Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
#101
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
There is a product out there, that sports a "power" program and an "economy"
program, all on the same chip. I think it is for the Chevy 350. There
aren't more of them, because of lack of interest. Maybe gas prices are now
high enough to change this. Stock FI programs run slightly rich on purpose,
to lower combustion temperature and reduce NOx. This produces more HC and
CO. It is also one reason that a less restrictive intake and exhaust will
give you both better economy and more power, when added to just about any
stock FI vehicle, and without burning holes in the tops of your pistons.
Earle
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4469D991.B2FB71E6@sympatico.ca...
> Simon Juncal wrote:
> >
> > Mike Romain wrote:
> > > Fuel injection is a compromise. It gives lower gas mileage with
better
> > > emissions
> >
> > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
> > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
> > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
> > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
> > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> >
> > You don't get one without the other
>
> Great in theory, too bad real life proves it otherwise.
>
> Why does a FI system need a fancy new chip to get more power and they
> warn about way less gas mileage?
>
> <snip>
> > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
> > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
> > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
> > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>
> LOL, got news for ya....
>
> Here is my last tuning experiment with my carb 258 engine with the
> emissions computer gone and 'no' catalytic converter in the exhaust
> stream.
>
> On the ASM 2525 test:
>
> I got 589 NOx, 16 ppm HC and 0.11% CO
>
> But but but, my Fuel Injected 4.0 Cherokee with a fresh tune up and a
> new O2 sensor got:
>
> HC for the Cherokee was 58 ppm, CO for the Cherokee was 0.56%. NOx
> wasn't recorded.
>
> So much for theory, eh....
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
program, all on the same chip. I think it is for the Chevy 350. There
aren't more of them, because of lack of interest. Maybe gas prices are now
high enough to change this. Stock FI programs run slightly rich on purpose,
to lower combustion temperature and reduce NOx. This produces more HC and
CO. It is also one reason that a less restrictive intake and exhaust will
give you both better economy and more power, when added to just about any
stock FI vehicle, and without burning holes in the tops of your pistons.
Earle
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4469D991.B2FB71E6@sympatico.ca...
> Simon Juncal wrote:
> >
> > Mike Romain wrote:
> > > Fuel injection is a compromise. It gives lower gas mileage with
better
> > > emissions
> >
> > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
> > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
> > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
> > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
> > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> >
> > You don't get one without the other
>
> Great in theory, too bad real life proves it otherwise.
>
> Why does a FI system need a fancy new chip to get more power and they
> warn about way less gas mileage?
>
> <snip>
> > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
> > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
> > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
> > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>
> LOL, got news for ya....
>
> Here is my last tuning experiment with my carb 258 engine with the
> emissions computer gone and 'no' catalytic converter in the exhaust
> stream.
>
> On the ASM 2525 test:
>
> I got 589 NOx, 16 ppm HC and 0.11% CO
>
> But but but, my Fuel Injected 4.0 Cherokee with a fresh tune up and a
> new O2 sensor got:
>
> HC for the Cherokee was 58 ppm, CO for the Cherokee was 0.56%. NOx
> wasn't recorded.
>
> So much for theory, eh....
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
#102
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
There is a product out there, that sports a "power" program and an "economy"
program, all on the same chip. I think it is for the Chevy 350. There
aren't more of them, because of lack of interest. Maybe gas prices are now
high enough to change this. Stock FI programs run slightly rich on purpose,
to lower combustion temperature and reduce NOx. This produces more HC and
CO. It is also one reason that a less restrictive intake and exhaust will
give you both better economy and more power, when added to just about any
stock FI vehicle, and without burning holes in the tops of your pistons.
Earle
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4469D991.B2FB71E6@sympatico.ca...
> Simon Juncal wrote:
> >
> > Mike Romain wrote:
> > > Fuel injection is a compromise. It gives lower gas mileage with
better
> > > emissions
> >
> > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
> > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
> > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
> > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
> > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> >
> > You don't get one without the other
>
> Great in theory, too bad real life proves it otherwise.
>
> Why does a FI system need a fancy new chip to get more power and they
> warn about way less gas mileage?
>
> <snip>
> > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
> > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
> > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
> > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>
> LOL, got news for ya....
