I'll start this fun post. I see it come up a lot and have some pet peeves with it.

There is something Patrick James (Pro Systems) wrote about this. I certainly won't argue about any of that. Is it all true, probably mostly valid info, although he is a carb guy :). I don't know him but his reputation speaks for itself and I don't think I'd want to get into a physics battle with him. I'm more of a hands on guy and know what I see in real life and rely on that.

Here's what I'll say from there though. Although his comments pertain to any engine, from what I have seen, it would realistically mostly show up on higher end race engines that have the carbs very well tuned.

From the real "back to back" tests I've seen, where the intake manifold was the same, I'd venture to make the statement that carbs and EFI "make the same power at WOT". This is on engines at 900HP and high compression.

My pet peeve about comparisons, and many take place in magazines, is when they put carb and EFI on the same engine, but with totally different intake manifolds. Say a single plane carb intake on an LS1 and then the factory LS1 intake. DUHHHH the power curves will be different. Intakes will make MUCH more difference than whether you have EFI or a carb metering the fuel.


That brings up another point or misconception - That the intake doesn't matter with EFI. Or you can run a single plane just fine with EFI. Both have some truth and falacy.

The comment about the single plane is true to the point that "it is much easier to tune the proper A/F with EFI vs possibly a carb" during conditions where you don't have an ideal signal on the carb boosters/fuel circuits. Like you might at low RPM with a single plane with some carbs.

If ALL you are worried about by gaining with EFI is "WOT power", keep the carb.

The vast majority of people I know that switch, won't go back, and it has nothing to do with WOT. Lots of other benefits.

Modern engines like LSx's that are designed for EFI really can take advantage of EFI.

We have 8 widebands on our dyno. That is another post, but anyone would be HORRIFIED to see that data.

I've seen carbed engine at WOT have one cylinder pegged at 18:1 and at the same time have another cylinder pegged at 10:1. An LSx engine has pretty much perfect distribution all the time.

Distribution is another post as well. The AIR distrubution in an EFI intake is hugely important.

Ouch, 18:1 and 10:1 at the same time. Push it off a cliff? That will fix it.

I've always wondered how throttle plate angle affected distribution but I've never had access to a good enough dyno setup to check into it.

Doug,if you take an FI LS motored car down the track and then drive to the shop and swap out the FI for a carb and intake and tune it, what will you find when you return to the track?
Mike

doug,if you take an fi ls motored car down the track and then drive to the shop and swap out the fi for a carb and intake and tune it, what will you find when you return to the track?
Mike

x2, good question.

Doug,if you take an FI LS motored car down the track and then drive to the shop and swap out the FI for a carb and intake and tune it, what will you find when you return to the track?
Mike

Not answering for Doug on the specific question here. I'm just wondering why you ask the question?

If, as many in the industry contend, that there is no difference in max HP at full throttle, then all other things being equal (tires, humidity, barometric pressure, etc.) the results would be the same at a drag race.

I run a single plane manifold (a modified for the injectors holley marine intake) on a 350 SBC. (Why did I get a manifold that had to be modified? Because when I did my efi about 8 years ago nobody had parts to get EFI on a SBC) It starts and drives well even in very cold conditions.
That is a great benefit I would contend, in addition to the drivability issues, lower emissions, A/F balance and improved fuel consumption.

These are the reasons for using EFI, not 1/4 times.

Ron

Pretty serious 4-dr there bikeron.

green cars live forever, just saw that recently.

Not answering for Doug on the specific question here. I'm just wondering why you ask the question?
Ron

While I can't be completly sure why I asked ,I'm thinking it had something to do with the title of the thread...

"Does a carb make more power than EFI?"

