carburator vs fuel injection

Camaro Forums Camaro Classifieds Photo Gallery Members Search Forum FAQ Contact CF Sponsors
Camaro News Camaro Timeslips Camaro Recalls TSBs Register Login

carburator vs fuel injection

Printable Version

Camaro Forums >> Brand Review >> Engine & Internal >> carburator vs fuel injection

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

carburator vs fuel injection - 9/11/2006 10:35:28 PM

American Muscle 100

Posts: 97
Joined: 9/11/2006
Status: offline

whats your opinion

Post #: 1

RE: carburator vs fuel injection - 9/12/2006 11:51:55 PM

81CanuckZ

Posts: 215
Joined: 9/4/2006
Status: offline

Daily Driver: fuel injection hands down
Weekend /Summer Driver: Carburator (only on cars old enough to not come with fuel injection)

(in reply to American Muscle 100)

Post #: 2

RE: carburator vs fuel injection - 9/18/2006 4:17:00 PM

DFENS

Posts: 74
Joined: 9/6/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 81CanuckZ

Daily Driver: fuel injection hands down
Weekend /Summer Driver: Carburator (only on cars old enough to not come with fuel injection)

+1

If I had my way, my 305 would be injected. It's more expensive, but more effecient and more accurately controlled. (by controlled, I mean safer for keeping an exact A/F ratio, avoiding the boom)

(in reply to 81CanuckZ)

Post #: 3

RE: carburator vs fuel injection - 9/19/2006 8:49:22 PM

1969 SS

Posts: 1240
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Massachusetts
Status: offline

a carburator is much easier to tune and you don't have as many restrictions when building your engine. it is cheaper and easier to troubleshoot and good for highend horsepower

injection is nice because of the very consistant power curve. you will get much more low end torque with injection but you will sacrifice some highend horsepower compared to a carb. you have more things to watch for when building your engine and vaccum is much more important to injected motors. you need around 11" of vaccum with injection whereas a carbed motor can sometimes pull as little a 4" to 5" under hard acceleration

just my two views

(in reply to DFENS)

Post #: 4

RE: carburator vs fuel injection - 9/19/2006 8:55:29 PM

Slayer

Posts: 544
Joined: 8/19/2006
From: Wichita, KS
Status: offline

Carberation all the way.

(in reply to 1969 SS)

Post #: 5

RE: carburator vs fuel injection - 9/19/2006 9:40:20 PM

American Muscle 100

Posts: 97
Joined: 9/11/2006
Status: offline

wow good replys

(in reply to Slayer)

Post #: 6

RE: carburator vs fuel injection - 9/19/2006 10:56:11 PM

JD1969

Posts: 1677
Joined: 6/3/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1969 SS

a carburator is much easier to tune and you don't have as many restrictions when building your engine. it is cheaper and easier to troubleshoot and good for highend horsepower

injection is nice because of the very consistant power curve. you will get much more low end torque with injection but you will sacrifice some highend horsepower compared to a carb. you have more things to watch for when building your engine and vaccum is much more important to injected motors. you need around 11" of vaccum with injection whereas a carbed motor can sometimes pull as little a 4" to 5" under hard acceleration

just my two views

My injection is very easy to tune, I just plug in my laptop and away I go. More modern injection does not sacrifice high rpm power, many LS1 cars are reving past 7000rpm and running deep into the single digets.

_____________________________

2001 SS A4
11.500 @ 116.01
SLP Lid/Granitelli Maf/Fernco/JD1969 custom cat back/UMI Lower Control Arms and PHR/Flowtechs/TSP Cam/Yank 4000 stall

(in reply to 1969 SS)

Post #: 7

RE: carburator vs fuel injection - 9/20/2006 11:30:15 AM

1969 SS

Posts: 1240
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Massachusetts
Status: offline

I also have an LS1 in one of my toys and it pulls good all the way up but I was just trying to give "most of the time" examples.

in reality, Edlebrock and Carter and a lot harder to tune than a Holley or Demon but most people have Holley so I went with that assumption. I think Edlebrock is a better street carb when it is perfect but Holley is just way easier.

as for the injection, yes many systems are very tunable with a loptop, but again most people don't have the laptop and knowledge to do their own tunes. a lot of them just to later model bolt-ins that rely on factory computers and when something goes wrong they either have to go to a dealership and pay top dollar or they find that no one wants to touch a car that is not a stock animal

just my useless opinions

(in reply to JD1969)

Post #: 8

RE: carburator vs fuel injection - 9/20/2006 11:51:32 AM

uncle bill

Posts: 819
Joined: 9/3/2006
From: San Antonio, Texas
Status: offline

Carb is old school - uses more fuel - not as efficient - engines don't last as long due to fuel wash in the cylinders. Carbs are less expensive initally and will not make as much power as a properly tuned fuel injection engine. The right fuel / air mixture to each cylinder is the real advantage. So I'm old school but realize the difference new school technology allows Us.

(in reply to 1969 SS)

Post #: 9

RE: carburator vs fuel injection - 9/20/2006 2:59:20 PM

1969 SS

Posts: 1240
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Massachusetts
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: uncle bill

Carb is old school - uses more fuel - not as efficient - engines don't last as long due to fuel wash in the cylinders. Carbs are less expensive initally and will not make as much power as a properly tuned fuel injection engine. The right fuel / air mixture to each cylinder is the real advantage. So I'm old school but realize the difference new school technology allows Us.

old school is still ok

sometimes an old dog can learn new tricks but just doesn't want to take the time.

I find it funny that some people swear by one method or the other when they don't even know anything about the other side of the subject. it's nice to see someone say what they like but also give an explanation that doesn't shoot the other possibilites down

(in reply to uncle bill)

Post #: 10