Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: Cab_Burge] #2725363
12/19/19 12:01 PM
12/19/19 12:01 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,028
Tulsa OK
Bad340fish Offline
master
Bad340fish  Offline
master

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,028
Tulsa OK
Originally Posted by Cab_Burge
Originally Posted by Gavin
There's really no debate to be had on which technology atomises better. You've had at least two people who have worked in the industry say the same thing (Mr P Body and myself). Higher pressure gives better atomisation. EFI is ALWAYS higher pressure therefore, leaving the carb or injector, better atomisation, every time, period.

Per my original reply - what you do with it after that is getting a lot of good discussion here, but there's no uncertainty about which device atomises better.

I am still in doubt about which system, EFI or a dual quad tunnel ram set up, is better for a all out drag race motor work shruggy Hence NHRA Pro Stock not going faster now with EFI than they did with dual carbs on a tunnel ram intakes work
I remember several different mechanical fuel injector companies testing the location of the injectors heights in there all out race set ups for dirt and asphalt track roundy round all out race cars work


My understanding is that the higher up you can place the injector the more power you can make, downside is they are a little harder to dial in for street driving with the injector way up the intake.

It would have been interesting to see what happened with pro stock if the EFI conversion didn't require the loss of the scoops and tunnel rams. Holley makes a 4500 bolt pattern throttle body that is 2500CFM, a pair of those on a tunnel ram would be fun.


68 Barracuda Formula S 340
Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: Gavin] #2725372
12/19/19 12:28 PM
12/19/19 12:28 PM
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318
State of confusion
T
Thumperdart Offline
I Live Here
Thumperdart  Offline
I Live Here
T

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318
State of confusion
If EFI is so much better(which I don't believe it is in every case)then why did Pro Stock slow down across the board. Plus there's some well known heads up racers I know that sold there's and went BACK to carbs and picked up LOTS of power......My opinion on the 2 places it shines, 1, on our daily drivers get to work stuff and 2, super high end high power(2000+hp)stuff but in between that carbs shine and I've been part of it personally...........

Last edited by Thumperdart; 12/19/19 12:28 PM.

72 Dart 470 n/a BB stroker street car `THUMPER`...Check me out on FB Dominic Thumper for videos and lots of carb pics......760-900-3895.....
Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: Thumperdart] #2725390
12/19/19 02:22 PM
12/19/19 02:22 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,028
Tulsa OK
Bad340fish Offline
master
Bad340fish  Offline
master

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,028
Tulsa OK
Originally Posted by Thumperdart
If EFI is so much better(which I don't believe it is in every case)then why did Pro Stock slow down across the board. Plus there's some well known heads up racers I know that sold there's and went BACK to carbs and picked up LOTS of power......My opinion on the 2 places it shines, 1, on our daily drivers get to work stuff and 2, super high end high power(2000+hp)stuff but in between that carbs shine and I've been part of it personally...........


Pro stock didn't just swap to EFI, they also got a 10,500 RPM limit, lost the scoop, and run a spec throttle body and intake tube.

Not to say that the carb still wouldn't make more power but I feel it would be MUCH closer or equal had they got to keep the tunnel rams.


68 Barracuda Formula S 340
Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: Gavin] #2725441
12/19/19 07:18 PM
12/19/19 07:18 PM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
H
hysteric Offline
member
hysteric  Offline
member
H

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
Originally Posted by Gavin
There's really no debate to be had on which technology atomises better. You've had at least two people who have worked in the industry say the same thing (Mr P Body and myself). Higher pressure gives better atomisation. EFI is ALWAYS higher pressure therefore, leaving the carb or injector, better atomisation, every time, period.

Per my original reply - what you do with it after that is getting a lot of good discussion here, but there's no uncertainty about which device atomises better.


But does that mean that it produces a better homogenized mixture?

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: hysteric] #2725443
12/19/19 07:38 PM
12/19/19 07:38 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,050
Oregon
A
AndyF Offline
I Win
AndyF  Offline
I Win
A

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,050
Oregon
Originally Posted by hysteric
Originally Posted by Gavin
There's really no debate to be had on which technology atomises better. You've had at least two people who have worked in the industry say the same thing (Mr P Body and myself). Higher pressure gives better atomisation. EFI is ALWAYS higher pressure therefore, leaving the carb or injector, better atomisation, every time, period.

Per my original reply - what you do with it after that is getting a lot of good discussion here, but there's no uncertainty about which device atomises better.


But does that mean that it produces a better homogenized mixture?


Exactly. When I look down the throttle bores of a Sniper it drools big drops of fuel into the intake manifold just like a carb does. The injectors in a Sniper do not spray fuel into the intake which is what most people seem to be assuming.

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: AndyF] #2725447
12/19/19 07:50 PM
12/19/19 07:50 PM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
H
hysteric Offline
member
hysteric  Offline
member
H

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
Originally Posted by AndyF
Originally Posted by MoonshineMattK
Can anyone please explain how a carb atomizes fuel better than fuel injection.

For the sake of my question both the carb and fuel injection are tuned properly.