>
> Here is my last tuning experiment with my carb 258 engine with the
> emissions computer gone and 'no' catalytic converter in the exhaust
> stream.
>
> On the ASM 2525 test:
>
> I got 589 NOx, 16 ppm HC and 0.11% CO
>
> But but but, my Fuel Injected 4.0 Cherokee with a fresh tune up and a
> new O2 sensor got:
>
> HC for the Cherokee was 58 ppm, CO for the Cherokee was 0.56%. NOx
> wasn't recorded.
>
> So much for theory, eh....
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
program, all on the same chip. I think it is for the Chevy 350. There
aren't more of them, because of lack of interest. Maybe gas prices are now
high enough to change this. Stock FI programs run slightly rich on purpose,
to lower combustion temperature and reduce NOx. This produces more HC and
CO. It is also one reason that a less restrictive intake and exhaust will
give you both better economy and more power, when added to just about any
stock FI vehicle, and without burning holes in the tops of your pistons.
Earle
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4469D991.B2FB71E6@sympatico.ca...
> Simon Juncal wrote:
> >
> > Mike Romain wrote:
> > > Fuel injection is a compromise. It gives lower gas mileage with
better
> > > emissions
> >
> > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
> > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
> > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
> > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
> > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> >
> > You don't get one without the other
>
> Great in theory, too bad real life proves it otherwise.
>
> Why does a FI system need a fancy new chip to get more power and they
> warn about way less gas mileage?
>
> <snip>
> > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
> > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
> > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
> > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>
> LOL, got news for ya....
>
> Here is my last tuning experiment with my carb 258 engine with the
> emissions computer gone and 'no' catalytic converter in the exhaust
> stream.
>
> On the ASM 2525 test:
>
> I got 589 NOx, 16 ppm HC and 0.11% CO
>
> But but but, my Fuel Injected 4.0 Cherokee with a fresh tune up and a
> new O2 sensor got:
>
> HC for the Cherokee was 58 ppm, CO for the Cherokee was 0.56%. NOx
> wasn't recorded.
>
> So much for theory, eh....
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
#103
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
There is a product out there, that sports a "power" program and an "economy"
program, all on the same chip. I think it is for the Chevy 350. There
aren't more of them, because of lack of interest. Maybe gas prices are now
high enough to change this. Stock FI programs run slightly rich on purpose,
to lower combustion temperature and reduce NOx. This produces more HC and
CO. It is also one reason that a less restrictive intake and exhaust will
give you both better economy and more power, when added to just about any
stock FI vehicle, and without burning holes in the tops of your pistons.
Earle
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4469D991.B2FB71E6@sympatico.ca...
> Simon Juncal wrote:
> >
> > Mike Romain wrote:
> > > Fuel injection is a compromise. It gives lower gas mileage with
better
> > > emissions
> >
> > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
> > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
> > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
> > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
> > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> >
> > You don't get one without the other
>
> Great in theory, too bad real life proves it otherwise.
>
> Why does a FI system need a fancy new chip to get more power and they
> warn about way less gas mileage?
>
> <snip>
> > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
> > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
> > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
> > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>
> LOL, got news for ya....
>
> Here is my last tuning experiment with my carb 258 engine with the
> emissions computer gone and 'no' catalytic converter in the exhaust
> stream.
>
> On the ASM 2525 test:
>
> I got 589 NOx, 16 ppm HC and 0.11% CO
>
> But but but, my Fuel Injected 4.0 Cherokee with a fresh tune up and a
> new O2 sensor got:
>
> HC for the Cherokee was 58 ppm, CO for the Cherokee was 0.56%. NOx
> wasn't recorded.
>
> So much for theory, eh....
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
program, all on the same chip. I think it is for the Chevy 350. There
aren't more of them, because of lack of interest. Maybe gas prices are now
high enough to change this. Stock FI programs run slightly rich on purpose,
to lower combustion temperature and reduce NOx. This produces more HC and
CO. It is also one reason that a less restrictive intake and exhaust will
give you both better economy and more power, when added to just about any
stock FI vehicle, and without burning holes in the tops of your pistons.
Earle
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4469D991.B2FB71E6@sympatico.ca...