Still running a carb, but those elevation changes going up to Hot August Night in Reno forced me to pull over and re-tune the engine (by ear) half way up the Sierra's. Another advantage for EFI

Still running a carb, but those elevation changes going up to Hot August Night in Reno forced me to pull over and re-tune the engine (by ear) half way up the Sierra's. Another advantage for EFI

Not sure about all EFI systems, but I am pretty sure most of them use the MAP sensor reading just prior to engine start up to get the 'ambient' air pressure. So if you fire up the engine at sea level and drive up a mountain to 5000ft, the computer still thinks you are at sea level. But to recalibrate, all you need to do is turn off the engine and restart.

My pet peeve about comparisons, and many take place in magazines, is when they put carb and EFI on the same engine, but with totally different intake manifolds. Say a single plane carb intake on an LS1 and then the factory LS1 intake. DUHHHH the power curves will be different. Intakes will make MUCH more difference than whether you have EFI or a carb metering the fuel.


Doug,if you take an FI LS motored car down the track and then drive to the shop and swap out the FI for a carb and intake and tune it, what will you find when you return to the track?
Mike

While I can't be completly sure why I asked ,I'm thinking it had something to do with the title of the thread...

"Does a carb make more power than EFI?"

Sounds to me like the question was answered before you asked it.

Sounds to me like the question was answered before you asked it.

Pretty much.

Not being smart, but I'd ask:
#1 what is the complete engine combination, stock, 9000 RPM etc.
What was the carb intake What is the EFI intake
What was the carb. How well was the carb tuned for that engine on that day? What is the overall fuel curve
How well was the EFI tuned?
How good is the cylinder to cylinder distribution of the carb/intake
How good is the cylinder to cylinder distribution of the EFI intake
What color shirt did the driver wear each time?

Seriously, that is what matters.

Again, I'm not talking about doing this on a Pro Stock car that has carbs that have 10 years of work into. You wouldn't "throw EFI on an engine like that" and expect it to beat something like that.

Although I'm not real knowledgable, if you look at hi RPM EFI engines like CART (back when it was CART, saw one of these at PRI one year), etc, they (at least used to a while ago) run 2 sets of injectors. Port injectors near the head. These were smaller for just low fueling demands I'd guess. Then they run actual TBI type injectors ABOVE the entry to the intake runners runner inside the plenum. For Hi RPM stuff. This I'm sure from what I've read has to do with getting better atomization at hi (8000+++) rpm. Putting the fuel out closer "to where a carb is".

Again, from what I have seen in non-crazy situations, you'll make the "same" power. And that is assuming the carb is decent.

Something else I learned from an "injector expert" at a PRI seminar last year is that the actual injector itself has a lot to do with this power difference. He had some slow motion video of certain injector sprays. Some injectors looked like a hose, some, when the fuel came out, it almost just disappeared into small droplets.

HE said anytime someone could make the same power as a carb (in a true back to back), they'd change the injectors to a better (usually new technology) design that had better atomization and they'd make the same.


As I've learned working on this stuff for a while, there are MANY variables to consider before making "blanket statements" that are made all the time.

Yeah, but it's SO much more convenient to ignore everything a guy doesn't understand. :)

Ah,I see the problem,I failed to include the word "stock" in the scenario. I would have thought that with a description that lacked any inclusion of any details about performance enhancements that even those of limited mental capabilities would have been able to grasp the intent of the question,but alas I was wrong.
Mike

Ah,I see the problem,I failed to include the word "stock" in the scenario. I would have thought that with a description that lacked any inclusion of any details about performance enhancements that even those of limited mental capabilities would have been able to grasp the intent of the question,but alas I was wrong.
Mike

For a stock LSx engine, from how incredible I've seen the factory stuff work, I'd guess the EFI would run quicker. The stock EFI intakes are very good and the latest throttle bodies flow a lot.

It would run in general much better than the carb. The factory LSx engines are pretty amazing.

Thanks Doug.
Mike

bikeron did you and 454HO get that..?

I'd say it's all in the tune for both.

Not sure about all EFI systems, but I am pretty sure most of them use the MAP sensor reading just prior to engine start up to get the 'ambient' air pressure. So if you fire up the engine at sea level and drive up a mountain to 5000ft, the computer still thinks you are at sea level. But to recalibrate, all you need to do is turn off the engine and restart.

