[trueblue01]

I think the main argument here is being able to tinker and tune without being a rocket scientist. There is no way I or any other carb junkie can out think an EFI system, known fact. The appeal of a carb system is I can play with it and still be able to race or drive it after I mess around. I don't need some computer jock to tell me what's up. I beat up on EFI cars all the time and on occasion they return the favor, to each his own I guess. On a side note, I know at least 8 guys who have switched from EFI to carbed and they haven't switched back and are just as fast or faster then when they switched.

[ryans88gt]

The truth in the EFI vs. Carb debate is neither has an advantage in terms of power...

Power is limited by air flow, not fuel delivery (assuming you have an adequate fuel system). If an EFI system and carb system are both properly tuned and on intakes that flow the same amount of air, they will make almost identical power numbers.

The advantage with EFI is you have electronic adjustment for operating conditions, sometimes that is worth the added expense, sometimes not. Carb intakes tend to have higher flow potential than most commonly used ford EFI intake manifolds, so if you are switching from a stock EFI manifold to a vic jr carb intake, no doubt you will make more power...should be common sense.

[gotn20]

i agree with darrell on this one. I had a buddy that had an 84 gt and he had his carb tuned by two different reputable tuners he was unhappy with the result pulled an a9l and harness switched to efi had it tuned and his car was quicker and better drivability and he's been night and day happier since the switch. Not saying carbs suck i have some carb'd cars but I prefer efi all day.

[ryans88gt]

Originally Posted by gotn20 i agree with darrell on this one. I had a buddy that had an 84 gt and he had his carb tuned by two different reputable tuners he was unhappy with the result pulled an a9l and harness switched to efi had it tuned and his car was quicker and better drivability and he's been night and day happier since the switch. Not saying carbs suck i have some carb'd cars but I prefer efi all day.

Carb tuning is quickly becoming a lost art...that and half the people running carbs on the street have the wrong equipment to start with.

[fogged306]

Originally Posted by Darrell The computer isn't taking rpm away at 5850, you have other issues there but it will start cutting fuel at 6250. You can have a chip burned to eliminate the factory rpm limit or you can find a used Ford Racing RPM Extender like 93mustank said. They don't make them anymore but you can find them used.

A lean condition at 6250 doesn't seem like a good way to decrease RPM

[1slo5.0]

Originally Posted by ryans88gt The truth in the EFI vs. Carb debate is neither has an advantage in terms of power... Power is limited by air flow, not fuel delivery (assuming you have an adequate fuel system). If an EFI system and carb system are both properly tuned and on intakes that flow the same amount of air, they will make almost identical power numbers. The advantage with EFI is you have electronic adjustment for operating conditions, sometimes that is worth the added expense, sometimes not. Carb intakes tend to have higher flow potential than most commonly used ford EFI intake manifolds, so if you are switching from a stock EFI manifold to a vic jr carb intake, no doubt you will make more power...should be common sense.

You need to study induction more, but you are entitled to your opinion.

Tell your theory to some reputable EFI people and see what response you get.

[1slo5.0]

Originally Posted by fogged306 A lean condition at 6250 doesn't seem like a good way to decrease RPM

No it is not a good way at all but that is how Ford does it.

[nolife]

Originally Posted by fogged306 A lean condition at 6250 doesn't seem like a good way to decrease RPM

Is cutting the fuel like the stock limter does really a problem? If measuring A/F ratio then yes it would definately be lean but with no fuel I wouldnt think that lean condition would matter. There is a difference in fuel burning lean and no fuel to burn at all. Running lean can cause detonation and excessive temperatures because there is complete burning and no cooling effect. With NO fuel injected, there is no chance of detonation and nothing to burn to add heat to the cylinder, there is nothing but compressed air and a spark in the cylinder. I don't think that would cause a problem. I could be completely wrong though.

That is why I have been back and forth between using a 6000-6200 pill in my MSD and the stock one at 6250. I don't know which one I'd rather use. The stock is "softer" but I swear the engine ramps far past 6250. Ideally I'd be skilled enough to shift at 5800-6200 and not have to worry about it but I have not got that concept down in the lower gears. My peak power is right about 6K rpm and as the boost comes up, I typcially loose traction at about 4k in 1st and 2nd so it makes it a little tricky. I end up shifting too early, letting of the gas too much when it starts spinning, or I spin and instantly hit the limiter for a while.
I'm sure some track time or tires that don't suck would solve my problem.

[fogged306]

Originally Posted by nolife Is cutting the fuel like the stock limter does really a problem? If measuring A/F ratio then yes it would definately be lean but with no fuel I wouldnt think that lean condition would matter. There is a difference in fuel burning lean and no fuel to burn at all. Running lean can cause detonation and excessive temperatures because there is complete burning and no cooling effect. With NO fuel injected, there is no chance of detonation and nothing to burn to add heat to the cylinder, there is nothing but compressed air and a spark in the cylinder. I don't think that would cause a problem. I could be completely wrong though. That is why I have been back and forth between using a 6000-6200 pill in my MSD and the stock one at 6250. I don't know which one I'd rather use. The stock is "softer" but I swear the engine ramps far past 6250. Ideally I'd be skilled enough to shift at 5800-6200 and not have to worry about it but I have not got that concept down in the lower gears. My peak power is right about 6K rpm and as the boost comes up, I typcially loose traction at about 4k in 1st and 2nd so it makes it a little tricky. I end up shifting too early, letting of the gas too much when it starts spinning, or I spin and instantly hit the limiter for a while. I'm sure some track time or tires that don't suck would solve my problem.

No, you're right. I haven't looked it up personally to verify, but I would imagine if they are using the fuel as a rev limiter, they are killing the injectors themselves rather than the pump, in the same way your MSD kills the spark. So no fuel is sprayed into a given cylinder, rather than less-than-required, because that would cause the exact opposite of the intended purpose... I always get a little nervous when I run my generator's tank dry for winter storage at work, because as soon as it starts going lean, it hits RPM's like you wouldn't believe just before it runs out.

[mustangsoldier]

i know i don't really know a whole lot about stangs yet but wouldn't the SCT Eliminator chip work for that?

[nolife]

The last thing I had with a carb was a late 70's Grand Prix with a 301 and a quadrajunk. With the air cleaner off, the carb and engine sounded awesome. The car did not accelerate faster past half throttle but it did sound cool.

[2002BLGT]

Originally Posted by mustangsoldier i know i don't really know a whole lot about stangs yet but wouldn't the SCT Eliminator chip work for that?

yes it would but I guess hes trying to do it for under 100 bucks which more than likely is not going to happen