> Simon Juncal wrote:
> >
> > Mike Romain wrote:
> > > Fuel injection is a compromise. It gives lower gas mileage with
better
> > > emissions
> >
> > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
> > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
> > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
> > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
> > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> >
> > You don't get one without the other
>
> Great in theory, too bad real life proves it otherwise.
>
> Why does a FI system need a fancy new chip to get more power and they
> warn about way less gas mileage?
>
> <snip>
> > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
> > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
> > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
> > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>
> LOL, got news for ya....
>
> Here is my last tuning experiment with my carb 258 engine with the
> emissions computer gone and 'no' catalytic converter in the exhaust
> stream.
>
> On the ASM 2525 test:
>
> I got 589 NOx, 16 ppm HC and 0.11% CO
>
> But but but, my Fuel Injected 4.0 Cherokee with a fresh tune up and a
> new O2 sensor got:
>
> HC for the Cherokee was 58 ppm, CO for the Cherokee was 0.56%. NOx
> wasn't recorded.
>
> So much for theory, eh....
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
#104
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
Bill,
I am talking about partial throttle operation, such as I use when driving
where I live. Now in Southern California (I have been there but I avoided
rush hour) a big carburetor on top of a rat motor might be more appropriate.
;^)
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446963A2.6FC0B3F6@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> Yes, there is no choke on a Dominator:
> http://www.carbsonly.com/Graphics/Bi...inatorrace.htm so
> that would make to owner smart enough to feather it, like I'm sure you
> have done, being too lazy to pull the choke. But other than that it got
> the same idle screws, power valve bodies my 850 CFM double pumpers have:
> http://www.----------.com/holley2.jpg Level site screw:
> http://www.----------.com/holleySite.jpg You may notice I don't like to
> f**k with the choke either! If it's cold, tickle it.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> >
> > Don't these things basically run at full load all the time? This means
that
> > they will have a much more limited range of operating parameters than
any
> > street use car, and over this limited range more primitive carburetor
> > technology will be more appropriate. I don't imagine that they worry
too
> > much about economy or emissions either. ;^)
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> > > Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> > > dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> > > http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> > > fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some
vibrating
> > > solenoid orifice.
> > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > >
> > > Simon Juncal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by
supplying
> > > > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much
leaner
> > > > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND
fuel
> > > > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > > > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount
of
> > > > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> > > >
> > > > You don't get one without the other
> > > >
> > > > Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio
whether
> > > > 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100%
humidity
> > > > and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in
real
> > time.
> > > >
> > > > Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone
set
> > > > of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
> > > > replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set
of
> > > > variables.
> > > >
> > > > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a
tuning
> > > > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a
computer
> > > > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your
air/fuel
> > > > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > > > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Simon
> > > > "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***
I am talking about partial throttle operation, such as I use when driving
where I live. Now in Southern California (I have been there but I avoided
rush hour) a big carburetor on top of a rat motor might be more appropriate.
;^)
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446963A2.6FC0B3F6@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> Yes, there is no choke on a Dominator:
> http://www.carbsonly.com/Graphics/Bi...inatorrace.htm so
> that would make to owner smart enough to feather it, like I'm sure you
> have done, being too lazy to pull the choke. But other than that it got
> the same idle screws, power valve bodies my 850 CFM double pumpers have:
> http://www.----------.com/holley2.jpg Level site screw:
> http://www.----------.com/holleySite.jpg You may notice I don't like to
> f**k with the choke either! If it's cold, tickle it.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> >
> > Don't these things basically run at full load all the time? This means
that
> > they will have a much more limited range of operating parameters than
any
> > street use car, and over this limited range more primitive carburetor
> > technology will be more appropriate. I don't imagine that they worry
too
> > much about economy or emissions either. ;^)
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> > > Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> > > dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> > > http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> > > fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some
vibrating
> > > solenoid orifice.
> > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > >
> > > Simon Juncal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by
supplying
> > > > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much
leaner
> > > > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND
fuel
> > > > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > > > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount
of
> > > > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> > > >
> > > > You don't get one without the other
> > > >
> > > > Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio
whether
> > > > 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100%
humidity
> > > > and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in
real
> > time.
> > > >
> > > > Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone
set
> > > > of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
> > > > replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set
of
> > > > variables.
