<VV> carbs

[djtcz at comcast.net]

----- Original Message(s) ----- 

From: Tony Underwood <tony.underwood at cox.net> 
At 07:28 AM 8/20/2010, John Kepler wrote: 


>The very first error is carbs make more HP than EFI. Given both are 
>optimized for making HP, EFI will ALWAYS beat a carb. 


...except on a dragstrip. ;) 
Lots of people have time slips to show for it. 


Agreed, those carbs are peaked for max hp at a narrow rpm range, and 
EFI will provide more over-all hp across the spectrum of normal 
engine operation... but for those dragstrip warriors, the carb will 
still put down the big numbers. 

tony.. 
================================================================== 


I don't have a copy of the current NHRA rule book, but many classes simply require carbs. 
If we're talking NHRA Pro Stock, one of the most highly engineered normally aspirated classes, they >>HAVE< to run carburetors when they run 6.6 seconds at over 200 mph. 


Even NASCAR requires carbs ( one carb, actually ) but that may be changing. 
http://sports.espn.go.com/rpm/nascar/cup/news/story?id=4414698 
Here's a comment credited to Danny Lawrence, who is the engine builder at Richard Childress Racing and builds the engines for drivers Kevin Harvick, Robby Gordon, and Jeff Green. 
"We have outdated the carburetor, but with a computer system on a fuel-injected engine, it would be easy to get an unfair advantage." 


The NASCAR advantages may include better fuel mileage (weight saving, fewer pit stops), and improved reliability from better mixture control when the track temp changes 15 degrees, but I'm pretty sure ANY reduction in HP in the operating range of ~ 7000 -10,000 rpm would cast a deciding veto vote. 


Dan T