T5superduty

[/QUOTE]listen here noob. muscle cars refer to the cars that were in the years of 67 to 70.[/QUOTE] </P>


Wrong, that is a matter of mabye your opinion but ya the muscle car era was more it started with the gto in 1964 but in 1966 was when the "Big 3" really joined in and made the "muscle car" These are the true muscle cars of the 60's there are some more but these are the main ones that competed against each other</P>


Fairlane Gt</P>


Chevelle SS</P>


GTO</P>


Barracuda</P>


</P>


</P>

Milky

Let me clarify *** hole, Cars with muscle... happy? dick...

USAMuscle

</P>


What an ignorant thing to say. Nothing ignorant about preferring a carb over EFI. Everybody has their own reasons, and each application is different. No you won't see a carb on a Ferrari, but the Ferrari F50, which is one of the fastest, only runs the quarter in the 12's. Nostalgia Super Stock cars all use carbs, and run in the 9's and 10's without breaking a sweat. Those are stock-bodied steel cars from the 60's weighing in at over 3,400 lbs. usually. It's just brute power. Carbs are a lot easier to tune than EFI, and swapping out a carb is a hell of a lot faster than swapping out an EFI setup.</P>


Also, EFI cars have an intake manifold also, so it's not an extra expense for carb'd cars. The COMPLETE air/fuel delivery setup for EFI is more expensive than a carbureted setup, and a lot more complicated. If you want performance and *****-to-the-wall power, easy tunability and functionality, go with a carburetor. If you're concerned with emissions, use EFI.</P>


To answer your question about why today's performance cars are all EFI...IT'S BECAUSE OF EMISSIONS RETARD!! It has nothing to do with power output.</P><edited><editID>USAMuscle</editID><editDate>37992.0891087963</editDate></edited>

T5superduty

[QUOTE


What an ignorant thing to say. Nothing ignorant about preferring a carb over EFI. Everybody has their own reasons, and each application is different. No you won't see a carb on a Ferrari, but the Ferrari F50, which is one of the fastest, only runs the quarter in the 12's. Nostalgia Super Stock cars all use carbs, and run in the 9's and 10's without breaking a sweat. Those are stock-bodied steel cars from the 60's weighing in at over 3,400 lbs. usually. It's just brute power. Carbs are a lot easier to tune than EFI, and swapping out a carb is a hell of a lot faster than swapping out an EFI setup.</P>


Also, EFI cars have an intake manifold also, so it's not an extra expense for carb'd cars. The COMPLETE air/fuel delivery setup for EFI is more expensive than a carbureted setup, and a lot more complicated. If you want performance and *****-to-the-wall power, easy tunability and functionality, go with a carburetor. If you're concerned with emissions, use EFI.</P>


To answer your question about why today's performance cars are all EFI...IT'S BECAUSE OF EMISSIONS RETARD!! It has nothing to do with power output.</P>


[/QUOTE</P>


OMG exactly, wtf is that guy talking about<FONT size=6> </FONT></P>


<FONT size=6>carbs suck fool LOL</FONT></P>

horatio102

fuel injection will create more power if you spend the time to program it. Carbs can't make minute adjustments throughout the entire RPM range.
For ease of tuning, carbs are the way to go. If you don't mind spending most of your time with a laptop doing data logging and reprogramming, then fuel injection will net you more power.

But it's really not worth the energy, because carbs get the job done well enough.

And to put it back into perspective -

With a 400hp goal:
carb - 600-650 carb, intake manifold, fuel pressure regulator

efi - MAF, TB, EGR spacer, Upper and lower intake manifold, injectors, fuel pressure regulator, some sort of tuning, either custom burned chip or a DIY like the tweecer

What do you think is going to be more expensive? And that doesn't take into account all of the other mods to get you there - cam, heads, rockers, exhaust, etc. that would be common for both of them.

horatio102

Oh.

I voted for EFI. If I had to do it over again I probably would convert to carb though, just because it's so much easier to tune. I've been getting ~8mpg and I need to do some serious tuning work.

My truck is carb'd, and well, there's something to be said for fuel injection. Just jump in, turn it on, let the oil circulate for a few seconds, and go. None of this 5 minute warmup before it'll move without stalling crap.

hotrodman

carbs are easyer to set up but thats just my sau so fuel inj. to me is to damm hard to work on

horatio102

carbs are WAY easier...

but for a stock engine fuel injection works well - just plug it in and it's ready to go. Of course it's going to try and keep the A/F ratio around 14:1 for economy...

Quik

wow you full of it... any good carb tunner can get a carb car to pass todays emissions. and you all think carbs are easier. ..cough..cough..bulls**t... just cause you slap it on and say thats it. its not.

this can go on for who knows when. if carbs are so good why they anit around. maybe because EFI offers better driveability

Quik

wow this is coming from a person who doesnt know s**t about his car. keeps asking questions. listen here todays cars dont have muscle. a fox body, sn95 or new edge isnt considered muscle.
power ranging from what a messly 225 to 260. that anit s**t. and the torque in the low to mid 300s. come on now. think about it. muscle refers to alot more power something like high 300s and 400+torq.