> > > >
> > > > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a
tuning
> > > > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a
computer
> > > > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your
air/fuel
> > > > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > > > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Simon
> > > > "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***
#105
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
Bill,
I am talking about partial throttle operation, such as I use when driving
where I live. Now in Southern California (I have been there but I avoided
rush hour) a big carburetor on top of a rat motor might be more appropriate.
;^)
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446963A2.6FC0B3F6@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> Yes, there is no choke on a Dominator:
> http://www.carbsonly.com/Graphics/Bi...inatorrace.htm so
> that would make to owner smart enough to feather it, like I'm sure you
> have done, being too lazy to pull the choke. But other than that it got
> the same idle screws, power valve bodies my 850 CFM double pumpers have:
> http://www.----------.com/holley2.jpg Level site screw:
> http://www.----------.com/holleySite.jpg You may notice I don't like to
> f**k with the choke either! If it's cold, tickle it.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> >
> > Don't these things basically run at full load all the time? This means
that
> > they will have a much more limited range of operating parameters than
any
> > street use car, and over this limited range more primitive carburetor
> > technology will be more appropriate. I don't imagine that they worry
too
> > much about economy or emissions either. ;^)
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> > > Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> > > dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> > > http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> > > fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some
vibrating
> > > solenoid orifice.
> > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > >
> > > Simon Juncal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by
supplying
> > > > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much
leaner
> > > > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND
fuel
> > > > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > > > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount
of
> > > > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> > > >
> > > > You don't get one without the other
> > > >
> > > > Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio
whether
> > > > 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100%
humidity
> > > > and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in
real
> > time.
> > > >
> > > > Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone
set
> > > > of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
> > > > replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set
of
> > > > variables.
> > > >
> > > > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a
tuning
> > > > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a
computer
> > > > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your
air/fuel
> > > > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > > > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Simon
> > > > "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***
I am talking about partial throttle operation, such as I use when driving
where I live. Now in Southern California (I have been there but I avoided
rush hour) a big carburetor on top of a rat motor might be more appropriate.
;^)
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446963A2.6FC0B3F6@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> Yes, there is no choke on a Dominator:
> http://www.carbsonly.com/Graphics/Bi...inatorrace.htm so
> that would make to owner smart enough to feather it, like I'm sure you
> have done, being too lazy to pull the choke. But other than that it got
> the same idle screws, power valve bodies my 850 CFM double pumpers have:
> http://www.----------.com/holley2.jpg Level site screw:
> http://www.----------.com/holleySite.jpg You may notice I don't like to
> f**k with the choke either! If it's cold, tickle it.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> >
> > Don't these things basically run at full load all the time? This means
that
> > they will have a much more limited range of operating parameters than
any
> > street use car, and over this limited range more primitive carburetor
> > technology will be more appropriate. I don't imagine that they worry
too
> > much about economy or emissions either. ;^)
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> > > Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> > > dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> > > http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> > > fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some
vibrating
> > > solenoid orifice.
> > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > >
> > > Simon Juncal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by
supplying
> > > > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much
leaner
> > > > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND
fuel
> > > > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > > > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount
of
> > > > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> > > >
> > > > You don't get one without the other
> > > >
> > > > Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio
whether
> > > > 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100%
humidity
> > > > and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in
real
> > time.
> > > >
> > > > Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone
set
> > > > of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
> > > > replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set
of
> > > > variables.
> > > >
> > > > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a
tuning
> > > > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a
computer
> > > > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your
air/fuel
> > > > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > > > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Simon
> > > > "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***
#106
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
Bill,
I am talking about partial throttle operation, such as I use when driving
where I live. Now in Southern California (I have been there but I avoided
rush hour) a big carburetor on top of a rat motor might be more appropriate.
