mkspeed26

i posted this poll because i knew it would be just like this, the vote is now 21-21 and everyone is getting very POd over it. it is a touchy subject. but notice the carb people are the only ones posting their replies (for the most part) <IMG src=smileys/smiley11.gif border="0"></P>


and they put EFI into cars because of a couple reasons,and all of them have to do with the complete burning of the fuel, aka EMISSIONS. yes, if you are running a multi-million dollarrace team and will pay someone to sit at a labtop and do all the programming and such EFI is better, but most people cant do that so in those cases carb is better. </P>


and thanks to whoever did the price comparison thanks <IMG src=smileys/smiley2.gif border="0">, saved me the time of typing it. carb = cheaper PRICES, not performance</P>


thanks for your opinions everyone<IMG src=smileys/smiley1.gif border="0"></P>

Milky

I consider it muscle <IMG src=smileys/smiley17.gif border="0"></P>


Since when is 300+ hp not having muscle? If my car has 300+ hp, my car has muscle. End of discussion... tell me where Im wrong.</P>

Pitviper100

mmm k heres how i see it id like to get into this debate..</P>


Sure carbs are cheaper and less of a hassle but if you look at the true aspects of EFI not only do you get better performance due to precision tuning but i mean better gas milage and everything else comes with it. The smog s**t has nothing to do with the power because anyone like me with an EFI mustang can buy a smaller belt and disconnect the stupid smog pump then what we have a more advanced carbed car ... the EFI of today are the carbs of the past but better.</P>


I own a 1986 GT the first year for fuel injection for the mustang so im going to havta vote for fuel injection. though theres a lil more hassle its worth it to someone whos willing to put the work into it.</P>

Jugador1

if you wanna get bitch nitpicky about definitions you're wrong. mustang is a pony car. want proof? http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclecars/general/musclecars-definition.shtml</P>


only muscle cars by definition are old ones with high displacement engines...like 351+ cubes</P><edited><editID>Jugador</editID><editDate>37992.7644907407</editDate></edited>

Milky

Well, not to be bitching about it cause Im way over it and think that its a bit pointless... but that link says "<FONT size=2>GTs, Mach 1's and Boss Mustangs are considered muscle cars" But stangs are pony cars... Take it however you want... I own a mustang GT with nearly 400torque... I really don't understand how you don't call that muscle... but no big deal, im over that bitch fit.</FONT>

mkspeed26

IMO the muscle car era stopped when they went into all the emissions sh*t, that is what, mid to late 70s??

tommyo

mike speed you dont no what you are talking about everyone for carbs sond like they want it because its simple if you had anyknowledge ofcars you would realize the power potetial of a daily driven 10 sec car with a tuned EFI setup that gets 20MPG .look at what there doing with the new cobra in any mag</P>


</P>

tommyo

I'm winning</P>


<IMG src=smileys/smiley1.gif border="0"></P>

gorbs88

LOOK AT IT THIS WAY....YOU WANT 400HP....YOU HAVE A 91 302....GO AND BUY A DEMON JR CARB AND WEIAND STEALTH INTAKE....THAT $500....YOU HAVE 52 HP OVER STOCK EFI......SO HOW IS EFI SO GOOD WHEN YOU CAN GET 50HP JUST FROM GETTIN RID OF IT....YOU DONT HAVE INJECTORS TO UPGRADE,FUEL PUMP, MASS AIR, THROTTLE BODY AND ECU...HOW MUCH DOES THAT COST.....WAY MORE THEN A INTAKE AND CARB....OH YAH $200 FOR A INTAKE...HOW MUCH FOR FUELY INTAKES.... 5-600.....IT WILL ALWAYS BE AN ARGUEMENT BUT CARB WETHER BETTER OR NOT WILL ALWAYS BE CHEAPER...THE ONLY REASON FOR EFI IS FOR MILAGE AND EMMISSIONS...THATS ALL.....</P>

callmecobra

i cant beleive someone made this stupid poll...we arent getting any good answers, just f**king idiots arguing about it. there is no answer to which is better, it all depeneds on the application...</P>