I don't think anyone on this thread knows the answer to that question. That is a very complicated technical question and nobody would be able to prove it one way or the other without a lab full of equipment. A carb works opposite of injection so the behavior is totally different. In a carb the low pressure area in the venturi sucks the fuel out of the bowl. The pressure differential in a carb is only 5 or 6 psi while an injector operates around 50 psi. The metering block in a carb adds air bubbles to the fuel which helps. There is no air bubble system in an injector.

If someone really wants to know the answer to this question they would need to talk to an injector engineer at Bosch. My guess is that they know how to measure it and and could explain it.


My understanding is that a 5 gas analyzer would tell you how the fractions are being converted. What happens to the flame front when the mixture isn't ideally homogenized? Just because you atomize fuel doesn't mean the mixture is ideal at the time of ignition. I'm no expert but maybe the question of atomization is just one part of the puzzle.

Maybe a thorough reading of Ricardo's work might shed some light on the matter

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: AndyF] #2725448
12/19/19 07:54 PM
12/19/19 07:54 PM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
H
hysteric Offline
member
hysteric  Offline
member
H

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
Originally Posted by AndyF
Originally Posted by hysteric
Originally Posted by Gavin
There's really no debate to be had on which technology atomises better. You've had at least two people who have worked in the industry say the same thing (Mr P Body and myself). Higher pressure gives better atomisation. EFI is ALWAYS higher pressure therefore, leaving the carb or injector, better atomisation, every time, period.

Per my original reply - what you do with it after that is getting a lot of good discussion here, but there's no uncertainty about which device atomises better.


But does that mean that it produces a better homogenized mixture?


Exactly. When I look down the throttle bores of a Sniper it drools big drops of fuel into the intake manifold just like a carb does. The injectors in a Sniper do not spray fuel into the intake which is what most people seem to be assuming.


Would be interesting to make a clear manifold and actually see the differences in fuel delivery between a Holley a Carter TQ/Rochestor Qjet and a Sniper.

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: Thumperdart] #2725452
12/19/19 08:05 PM
12/19/19 08:05 PM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
H
hysteric Offline
member
hysteric  Offline
member
H

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
Had this discussion with a friend about the difference in performance of efi and carbs and he told me about his mate who went from a well tuned Rochester Qjet to an expensive injection system and only gained 3 foot pounds of torque in the mid range and nothing at the top all measured on the dyno. He did say the only real benefit was when starting it cold it idled better. From memory it cost him 3K to convert over so not exactly bang for buck.

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: AndyF] #2725453
12/19/19 08:05 PM
12/19/19 08:05 PM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,864
Pattison Texas
CSK Offline
master
CSK  Offline
master

Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,864
Pattison Texas
I still have some tuning to do, because self tuning EFI is more of a selling point & not a true reality, but the EFI HILBORN 8 Stack I have on my Street Strip car is AWESOME, Individual runners, so the low vacuum, drivabilty issues from a large duration cam are gone, cam is a hyd roller 255, 258 @ .050 & it idles like a stock 440 & drives just as smooth. a carb on a common plenum intake CANNOT do what this EFI set up does, also I can change runner length to tune for power @ different RPM's, as I said earlier I can run much leaner without lean misfires, that tells me better fuel atomization & Obviously better fuel distribution than my ported Indy SP intake. Will keep Y'all updated on my progress at the track.

Last edited by csk; 12/19/19 08:11 PM.

1968 Charger COLD A/C Hilborn EFI
512ci 9.7 compression, Stealth heads, 4.10 gear A518 ODtrans 4100lb,10.93 full street car trim
2020 T/A 392 Stock 11.79 @ 114.5

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: Bad340fish] #2725460
12/19/19 08:24 PM
12/19/19 08:24 PM
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,457
Washington
M
madscientist Offline
master
madscientist  Offline
master
M

Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,457
Washington
Originally Posted by Bad340fish
Originally Posted by Thumperdart
If EFI is so much better(which I don't believe it is in every case)then why did Pro Stock slow down across the board. Plus there's some well known heads up racers I know that sold there's and went BACK to carbs and picked up LOTS of power......My opinion on the 2 places it shines, 1, on our daily drivers get to work stuff and 2, super high end high power(2000+hp)stuff but in between that carbs shine and I've been part of it personally...........


Pro stock didn't just swap to EFI, they also got a 10,500 RPM limit, lost the scoop, and run a spec throttle body and intake tube.

Not to say that the carb still wouldn't make more power but I feel it would be MUCH closer or equal had they got to keep the tunnel rams.


The RPM limit didn't hurt the GM architecture.

The hood scoop was on of the MOST cried about pieces of a Pro Stock car ever. WJ sniveled about them for years and claimed a huge gain in MPH if the big "mail box" was gone from the car.

EFI retarded Pro Stock in more than one way.


Just because you think it won't make it true. Horsepower is KING. To dispute this is stupid. C. Alston
Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: madscientist] #2725468
12/19/19 08:51 PM
12/19/19 08:51 PM
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 907
Washington
H
hemienvy Offline OP
super stock
hemienvy  Offline OP
super stock
H

Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 907
Washington
AndyF,
I had no idea the Sniper was a "drooler" not a "fogger" !!
To me, EFI should not only meter fuel, it should also atomize it.