GM systems use a MAF and MAP and it is continuously changing and reading, it doesnt take just one reading and call it quits. The great thing about the MAF setup is that you can change a lot to the engine with regards to exhaust, cam, heads etc to flow better. The computer adjusts the amount of air moving into the engine and compares that with the MAP sensor, and O2 sensors to adjust the A/F ratio. compares air in air out and pressures.

BTW MAP doesnt take manifold temp, it takes the manifold absolute pressure or Barometric pressure .

I'm no expert on the subject but from what I've read about it the power difference comes from the cooler mixture of the carbed engine. I've heard about intakes frosting up during high rpm dyno pulls so the theory seems to make sense to me. It seems to me that tbi would have the same benefit as the carb.

Pretty serious 4-dr there bikeron.

green cars live forever, just saw that recently.

Thanks Tom.

Ron

Power, efficiency, reliability, dependibility are ALL very viable postive attributes of an EFI engine. OH, did I mention better looking. Sorry, I might just be slightly partial in my opinion. :D

http://inlinethumb35.webshots.com/45602/2559888910100380351S500x500Q85.jpg (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2559888910100380351OsUBLW)

Carbs have come a long way and are still my first choice but there is a lot better tech in FI these days that allow some serious fine tuning you cant get with a carb. 5 yrs ago Id say carb but nowadays Id lean towards EFI.
At the end of the day I think it would still be close enough not to lose sleep over.

Ah,I see the problem,I failed to include the word "stock" in the scenario. I would have thought that with a description that lacked any inclusion of any details about performance enhancements that even those of limited mental capabilities would have been able to grasp the intent of the question,but alas I was wrong.
Mike

Perhaps it is your limited mental capability that prevented you from asking the question you intended.

Thanks Doug.
Mike

bikeron did you and 454HO get that..?

No, I can speak for myself thank you. :)

Thanks Doug.
Mike

bikeron did you and 454HO get that..?

Yep, I didn't get the "stock" part.

Ron

GM systems use a MAF and MAP and it is continuously changing and reading, it doesnt take just one reading and call it quits. The great thing about the MAF setup is that you can change a lot to the engine with regards to exhaust, cam, heads etc to flow better. The computer adjusts the amount of air moving into the engine and compares that with the MAP sensor, and O2 sensors to adjust the A/F ratio. compares air in air out and pressures.

BTW MAP doesnt take manifold temp, it takes the manifold absolute pressure or Barometric pressure .

I admit I do not know much about how the GM factory EFI system uses all the sensors. But I do know what a MAP sensor is and how it works. One side of the sensor is exposed to ambient barometric pressure. The other side is exposed to the pressure in the intake manifold. The only time these two are equal, that is also predictable, is when the engine is not running. If the ambient barometric pressure changes (as in large altitude differences), how does the computer determine this has occured if the engine is running?????

And here is a quote from the Megasquirt manual, which I do know a little something about since I have built and tuned one myself.

Note that MegaSquirt® also uses the MAP sensor to grab a “barometer” reading at start-up to apply barometric corrections that compensate for reduced exhaust back pressure at high altitude. This value is stored in a variable called “baro”. The corrections themselves are in a variable called “aircor”.

some injection setups have 2 MAP sensors. one is connected to the intake and works as normal. The other is exposed to ambient pressure and updates on an interval chosen by whoever programs the unit. Good deal if you change altitude much. I live in a valley that's flat as a pancake, wouldn't help me much.

If I drove up to Flagstaff I'd have to cycle the ignition a couple times along the way.

I admit I do not know much about how the GM factory EFI system uses all the sensors. But I do know what a MAP sensor is and how it works. One side of the sensor is exposed to ambient barometric pressure. The other side is exposed to the pressure in the intake manifold. The only time these two are equal, that is also predictable, is when the engine is not running. If the ambient barometric pressure changes (as in large altitude differences), how does the computer determine this has occured if the engine is running?????

