Tornado product

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Nov 17, 2004 | 05:31 PM

#31

jcrice

Mountain Pass

Joined: Jan 2003

Posts: 161

Likes: 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dunk

Because fuel injection never saved a drop of fuel. I got an OPEC built 88 Bronco that's FI that kind of proves that point. Fi was/is and always be "just" another way to get fuel to the cylinders. Yes, at rpms less than 12-1500 FI is more efficent, but once you pour the coal to the engine they burn the same fuel a carbed engine does.

On the flip side about conspiracy theroys I agree. Anyone remember the carburator that got 100mpg that the oil companies snatched off the market??

I think most people aren't driving at WOT most of the time, but I may be wrong.

FI has come a little ways since 1988 (you’re probably talking about throttle-body injection), and is much more efficient than carburetion. There is an ideal air/fuel ratio (stoichiometric – 14.6:1) that is controlled by the vehicle’s computer to maintain this mix. With carbureted engines, you can do little more than get close. Most, if not all, FI engines these days inject the fuel directly into the intake ports rather than at the top of the intake manifold, like carburetors do, also adding to efficiency.

Have you ever seen the carbon deposits on a carbureted engines valves? They’ll be cleaner on a fuel injected engine. Do you know where those carbon deposits come from? I'll give you a hint: wasted fuel.