G Force vs fuel distribution (another argument thread)

[Beer:30]

Hey Beevis...where's Buthead?
I don't think anything you said has anything to do with fuel distribution.
Have you looked at the location of the injectors in most modern efi racing engines? They're no where near the valve.
What does timing control have to do with fuel distribution?
What does altitude compensation have to do with fuel distribution?
Just curious what the heck you're trying to say here regarding fuel distribution and G forces...

Haven't been through any EFI schools, courses, or had much experience with them, ay?

You obviously wouldn't believe me even if I answered your questions, so like I said, all of that info is available elsewhere. Common sense has to come from inside. Nobody is going to "miracle" it into us.

[Beer:30]

He is such an asset to the forum. Just a wealth of BULLSHIT!

I sure that the NUMBER 1 reason that the OEMs went to EFI was performance.
How many times has that line of BS been debunked?

Of course, if I towed with my boat, drove in traffic, drove up and down hills, and really gave a flying F about the emmissions it was spewing and MILAGE, instead of the HP, I would probably go with EFI myself.
BUT I DON'T DO ANY OF THOSE THINGS

Again, if you spent more time HANDS-ON with this stuff, you would know the answers. Instead, you just keep spinning around in circles in a baby boat. Unless you blew up the motor AGAIN?

[steelcomp]

Haven't been through any EFI schools, courses, or had much experience with them, ay?

You obviously wouldn't believe me even if I answered your questions, so like I said, all of that info is available elsewhere. Common sense has to come from inside. Nobody is going to "miracle" it into us.

OK...I didn't think you could answer the question. Thanks.

[steelcomp]

Again, if you spent more time HANDS-ON with this stuff, you would know the answers. Instead, you just keep spinning around in circles in a baby boat. Unless you blew up the motor AGAIN?

Instead of diverting to attacking people's credibility like a two year old, why don't you just answer the question?

[Beer:30]

Instead of diverting to attacking people's credibility like a two year old, why don't you just answer the question?

Ok, I'll endulge you. Let's pick one of them, shall we?: What does timing control have to do with fuel distribution?

With that, I will answer a question WITH a question, since there are many variables....WHY WOULD YOU NOT WANT THE TIMING TO PIGGY-BACK THE FUEL? What would be BAD about the two sharing information and timing themselves together during ANY aspect of engine function?

The MegaSquirt-II™ EFI controller can control the ignition advance timing based on rpm, load (engine MAP), and coolant temperature. This means you have the ability to program full 'mechanical' and 'vacuum' advance, and the user can program in any amount of boost retard simply by reducing the advance table entries over 100 kPa. Later version of the code also have provisions for ignition advance retard based on intake air temperature.

[Beer:30]

Instead of diverting to attacking people's credibility like a two year old, why don't you just answer the question?

And by the by....I am just defending myself. You guys all struck the first blow here. Just can't help yourselves.

[Beer:30]

I started into FI with a Rochester unit on my '57. Constantly had to be adjusted for altitude changes, if you were going to spend any amount of time at a different alt than it was originally tuned for. Finally took a new RamJet EFI crate motor, cut the throttle-body off of the front of the plenum, welded it onto the driver's side (90-degrees), and shot-peened the whole unit to hide the work. Looks original, but it UPGRADED to electronic. So, even back then, they were aiming at the intake valve.....to answer another question of yours. Again, for everyone else other than the two-to-three that HATE me, I'm not just making this stuff up. This information is everythere.

Chevrolet introduced a mechanical fuel injection option, made by General Motors' Rochester Products division, for its 283 V8 engine in 1956 (1957 US model year). This system directed the inducted engine air across a "spoon shaped" plunger that moved in proportion to the air volume. The plunger connected to the fuel metering system that mechanically dispensed fuel to the cylinders via distribution tubes. This system was not a "pulse" or intermittent injection, but rather a constant flow system, metering fuel to all cylinders simultaneously from a central "spider" of injection lines. The fuel meter adjusted the amount of flow according to engine speed and load, and included a fuel reservoir, which was similar to a carburetor's float chamber. With its own high-pressure fuel pump driven by a cable from the distributor to the fuel meter, the system supplied the necessary pressure for injection. This was a "port" injection where the injectors are located in the intake manifold, very near the intake valve.
During the 1960s, other mechanical injection systems such as Hilborn were occasionally used on modified American V8 engines in various racing applications such as drag racing, oval racing, and road racing.^[6] These racing-derived systems were not suitable for everyday street use, having no provisions for low speed metering, or often none even for starting (starting required that fuel be squirted into the injector tubes while cranking the engine). However they were a favorite in the aforementioned competition trials in which essentially wide-open throttle operation was prevalent. Constant-flow injection systems continue to be used at the highest levels of drag racing, where full-throttle, high-RPM performance is key.^[7]
Another mechanical system, made by Bosch, but injecting the fuel into the port above the intake valve, was used by Porsche from 1969 until 1973 in the 911 production range and until 1975 on the Carrera 3.0 in Europe.