And here is a quote from the Megasquirt manual, which I do know a little something about since I have built and tuned one myself.

I dont have megasquirt on this computer but I could have sworn that you could add a separate baro sensor for altitude corrections? I might be very wrong though but I thought I saw this option in tuner studio

ok, here I found it

"BaroCorr is the barometric correction based on the ambient air pressure (usually taken at start-up, but a second baro pressure sensor can be added to MegaSquirt-II for continuous updates to the BaroCorr)"

http://www.megamanual.com/v22manual/mfuel.htm

Perhaps it is your limited mental capability that prevented you from asking the question you intended.



Doug,if you take an FI LS motored car down the track and then drive to the shop and swap out the FI for a carb and intake and tune it, what will you find when you return to the track?
Mike

Nope, thats the question I wanted to ask all right. I distinctly remember it. LOL
Mike

If the ambient barometric pressure changes (as in large altitude differences), how does the computer determine this has occured if the engine is running?????

If the MAP sensor measures changes in the intake manifold pressure would the change in altitude not have a direct effect on this pressure?
Mike

I believe fuel injection is the way of the future. There is no arguement that a carb at this time has been the best thing at a drag strip.But how long have we been tuning with them forever right ! well in due time and enough racers start using fuel injection we will find ways to tune and find ways of making it work better. I recently installed a fuel injected 582 bbc and a 4l80e trans in my 1969 SS chevelle and its all ran by big stuff 3 pcm and i just started to tune it. The tuning capability is just unreal by the touch of a button on a laptop and after being a master auto tech for 30 years now its kind of nice to put the tools down and push buttons in instead of busting knuckles so i believe in what Doug F. is talking about ! good job Doug F. SAM

If the MAP sensor measures changes in the intake manifold pressure would the change in altitude not have a direct effect on this pressure?
Mike

Yes it does have a direct effect. It makes a reading of intake and outside pressures and adjust the throttle, fuel maps and such.

Carbs have come a long way and are still my first choice but there is a lot better tech in FI these days that allow some serious fine tuning you cant get with a carb. 5 yrs ago Id say carb but nowadays Id lean towards EFI.
At the end of the day I think it would still be close enough not to lose sleep over.

not to be argumentative... but how have carbs come a long way. They are pretty much the same as they were 50 years ago. Only true changes Ive seen is that there aer feed back carbs which do what FI systems do and adjust things as they get information to the computer.

Man I love this stuff. Doug, thanks for stepping up and spear heading this. I'm a novice with EFI and I jump on every opportunity to learn it. Anyways, the question "Does a carb make more power than EFI?" Great question, and my uneducated answer would be yes. By design, a carb uses a venturi to pull fuel from the carb. This venturi has a side benefit of cooling the incoming air as it atomizes the fuel, thus creating a slightly denser air fuel mixture. An EFI system doesn't have this benefit, so on the same given application, I would expect to see a slight loss in horsepower with an EFI set-up. Something else I'd like to add about carb vs EFI; a carb is a dumb device and what I mean by that is, it can't self compensate for changing air density conditions. In order to maintain optimum power, a tuner has to manually compensate for air density changes by changing jets and air bleeds. A carb will only deliver fuel in relation to the volume of air going through it, it cannot adjust the fuel mixture to compensate for air density changes. This is where EFI will dominate over a carb. There's other advantages to an EFI system, but those are entirely new threads. OK Doug I'm ready, now blow holes through my theory, lol.

not to be argumentative... but how have carbs come a long way. They are pretty much the same as they were 50 years ago. Only true changes Ive seen is that there aer feed back carbs which do what FI systems do and adjust things as they get information to the computer.

Far more adjustability than 50 yrs ago, same principle yet refined quite a bit. I'd much rather park behind my trailer after a round that sit there with my laptop tweaking the FI system. I'm with the "no more power at WOT" crowd ;)

But Bob, you know there's people out there that occasionally drive at less than WOT? :)

When you tune an EFI, do you tune for power, drivibility or both?