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: hysteric] #2725530
12/20/19 02:05 AM
12/20/19 02:05 AM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,566
Downtown Roebuck Ont
Twostick Offline
Still wishing...
Twostick  Offline
Still wishing...

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,566
Downtown Roebuck Ont
Originally Posted by hysteric
Originally Posted by AndyF
Originally Posted by hysteric
Originally Posted by Gavin
There's really no debate to be had on which technology atomises better. You've had at least two people who have worked in the industry say the same thing (Mr P Body and myself). Higher pressure gives better atomisation. EFI is ALWAYS higher pressure therefore, leaving the carb or injector, better atomisation, every time, period.

Per my original reply - what you do with it after that is getting a lot of good discussion here, but there's no uncertainty about which device atomises better.


But does that mean that it produces a better homogenized mixture?


Exactly. When I look down the throttle bores of a Sniper it drools big drops of fuel into the intake manifold just like a carb does. The injectors in a Sniper do not spray fuel into the intake which is what most people seem to be assuming.


Would be interesting to make a clear manifold and actually see the differences in fuel delivery between a Holley a Carter TQ/Rochestor Qjet and a Sniper.


A buddy of mine in the R&D biz did that years ago. First thing he learned was that fuel staying in suspension in a wet manifold is basically a myth. There is a cloud of it directly under the carburetor and then 90% of it goes directly to the floor of the intake manifold.

Kevin

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: Twostick] #2725541
12/20/19 08:09 AM
12/20/19 08:09 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
B
BradH Offline
Taking time off to work on my car
BradH  Offline
Taking time off to work on my car
B

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
Atomization does not necessarily = more power.

Direct injection (nozzle exits directly into intake runner bowl) does not make the most power of FI configurations, for a traditional V8 engine.

Google "Darin Morgan wet flow test" and there is a link to a gearhead podcast where he's interviewed for about an hour. One of the topics is FI nozzle placement, in which he talks about why Sprint Cars ended up running both direct injection for improved throttle response AND additional injectors farther upstream in the runners, because the upstream location is more flexible in its tuning parameters and makes more power at high(er) RPM.

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: BradH] #2725552
12/20/19 09:01 AM
12/20/19 09:01 AM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,540
Milwaukee WI
T
TRENDZ Offline
master
TRENDZ  Offline
master
T

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,540
Milwaukee WI
I never heard of direct injection above the valve. Direct injection has always been in-cylinder nozzles at extremely high pressures. Port injection, as used on sprint car engines generally have the nozzles entering the port from the exhaust side of the head, straight into the bowl. Other than the clarification, I think you/ he is spot-on. The higher the rpm range, the farther away from the intake valve the injector should be. F1 engines live life way above 10,000 rpm. They have had injectors at great distances for years.


"use it 'till it breaks, replace as needed"
Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: TRENDZ] #2725566
12/20/19 09:45 AM
12/20/19 09:45 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
B
BradH Offline
Taking time off to work on my car
BradH  Offline
Taking time off to work on my car
B

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
Originally Posted by TRENDZ
Port injection, as used on sprint car engines generally have the nozzles entering the port from the exhaust side of the head, straight into the bowl.

Yes, that's what I mean; I'm not familiar with all the correct terminology. up

Last edited by BradH; 12/20/19 09:55 AM.
Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: BradH] #2725628
12/20/19 01:07 PM
12/20/19 01:07 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,419
Kalispell Mt.
H
HotRodDave Offline
I Live Here
HotRodDave  Offline
I Live Here
H

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,419
Kalispell Mt.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2iBbwocYZw

this is how the most expensive highest tech engines are done


I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!



Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: Twostick] #2725706
12/20/19 07:11 PM
12/20/19 07:11 PM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
H
hysteric Offline
member
hysteric  Offline
member
H

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
I would imagine the "Mist" component could change direction very quickly to go to the cylinder with the opening valve. It would be harder for the fuel on the walls of the manifold to change direction.

Anyway a heated manifold would help vaporize some/most of the fuel on the walls and floor of the intake helping it find its way into the cylinder in a better state than liquid.

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: BradH] #2725708
12/20/19 07:14 PM
12/20/19 07:14 PM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
H
hysteric Offline
member
hysteric  Offline
member
H

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 117
Aus
Well known road race car here in Australia had the injector nozzles mounted before the entrance of the IR trumpet.

[Linked Image]

Re: Fuel atomization: Carb vs. EFI [Re: Bad340fish] #2725723
12/20/19 08:38 PM
12/20/19 08:38 PM
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318
State of confusion
T
Thumperdart Offline
I Live Here
Thumperdart  Offline
I Live Here
T

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318
State of confusion
I remember they changed a few things but most interviews I saw it seemed the drivers/tuners preferred carbs and a forward scoop plus I'm sure singing the HEMI'S way up is missed as well...........I saw the spec sheet on Erica Enders carbs and it was quite eye opening..........


72 Dart 470 n/a BB stroker street car `THUMPER`...Check me out on FB Dominic Thumper for videos and lots of carb pics......760-900-3895.....
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3






Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1