[wizbang]

" What does timing control have to do with fuel distribution? "

I hope we still talking mech fuel inj ?

I'm not very smart about this, so I'm asking a question here, " How does ign timing affect fuel distribution? "

Would it change the amount of fuel/air a cylinder would grab in relation to the actual timing event it does this ? I mean if you start at 30 degrees, the distribution is happening at a certain time and direction, change that time , why would it change the distribution ? It would only change the timing of said distribution, right ?

[Beer:30]

" What does timing control have to do with fuel distribution? "

I hope we still talking mech fuel inj ?

I'm not very smart about this, so I'm asking a question here, " How does ign timing affect fuel distribution? "

Would it change the amount of fuel/air a cylinder would grab in relation to the actual timing event it does this ? I mean if you start at 30 degrees, the distribution is happening at a certain time and direction, change that time , why would it change the distribution ? It would only change the timing of said distribution, right ?

I mainly was pointing out the advantages to Efi instead of just fi. It was said - EFI can't do anything better than mechanical FI can. That is just one of the benefits.

Any gasoline-powered engine can be converted to run on Electronic Fuel Injection or EFI. An engine has no idea how it is being fueled. As long as the proper air/fuel ratios and ignition timing requirements are available, the engine will run and in most cases the same engine will perform better and be more efficient when converted to EFI. The advantages are numerous. Great cold start, better fuel economy, better performance as well as altitude compensation.

For this reason, it has become increasingly popular to convert the older work horse engines from the past to Electronic Fuel Injection. Ford's 427, 428 and Cleveland engines, Chrysler's 440 and Hemi head engines and of course the Chevrolet small blocks and big blocks are among the popular engines to convert over to EFI.

With an Electronic Fuel Injection system, an Engine Control Unit or ECU controls the A/F ratios and ignition timing curves. All aspects of engine performance: cold start, idle speed control, transient fueling, A/F ratios, timing curves and electronic spark control are calibrated into the system and precisely controlled through a feed back process. On a properly calibrated feed back system, the ECU constantly gathers information from various sensors processes it and then tunes and adjusts the engine to meet changing conditions. Another advantage of EFI is the Engine Control Unit can control non-engine functions such as cooling fan operation and transmission functions.

[gn7]

I mainly was pointing out the advantages to Efi instead of just fi. It was said - EFI can't do anything better than mechanical FI can. That is just one of the benefits.

Since when can't you control ignition timing cylinder to cylinder without EFI. You living in a cave?

[Beer:30]

Since when can't you control ignition timing cylinder to cylinder without EFI. You living in a cave?

Can't you just be cordial for once?

Of course, there are stand-alone electronic ignition controllers.......My point, which you are missing is......isn't it better if the cam is matched to the intake? Doesn't it work better if the heads are setup to "know" what the intake and exhaust will be? WHY WOULDN'T it be a good thing to have the ignition KNOW what the fuel was doing and the fuel KNOW what the ignition is doing?

[Budweiser]

Eh hem, cough.

Maybe we should ask this here fuel disterbewsheeun question in the Outboard tech area of sorts... them things have 1G of force even at idle. Seems they might know sumptin bout it.

[gn7]

Eh hem, cough.

Maybe we should ask this here fuel disterbewsheeun question in the Outboard tech area of sorts... them things have 1G of force even at idle. Seems they might know sumptin bout it.

Outboards don't have a distribution problem any more than a SBC with Webers does.

[steelcomp]

Ok, I'll endulge you. Let's pick one of them, shall we?: What does timing control have to do with fuel distribution?

With that, I will answer a question WITH a question, since there are many variables....WHY WOULD YOU NOT WANT THE TIMING TO PIGGY-BACK THE FUEL? What would be BAD about the two sharing information and timing themselves together during ANY aspect of engine function?

Still has nothing to do with the effects of G forces (or any other factors) on fuel distribution.
Wanna try again?