Do you target an A/F ratio throught the RPM range? If so, does that necessarly mean that it makes the most power in the midrange RPM?

How does a Dyno curve look comparing EFI vs carb?

With EFI you can tune for maximum fuel economy during cruise and then maxmimum power at WOT. Tuning options are way better and its more accurate overall than a carb. Maybe a perfectly tuned Carb setup will make a bit more power at WOT than a perfectly tuned EFI setup on the same engine but I've never seen any really evidence just theories. There is no doubt you can make great power with either, but I think EFI wins for daily driver on the street. Carb wins for clean looking and simple. It all depends on what you want from your car. I drive my car on the street alot and am now boosted so I went EFI over a blowthrough carb and my car runs very nice. As for the dyno graph difference, probably wouldn't notice it at all since dynos graphs are so unsmooth. Maybe a bit more low rpm power with EFI.

Far more adjustability than 50 yrs ago, same principle yet refined quite a bit. I'd much rather park behind my trailer after a round that sit there with my laptop tweaking the FI system. I'm with the "no more power at WOT" crowd ;)

I haven't opened my hood all year! Haven't hardly pecked on my laptop either!

I would agree that the right sized properly tuned carb will make as much HP as EFI, maybe even a speck more in some cases. But one thing I've always found, is that swapping to EFI will always pick up low to mid range torque. I'm sure there are cases where this isn't true, but it's never happened to me.

Then add in the driveability, tuneability, etc. and EFI seems like a no-brainer if it fits the budget.

Jody

... This venturi has a side benefit of cooling the incoming air as it atomizes the fuel, thus creating a slightly denser air fuel mixture. An EFI system doesn't have this benefit, so on the same given application, I would expect to see a slight loss in horsepower with an EFI set-up.

FI works in a similiar fashion. The injectors work the same in the sense that they are like the orphus tube or expansion valve. There is a high pressure fluid going through a restricted opening into a very low pressure area, atomization takes place and the cold gas drops the temp of the air.

Far more adjustability than 50 yrs ago, same principle yet refined quite a bit. I'd much rather park behind my trailer after a round that sit there with my laptop tweaking the FI system. I'm with the "no more power at WOT" crowd ;)

The sitting behind a laptop would only take place while tuning your system, same as tuning a carb wherein you get gas all over the place, and have to replace gaskets, undo linkage and get dirty. When all is said and done the tuning is just played with just as you would with the car from time to time, and Im willing to bet it takes a lot less time to tune the computer/efi system than pulling a carb and rejetting, and drilling etc.

When you tune an EFI, do you tune for power, drivibility or both?

Do you target an A/F ratio throught the RPM range? If so, does that necessarly mean that it makes the most power in the midrange RPM?

How does a Dyno curve look comparing EFI vs carb?

I had my system tuned for partial thottle drivability and wide open power from a gentleman in Pen. My brother on the other hand emails a guy his hand held reader that is connected to his OBDII connector every once in a while and gets his tunes done and emailed back to him within one business day. He can have different A/F ratios at different throttle positions, air flow rates etc.

immense cost factor ? cost per hp ?

I haven't opened my hood all year! Haven't hardly pecked on my laptop either!

Sounds like you're due for an oil change ++ :p

Sounds like you're due for an oil change ++ :p

Actually just did that last weekend. Should have done it sooner!

immense cost factor ? cost per hp ?

One thing about EFI is that if you get a good system up front, you don't need to change some things if you change or modify the engines.

When I went from a 388 SB to a 491 BB, I reused the throttle body, ECU, fuel system, sensors. I did need larger injectors but I sold my SBC ones and about broke even. Of course I needed a new intake, but I modded a carb one for low cost.

Most likely a carb that works on a 400 HP 388 won't be what you want on a 600 HP 491.

For a street or street/strip car, EFI is more expensive at the start, no doubt.