;^)
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446963A2.6FC0B3F6@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> Yes, there is no choke on a Dominator:
> http://www.carbsonly.com/Graphics/Bi...inatorrace.htm so
> that would make to owner smart enough to feather it, like I'm sure you
> have done, being too lazy to pull the choke. But other than that it got
> the same idle screws, power valve bodies my 850 CFM double pumpers have:
> http://www.----------.com/holley2.jpg Level site screw:
> http://www.----------.com/holleySite.jpg You may notice I don't like to
> f**k with the choke either! If it's cold, tickle it.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> >
> > Don't these things basically run at full load all the time? This means
that
> > they will have a much more limited range of operating parameters than
any
> > street use car, and over this limited range more primitive carburetor
> > technology will be more appropriate. I don't imagine that they worry
too
> > much about economy or emissions either. ;^)
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> > > Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> > > dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> > > http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> > > fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some
vibrating
> > > solenoid orifice.
> > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > >
> > > Simon Juncal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by
supplying
> > > > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much
leaner
> > > > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND
fuel
> > > > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > > > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount
of
> > > > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> > > >
> > > > You don't get one without the other
> > > >
> > > > Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio
whether
> > > > 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100%
humidity
> > > > and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in
real
> > time.
> > > >
> > > > Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone
set
> > > > of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
> > > > replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set
of
> > > > variables.
> > > >
> > > > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a
tuning
> > > > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a
computer
> > > > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your
air/fuel
> > > > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > > > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Simon
> > > > "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***
I am talking about partial throttle operation, such as I use when driving
where I live. Now in Southern California (I have been there but I avoided
rush hour) a big carburetor on top of a rat motor might be more appropriate.
;^)
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446963A2.6FC0B3F6@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> Yes, there is no choke on a Dominator:
> http://www.carbsonly.com/Graphics/Bi...inatorrace.htm so
> that would make to owner smart enough to feather it, like I'm sure you
> have done, being too lazy to pull the choke. But other than that it got
> the same idle screws, power valve bodies my 850 CFM double pumpers have:
> http://www.----------.com/holley2.jpg Level site screw:
> http://www.----------.com/holleySite.jpg You may notice I don't like to
> f**k with the choke either! If it's cold, tickle it.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> >
> > Don't these things basically run at full load all the time? This means
that
> > they will have a much more limited range of operating parameters than
any
> > street use car, and over this limited range more primitive carburetor
> > technology will be more appropriate. I don't imagine that they worry
too
> > much about economy or emissions either. ;^)
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> > > Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> > > dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> > > http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> > > fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some
vibrating
> > > solenoid orifice.
> > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > >
> > > Simon Juncal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by
supplying
> > > > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much
leaner
> > > > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND
fuel
> > > > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > > > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount
of
> > > > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> > > >
> > > > You don't get one without the other
> > > >
> > > > Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio
whether
> > > > 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100%
humidity
> > > > and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in
real
> > time.
> > > >
> > > > Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone
set
> > > > of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
> > > > replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set
of
> > > > variables.
> > > >
> > > > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a
tuning
> > > > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a
computer
> > > > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your
air/fuel
> > > > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > > > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Simon
> > > > "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***
#107
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
Sure, they would if the rules allowed them. FI is prohibited in Pro Stock.
Now take a look at the Outlaw Pro cars that have a choice of carb or FI, and
they are running FI.
Chris
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some vibrating
> solenoid orifice.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
>> fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
>> and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
>> use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
>> more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
>> fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
>>
>> You don't get one without the other
>>
>> Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio whether
>> 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100% humidity
>> and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in real
>> time.
>>
>> Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone set
>> of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
>> replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set of
>> variables.
>>
>> I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
>> wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
>> can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
>> ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
>> corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>>
>> --
>> Simon
>> "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
Now take a look at the Outlaw Pro cars that have a choice of carb or FI, and
they are running FI.
Chris
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some vibrating
> solenoid orifice.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
>> fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
>> and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
>> use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
>> more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
>> fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
>>
>> You don't get one without the other
>>
>> Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio whether
>> 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100% humidity
>> and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in real
>> time.
>>
>> Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone set
>> of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
>> replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set of
>> variables.
>>
>> I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
>> wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
>> can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
>> ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
>> corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>>
>> --
>> Simon
>> "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
#108
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
Sure, they would if the rules allowed them. FI is prohibited in Pro Stock.
Now take a look at the Outlaw Pro cars that have a choice of carb or FI, and
they are running FI.
Chris
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some vibrating
> solenoid orifice.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
>> fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
>> and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
>> use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
>> more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
>> fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
>>
>> You don't get one without the other
>>
>> Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio whether
>> 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100% humidity
>> and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in real
>> time.
