X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-02.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.101] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.10) with ESMTP id 2194018 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:22:30 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.101; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-103-061.carolina.res.rr.com [24.74.103.61]) by ms-smtp-02.southeast.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id l6NBRYTQ024677 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2007 07:27:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <001501c7cd1c$781970a0$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] last time, i promise - carb vs EFI Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 07:27:35 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C7CCFA.F0B93B70" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C7CCFA.F0B93B70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think the reason you have not received a definitive answer is that - = "it all depends". Either system, well-tuned, will beat a poorly tuned = set up of the other system. Also it depends on your intake system, more = turns and twists would favor an EFI which is not having to carry fuel in = the mixture through those turns while a short straight stack wouldn't = hurt the carb system and wouldn't benefit the EFI. =20 My personal opinion is that the choice it has to do more with other = factors than a potential difference (if any) in power output. The power = output difference of a well set up carb and EFI (in our application) is = likely un-noticeable unless you put the on a dyno. If you don't feel comfortable around electronics, CPUs, etc then a Carb = would likely have more appeal. If you like to have more control over = fuel parameter at all stages, then EFI may have more appeal. My personal (but limited) experience with trying to tune a Webber = carburetor with all its different jets and air valves seem to require = some magical understanding and communion with the Webber whereas the EFI = seems simplistic in comparison. Again, just my impression, others who = have had challenges with EFI may beg to differ {:>) So, I don't think you are going to get (not certain one even exists) a = definitive answer to your question, Kevin (opinions, yes {:>)). Hummm, a Renesis, does this mean you are back in the rotary game? Ed ----- Original Message -----=20 From: kevin lane=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 2:01 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] last time, i promise - carb vs EFI I still never got an answer to my original question; how much more = power comes from EFI vs. carb? or is it a case that efi is just better = tuned at all rpms since it has so many easily controllable parameters? = does efi produce an optimum mixture and finer fuel droplets that can't = be matched by the carb? if it does produce more complete burning and = efficiency, how much? I hear these type stmts, but never numbers. are = we talking 5%, 10%, 20%? kevin (renesis in my future :-) ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C7CCFA.F0B93B70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think the reason you have not received a = definitive=20 answer  is that  - "it all depends".  Either system, = well-tuned,=20 will beat a poorly tuned set up of the other system.  Also it = depends on=20 your intake system, more turns and twists would favor an EFI which is = not having=20 to carry fuel in the mixture through those turns while a short straight = stack=20 wouldn't hurt the carb system and wouldn't benefit the EFI.  =
 
My personal opinion is that the choice it = has to do=20 more with other factors than a potential difference (if any) in power=20 output. The power output difference of a well set up carb=20 and EFI (in our application) is likely un-noticeable = unless you=20 put the on a dyno.
 
 If you don't feel comfortable around = electronics,=20 CPUs, etc then a Carb would likely have more appeal.  If you like = to have=20 more control over fuel parameter at all stages, then EFI may have more=20 appeal.
 
  My personal (but limited) experience with = trying=20  to tune a Webber carburetor with all its different jets and air = valves=20 seem to require some magical understanding and communion with the Webber = whereas=20 the EFI seems simplistic in comparison.  Again, just my impression, = others=20 who have had challenges with EFI may beg to differ {:>)
 
So, I don't think you are going to get (not = certain one=20 even exists) a definitive answer to your question, Kevin (opinions, yes=20 {:>)).
 
Hummm, a Renesis, does this mean you are back in = the=20 rotary game?
 
Ed
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 kevin = lane=20
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 = 2:01 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] last time, = i promise=20 - carb vs EFI

I still never got an answer to my = original=20 question;  how much more power comes from EFI vs. carb?  or = is=20 it a case that efi is just better tuned at all rpms since it = has so=20 many easily controllable parameters?  does efi produce an optimum = mixture=20 and finer fuel droplets that can't be matched by the carb?  if it = does=20 produce more complete burning and efficiency, how much?  I hear = these=20 type stmts, but never numbers.  are we talking 5%, 10%,=20 20%?    kevin (renesis in my future=20 :-)
------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C7CCFA.F0B93B70--