engine listings

[SSNIGHTMARE]

http://www.gmperformanceparts.com/_r...ineQRC2008.pdf

[camaro&T/A]

the Z28 should come with a carbed LS3!!! 515 HP sweet!!!

[MajorTom]

I like that it tells the weight of each engine. It's nice to know that LS motors are lighter than most other engines. Lighter than smaller displacement DOHC V8s so when people say "It doesn't put out a lot of power for being such a big engine." I always said displacement doesn't equal physical size. This'll be a good reference.


And the Carbed LS3 would be a step backwards in technology. Not to mention throttle response and lowend torque.

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by MajorTom

And the Carbed LS3 would be a step backwards in technology. Not to mention throttle response and lowend torque.

not necessarily.

you can get more power from a carbed motor and better mileage 9 times out of 10. however, it takes a crap ton of tuning and fine tuning and finer tuning and even finer tuning to get there. and all that tuning and whatnot costs money and isnt very efficient.

[Grape Ape]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

not necessarily.

you can get more power from a carbed motor and better mileage 9 times out of 10. however, it takes a crap ton of tuning and fine tuning and finer tuning and even finer tuning to get there. and all that tuning and whatnot costs money and isnt very efficient.

You can get more power and better mileage from non-emisions controled motor, but all else being equal injection beats carbs hands down.

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by Grape Ape

You can get more power and better mileage from non-emisions controled motor, but all else being equal injection beats carbs hands down.

what about a throttle plate? best of both worlds...lol

[gunslinger]

EFI has been proven through the years to produce a more constant (from VERY low temps and altitude to VERY high temps and altitude) and wide power band than an equivalent STREET carb setup.

The fact that the EFI injectors are now placed close to the valve also helps with fuel economy. Computers have also allowed EFI to instantly change tune for max power or max economy.

Carbs, however have shown that for max effort application, they are still effective. They make the same if not slightly more peak HP while allowing the air-fuel mixture more time to mix as it makes its way to the cylinder. Not to mention changing carbs is about ten times cheaper than changing EFI systems.

For racing, I don't think the carb will ever die, but on the street, I will take my EFI any day of the week!

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by gunslinger

EFI has been proven through the years to produce a more constant (from VERY low temps and altitude to VERY high temps and altitude) and wide power band than an equivalent STREET carb setup.

The fact that the EFI injectors are now placed close to the valve also helps with fuel economy. Computers have also allowed EFI to instantly change tune for max power or max economy.

Carbs, however have shown that for max effort application, they are still effective. They make the same if not slightly more peak HP while allowing the air-fuel mixture more time to mix as it makes its way to the cylinder. Not to mention changing carbs is about ten times cheaper than changing EFI systems.

For racing, I don't think the carb will ever die, but on the street, I will take my EFI any day of the week!

i like both...

94Z-LT1=EFI
86RS-LS1=Carbd

[MajorTom]

In my experience two engines with the same displacement, one carbed and one fuel-injected, the carbed one gets worse economy simply because it's a less precise method of injection. Fuel is wasted on the way to the combustion chamber.

And throttle response on the street is important and it's 9 times out of 10 going to be better with a fuel injected engine. And with electronic throttle, it's going to be better anyway because throttle tip-in is more progressive and measured and controlled. Just my experience owning a GTO and driving a few muscle cars.

I wouldn't want a carbed car. If I built a muscle car, I'd put an LS motor in it.

[Captainbob]

Originally Posted by MajorTom

In my experience two engines with the same displacement, one carbed and one fuel-injected, the carbed one gets worse economy simply because it's a less precise method of injection. Fuel is wasted on the way to the combustion chamber.

And throttle response on the street is important and it's 9 times out of 10 going to be better with a fuel injected engine. And with electronic throttle, it's going to be better anyway because throttle tip-in is more progressive and measured and controlled. Just my experience owning a GTO and driving a few muscle cars.

I wouldn't want a carbed car. If I built a muscle car, I'd put an LS motor in it.

+1 I'm running about 800 hp/676 rwhp wiht a S/C of course but all due to A/F calibrations and a nice monoblade throttle body I'm able to get 20mpg+ on the hiway, and run 10 sec 1/4 miles.. Thats technology

[BowtieGuy]

Originally Posted by MajorTom

In my experience two engines with the same displacement, one carbed and one fuel-injected, the carbed one gets worse economy simply because it's a less precise method of injection. Fuel is wasted on the way to the combustion chamber.

And throttle response on the street is important and it's 9 times out of 10 going to be better with a fuel injected engine. And with electronic throttle, it's going to be better anyway because throttle tip-in is more progressive and measured and controlled. Just my experience owning a GTO and driving a few muscle cars.

I wouldn't want a carbed car. If I built a muscle car, I'd put an LS motor in it.

You're telling me that throttle response is better on an injected engine? I've never seen that. I don't understand how a physical throttle linkage (pedal down, throttle open) could be slower than computer controlled (pedal down, computer signal travel, throttle open). Sure, we're talking milliseconds here, but even then I don't see EFI being faster.

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by BowtieGuy

You're telling me that throttle response is better on an injected engine? I've never seen that. I don't understand how a physical throttle linkage (pedal down, throttle open) could be slower than computer controlled (pedal down, computer signal travel, throttle open). Sure, we're talking milliseconds here, but even then I don't see EFI being faster.

i think he's meaning more towards the actual injection portion of fuel with carb'd vs efi

[Jamestwilliams]

fuel injection is simpler, no floats, no chambers, no swearing as all the little pieces fall on the floor.

[Grape Ape]

Originally Posted by BowtieGuy

You're telling me that throttle response is better on an injected engine? I've never seen that. I don't understand how a physical throttle linkage (pedal down, throttle open) could be slower than computer controlled (pedal down, computer signal travel, throttle open). Sure, we're talking milliseconds here, but even then I don't see EFI being faster.

The fuel injected motor’s advantage is that it can more closely track the amount (mass) of air entering the cylinders and increase the amount of fuel right away. Carbs suck at dealing with changes in load, the accelerator pump helps get it through tip in, but it is still kind of crude.

A drive by wire system might open the throttle a couple milliseconds late, but the more precise mixture control will more than compensate. Assuming of course that the ECM has a reasonably aggressive throttle map.