But on a race car, if you are starting from scratch and buying "good new parts", the cost could be closer than you'd think. A good modifier Dominator, regulator, big fuel pump, etc adds up quick. I've had drag racers switch to EFI and have a pretty big reduction in race fuel usage (warm up and pit driving) that actually adds up pretty quick with $10 a gallon gas. Others have said their oil is much better (less engine wear).

we have a debate going elsewhere
as I am on the low buck side of the tracks [have not had a hot car since we started a family ], I prefer being a luddite with my love of dominators and electric fuel pumps
we have a 'tuner ' with a bit of an attitude , but I point to his not being able to afford the kind of car or setup he recommends
add to the argument - the engine masters by phr contest this year - where efi was allowed but , while the popular prediction was efi would run away with the whole thing , it wasn't even a contest , carbs won the top spot
not trying to cause trouble , but most of the bonuses touted by the efi people , do not justify the cost ....

we have a debate going elsewhere
as I am on the low buck side of the tracks [have not had a hot car since we started a family ], I prefer being a luddite with my love of dominators and electric fuel pumps
we have a 'tuner ' with a bit of an attitude , but I point to his not being able to afford the kind of car or setup he recommends
add to the argument - the engine masters by phr contest this year - where efi was allowed but , while the popular prediction was efi would run away with the whole thing , it wasn't even a contest , carbs won the top spot
not trying to cause trouble , but most of the bonuses touted by the efi people , do not justify the cost ....

I'm not trying to debate this (maybe I am), but I ask this to you: Have you ever had hands-on with a good aftermarket EFI system, or a friend that did?

I've been in quite a few engine shops of "top" builders (several times to do EFI tuning). The vast majority have no EFI tuning experience hence I'm not surprised that many engine masters builders still went with carbs as their comfort still lies with carburetors as well as their "past development" knowledge.

From my real experiences, there is probably a "split". "Seasoned" professional engine builders that really know how to build an engine that makes power. These guys area and most will remain "carb guys". They hate computers and wires.

Then you have the "late model" people that don't know what a "jet" is.

Neither is wrong, but I don't think you can say that carb people stay with carbs because EFI wouldn't benefit them.

I know several engine builders that would never put a carb on something like a 2000+ HP nitrous engine that they were building for themselves. The benefits have become obvious to them.


I've told many a person to "stay with a carb", but never because they wouldn't see marked benefits with EFI. It's just that with the EFI tuning knowledge available to them, their chances of "success" were not likely.

Or if a guy is going to just lay black marks outside his house once a month with his BB Chevelle and do nothing else (ie low usage of the car), that is certainly something that should remain a carb.

I think it is clear that I'm not saying there is anything wrong with a carb for many (the company I work for would not be in business without them), it's just that EFI offers a lot of nice features, FOR THE PEOPLE THAT WOULD CONSIDER THOSE FEATURES "NICE". Many would not care. So pump the pedal, start her up, and give it a minute to warm up. Also nice to be able to fix a carb with a screwdriver you can keep in you glove box.

And I'm with you on the cost. If I didn't have access to "low dollar" EFI options (making stuff myself), I couldn't afford to spend 3k on a system myself with a family.

Doesn't NASCAR use carbs? same with all drag cars (except for those with mechanical fuel systems)?

I have read what patrick from pro systems has said many times, and I don't know any better than to agree with it.

Nascar uses carbs because the rules mandate it. Ask a Nascar engine builder about the issues they have with fuel/air distribution pulling 2+g's into the banking on a track...

NHRA Pro Stock also mandates carbs for now.

Go to an NMRA or NMCA race and look at the heads up cars and see what most of them run. Still many carbs but a lot of EFI.

I'm going to start to be repetitious, but engine builders that choose a carb over EFI
many times do it because they have no knowledge about EFI and have no desire to go there. It isn't because they did testing on both and choose to stay with carbs.

It is unfortunate as I think EFI tuning is really simple, but people get off in the wrong direction and make a mess then think EFI is terrible.