>>
>> Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone set
>> of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
>> replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set of
>> variables.
>>
>> I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
>> wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
>> can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
>> ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
>> corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>>
>> --
>> Simon
>> "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
Now take a look at the Outlaw Pro cars that have a choice of carb or FI, and
they are running FI.
Chris
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some vibrating
> solenoid orifice.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
>> fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
>> and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
>> use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
>> more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
>> fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
>>
>> You don't get one without the other
>>
>> Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio whether
>> 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100% humidity
>> and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in real
>> time.
>>
>> Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone set
>> of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
>> replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set of
>> variables.
>>
>> I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
>> wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
>> can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
>> ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
>> corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>>
>> --
>> Simon
>> "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
#109
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
Sure, they would if the rules allowed them. FI is prohibited in Pro Stock.
Now take a look at the Outlaw Pro cars that have a choice of carb or FI, and
they are running FI.
Chris
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some vibrating
> solenoid orifice.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
>> fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
>> and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
>> use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
>> more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
>> fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
>>
>> You don't get one without the other
>>
>> Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio whether
>> 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100% humidity
>> and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in real
>> time.
>>
>> Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone set
>> of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
>> replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set of
>> variables.
>>
>> I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
>> wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
>> can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
>> ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
>> corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>>
>> --
>> Simon
>> "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
Now take a look at the Outlaw Pro cars that have a choice of carb or FI, and
they are running FI.
Chris
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some vibrating
> solenoid orifice.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by supplying
>> fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much leaner
>> and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND fuel
>> use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
>> more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount of
>> fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
>>
>> You don't get one without the other
>>
>> Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio whether
>> 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100% humidity
>> and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in real
>> time.
>>
>> Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone set
>> of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
>> replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set of
>> variables.
>>
>> I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a tuning
>> wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a computer
>> can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your air/fuel
>> ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
>> corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
>>
>> --
>> Simon
>> "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
#110
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Convert 4.3L Chevy V6 to carb?
Hi Earle,
Partial throttle opening is Holley's advantage, it comes alive with
it's stock 8.5 inches of mercury, or what I use opens the diaphragm
power valve at 10.5: http://www.----------.com/holley2.jpg And yes we
should choose the cubic feet per minute, for the RPM range we're
probably going to use, and I use the 850 on my 462" Thunderbird, and
400" Real Jeep. This style of Holley looks just like that Ford used in
'57 at 450 CFMs to the 1200 CFM Dominator pictured in the previous post.
Dream wheel at: http://corvetteactioncenter.com/tech/tools/carb.html
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> I am talking about partial throttle operation, such as I use when driving
> where I live. Now in Southern California (I have been there but I avoided
> rush hour) a big carburetor on top of a rat motor might be more appropriate.
> ;^)
>
> Earle
>
> "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:446963A2.6FC0B3F6@***.net...
> > Hi Earle,
> > Yes, there is no choke on a Dominator:
> > http://www.carbsonly.com/Graphics/Bi...inatorrace.htm so
> > that would make to owner smart enough to feather it, like I'm sure you
> > have done, being too lazy to pull the choke. But other than that it got
> > the same idle screws, power valve bodies my 850 CFM double pumpers have:
> > http://www.----------.com/holley2.jpg Level site screw:
> > http://www.----------.com/holleySite.jpg You may notice I don't like to
> > f**k with the choke either! If it's cold, tickle it.
> > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > mailto:--------------------
> >
> > Earle Horton wrote:
> > >
> > > Bill,
> > >
> > > Don't these things basically run at full load all the time? This means
> that
> > > they will have a much more limited range of operating parameters than
> any
> > > street use car, and over this limited range more primitive carburetor
> > > technology will be more appropriate. I don't imagine that they worry
> too
> > > much about economy or emissions either. ;^)
> > >
> > > Earle
> > >
> > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> > > > Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> > > > dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> > > > http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> > > > fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some
> vibrating
> > > > solenoid orifice.
> > > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > >
> > > > Simon Juncal wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by
> supplying
> > > > > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much
> leaner
> > > > > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND
> fuel
> > > > > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > > > > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount
> of
> > > > > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> > > > >
> > > > > You don't get one without the other
> > > > >
> > > > > Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio
> whether
> > > > > 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100%
> humidity
> > > > > and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in
> real
> > > time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone
> set
> > > > > of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
> > > > > replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set
> of
> > > > > variables.
> > > > >
> > > > > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a
> tuning
> > > > > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a
> computer
> > > > > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your
> air/fuel
> > > > > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > > > > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Simon
> > > > > "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
>
> *** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***
Partial throttle opening is Holley's advantage, it comes alive with
it's stock 8.5 inches of mercury, or what I use opens the diaphragm
power valve at 10.5: http://www.----------.com/holley2.jpg And yes we
should choose the cubic feet per minute, for the RPM range we're
probably going to use, and I use the 850 on my 462" Thunderbird, and
400" Real Jeep. This style of Holley looks just like that Ford used in
'57 at 450 CFMs to the 1200 CFM Dominator pictured in the previous post.
Dream wheel at: http://corvetteactioncenter.com/tech/tools/carb.html
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> I am talking about partial throttle operation, such as I use when driving
> where I live. Now in Southern California (I have been there but I avoided
> rush hour) a big carburetor on top of a rat motor might be more appropriate.
> ;^)
>
> Earle
>
> "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:446963A2.6FC0B3F6@***.net...
> > Hi Earle,
> > Yes, there is no choke on a Dominator:
> > http://www.carbsonly.com/Graphics/Bi...inatorrace.htm so
> > that would make to owner smart enough to feather it, like I'm sure you
> > have done, being too lazy to pull the choke. But other than that it got
> > the same idle screws, power valve bodies my 850 CFM double pumpers have:
> > http://www.----------.com/holley2.jpg Level site screw:
> > http://www.----------.com/holleySite.jpg You may notice I don't like to
> > f**k with the choke either! If it's cold, tickle it.
> > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > mailto:--------------------
> >
> > Earle Horton wrote:
> > >
> > > Bill,
> > >
> > > Don't these things basically run at full load all the time? This means
> that
> > > they will have a much more limited range of operating parameters than
> any
> > > street use car, and over this limited range more primitive carburetor
> > > technology will be more appropriate. I don't imagine that they worry
> too
> > > much about economy or emissions either. ;^)
> > >
> > > Earle
> > >
> > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > news:44693570.56FA39A1@***.net...
> > > > Wouldn't you think the Pro Stock race cars and their millions of
> > > > dollars of sponsors would use something other than carburetors:
> > > > http://www.rehermorrison.com/indexStart.htm If you want fifteen to one
> > > > fuel gas ratio, you'd better send it threw a jet, and not some
> vibrating
> > > > solenoid orifice.
> > > > God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > >
> > > > Simon Juncal wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Basically you are totally wrong... FI help with emissions by
> supplying
> > > > > fuel in a much more precise manner than carbs, FI can run much
> leaner
> > > > > and stay closer to the ideal air/fuel mixture (ideal for power AND
> fuel
> > > > > use) throughout the range you use a vehicle in. This means you get
> > > > > more complete combustion, which means more bang for the same amount
> of
> > > > > fuel, which means more POWER AND better MILEAGE.
> > > > >
> > > > > You don't get one without the other
> > > > >
> > > > > Properly set up FI will supply fuel close to the perfect ratio
> whether
> > > > > 9000 feet above sea level in 30 degree temps or at 0 feet 100%
> humidity
> > > > > and 120 degrees. Based off input from an o2 sensor. On the fly in
> real
> > > time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Carbs use a very primitive and extremely complicated failure prone
> set
> > > > > of mechanical devices to derive ONE unchangeable (until you stop and
> > > > > replace jets) fuel map that has to suit the vehicle under a huge set
> of
> > > > > variables.
> > > > >
> > > > > I mean there isn't even a debate here, no matter HOW MUCH of a
> tuning
> > > > > wizard you are Mike, you will NEVER tune your carb as well as a
> computer
> > > > > can keep FI tuned... by the time you leave your driveway your
> air/fuel
> > > > > ratio will be less than ideal, a computer will have compensated and
> > > > > corrected the ratio 30 times before you left the same driveway.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Simon
> > > > > "I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
>
> *** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***