.5 mpg.  Light didn't come on until 50 miles.  I don't think the quiet core is going back in.  I don't think I will go deaf as long as I wear a helmet.

 

You may not go deaf but you could end up with hearing loss and tinnitus like I have (from years of riding without hearing protection).  Tinnitus really sucks and there is no cure!  I can't tell you how much I regret not wearing ear plugs in past.  I learned the hard way.


Edited by Navaho6, May 13, 2014 - 11:08 AM.






Related Content

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

 
x

Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.