It's just like ask 100 people if they like a Holley carb or Barry Grant carb. Some will love one and hate the other and visa versa because of their experiences which usually are very limited.

My "drag car" uses EFI and I've done pretty well bracket racing. Many people I race with think it is "because of the EFI". A bit more to it than that... But the car is deadly consistent.

Nascar has been looking at going EFI, they mentioned it a few times this year. I expect it will be in Nascar in the next 3 years.

I have read what patrick from pro systems has said many times, and I don't know any better than to agree with it.

he is a carb salesman .do you honestly expect him to say otherwise?

he is a carb salesman .do you honestly expect him to say otherwise?

yes of course I know that. But you guys are voting for EFI, should I honestly believe you:noway:, just as much as Patrick may be "selling something" you guys are "selling" your idea of what is better. which in fact it may actually be!

what I am trying to say is, I feel that carbs are better, from what I have heard and from what I KNOW, which like I said could be different what from someone else may KNOW.

all I know is that nothing will ever smell like a carbeurated gasoline engine, or look like one either:thumbsup:

yes of course I know that. But you guys are voting for EFI, should I honestly believe you:noway:, just as much as Patrick may be "selling something" you guys are "selling" your idea of what is better. which in fact it may actually be!

what I am trying to say is, I feel that carbs are better, from what I have heard and from what I KNOW, which like I said could be different what from someone else may KNOW.

all I know is that nothing will ever smell like a carbeurated gasoline engine, or look like one either:thumbsup:

what I am trying to say is, he makes his LIVING selling carbs. carburetors are how he puts food on the table. even if he knew EFI were better he would not say it with his mouth

by the way, how long ago did manufacturers get away from carbs? im sure it has been a couple of decades at least. that in itself speaks volumes about this whole carb vs efi thing

yes of course I know that. But you guys are voting for EFI, should I honestly believe you:noway:, just as much as Patrick may be "selling something" you guys are "selling" your idea of what is better. which in fact it may actually be!

what I am trying to say is, I feel that carbs are better, from what I have heard and from what I KNOW, which like I said could be different what from someone else may KNOW.

all I know is that nothing will ever smell like a carbeurated gasoline engine, or look like one either:thumbsup:



Here's a link to a picture of my EFI BBC when I first put it in. Would you say this "looks like an EFI engine?" Doesn't have to look like an LS1 to be EFI. Still needed some tidying up... Has a DIS ignition on it now.

http://www.chevytalk.org/fusionbb/showpost.php?post/1398399/

what I am trying to say is, he makes his LIVING selling carbs. carburetors are how he puts food on the table. even if he knew EFI were better he would not say it with his mouth

by the way, how long ago did manufacturers get away from carbs? im sure it has been a couple of decades at least. that in itself speaks volumes about this whole carb vs efi thing
"the only reason we are having this debate is the cost, and the learning curve for some people."
you must have edited that out your post after. Don't know if I should take that as a jab for using a carb or if your talking about engine builders in general who do not want to learn the ways of efi?
obviously patrick makes a living off carbs. so if a person making a living off EFI said that EFI is better why should I believe them? maybe they are smarter?

regardless I think the differences in MOST scenarios are minute, until you start making BIG power. but again that is my opinion.
Many guys like Doug said in NMCA and NMRA are running EFI now. BUT the majority still run carbs. I think to each their own.

Here's a link to a picture of my EFI BBC when I first put it in. Would you say this "looks like an EFI engine?" Doesn't have to look like an LS1 to be EFI. Still needed some tidying up... Has a DIS ignition on it now.

http://www.chevytalk.org/fusionbb/showpost.php?post/1398399/

your engine looks quite good Doug.

I shouldn't have joined this debate :plol. I think this debate will live on forever just like BB vs SB since carbs have been an established thing for so long.

