Engine & Internal Cams, heads, valvetrain, rotating assemblies. Chat about beefing up your insides here.

carburator vs fuel injection

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 12, 2006 | 12:35 AM
  #1  
American Muscle 100's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
In the Staging Lanes
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 47
From:
Default carburator vs fuel injection

whats your opinion
 
Old Sep 13, 2006 | 01:51 AM
  #2  
81CanuckZ's Avatar
1st Gear Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 212
From:
Default RE: carburator vs fuel injection

Daily Driver: fuel injection hands down
Weekend /Summer Driver: Carburator (only on cars old enough to not come with fuel injection)
 
Old Sep 18, 2006 | 06:17 PM
  #3  
DFENS's Avatar
In the Staging Lanes
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74
From:
Default RE: carburator vs fuel injection


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)
 
Old Sep 19, 2006 | 10:49 PM
  #4  
1969 SS's Avatar
3rd Gear Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,459
From: Massachusetts
Default RE: carburator vs fuel injection

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
 
Old Sep 19, 2006 | 10:55 PM
  #5  
Slayer's Avatar
2nd Gear member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 484
From: Wichita, KS
Default RE: carburator vs fuel injection

Carberation all the way.
 
Old Sep 19, 2006 | 11:40 PM
  #6  
American Muscle 100's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
In the Staging Lanes
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 47
From:
Default RE: carburator vs fuel injection

wow good replys
 
Old Sep 20, 2006 | 12:56 AM
  #7  
JD1969's Avatar
4th Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,687
Default RE: carburator vs fuel injection


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.
 
Old Sep 20, 2006 | 01:30 PM
  #8  
1969 SS's Avatar
3rd Gear Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,459
From: Massachusetts
Default RE: carburator vs fuel injection

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

 
Old Sep 20, 2006 | 01:51 PM
  #9  
uncle bill's Avatar
3rd Gear Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 793
From: San Antonio, Texas
Default RE: carburator vs fuel injection

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 Sep 20, 2006 | 04:59 PM
  #10  
1969 SS's Avatar
3rd Gear Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,459
From: Massachusetts
Default RE: carburator vs fuel injection


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
 



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:06 AM.