"the only reason we are having this debate is the cost, and the learning curve for some people."
you must have edited that out your post after. Don't know if I should take that as a jab for using a carb or if your talking about engine builders in general who do not want to learn the ways of efi?
obviously patrick makes a living off carbs. so if a person making a living off EFI said that EFI is better why should I believe them? maybe they are smarter?

regardless I think the differences in MOST scenarios are minute, until you start making BIG power. but again that is my opinion.
Many guys like Doug said in NMCA and NMRA are running EFI now. BUT the majority still run carbs. I think to each their own.



your engine looks quite good Doug.

I shouldn't have joined this debate :plol. I think this debate will live on forever just like BB vs SB since carbs have been an established thing for so long.

Amen brother :) Just make sure you are out burning rubber having fun.

Amen brother :) Just make sure you are out burning rubber having fun.

exactly! I don't like arguing:noway: or debating even lol, it is just not for me:D

amen to that :beers:

"the only reason we are having this debate is the cost, and the learning curve for some people."
you must have edited that out your post after. Don't know if I should take that as a jab for using a carb or if your talking about engine builders in general who do not want to learn the ways of efi?
obviously patrick makes a living off carbs. so if a person making a living off EFI said that EFI is better why should I believe them? maybe they are smarter?

regardless I think the differences in MOST scenarios are minute, until you start making BIG power. but again that is my opinion.
Many guys like Doug said in NMCA and NMRA are running EFI now. BUT the majority still run carbs. I think to each their own.





I editted it for that very reason - I did not want anyone thinking it was a personal jab.

it would be foolish for anyone to take the words of an efi salesperson, on efi, as gospel. that would not be wise at all, as they obviously have a vested interested.

i think efi is hugely different from carbs, and in some applications, carbs are still better. you dont have to design a system and tune just to run it. throw on a carb, and go. for most people a carb still makes more sense as the opportunity cost can be quite high -eg, I would say get aluminum aftermarket heads before you go efi- just my opinion. all I was pointing out is that you cant take the words of a carb salesperson as gospel

I editted it for that very reason - I did not want anyone thinking it was a personal jab.

it would be foolish for anyone to take the words of an efi salesperson, on efi, as gospel. that would not be wise at all, as they obviously have a vested interested.

i think efi is hugely different from carbs, and in some applications, carbs are still better. you dont have to design a system and tune just to run it. throw on a carb, and go. for most people a carb still makes more sense as the opportunity cost can be quite high -eg, I would say get aluminum aftermarket heads before you go efi- just my opinion. all I was pointing out is that you cant take the words of a carb salesperson as gospel

ok now I see more eye to eye with you. Yes, I agree to disagree:thumbsup:
And I haven't taken Patrick's word as gospel, I am just trying to sayi it is quite convincing to me (hey I am 20 yrs old, let me enjoy some nostalgia before I decide to electronically deliver my fuel:p).

what I am trying to say is, I feel that carbs are better, from what I have heard and from what I KNOW, which like I said could be different what from someone else may KNOW.

all I know is that nothing will ever smell like a carbeurated gasoline engine, or look like one either:thumbsup:*

I have a carb on my lawn mover. Everything else is EFI. And that's all I have to say on the matter. :D

I have a carb on my lawn mover. Everything else is EFI. And that's all I have to say on the matter. :D

You won't for long... Too many emissions... :(

Even I want a carb on my mower! It works perfect and cost the manufacturer about $5-10.

Man...isn't this fun???

Having been in the opposite lane against Doug, I can vouch for the deadly response and performance of his EFI. And I definitely give him style points for doing it with a tunnel ram! That things starts and idles like a new car and is definitely not leaving anything on the table HP wise. For sure looks easier to tune. I mean I've watched him peck away for a few seconds and tweak the tune. Not even a need for a red rag to wipe his hands on!! Gotta be something said for that!

JIM

You won't for long... Too many emissions... :(

Even I want a carb on my mower! It works perfect and cost the manufacturer about $5-10.

That's why I got a Briggs & Stratton. One of the few things you can buy these days that lasts decades. I'm actually impressed how lean it runs. The plug stays white.