Bob Mann wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:37:34 -0500, Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Bob Mann wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Ironically, carbs can still be tweaked to gain more power than fuel
>>>injection but they becaome far more sensitive and tempramental.
>>
>>In model-specific instances this can be true because the stock injectors
>>and fuel pump aren't up to the task of flowing as much fuel as required
>>for the engine's maximum possible horsepower, but there is nothing
>>inherent in FI itself that makes this statement true in all cases.
>
>
> That's true.
> You can always, if available, add larger throttle bodies, intakes and
> a higher capacity fuel pump.
> It all becomes a game of find the weakest link.
> In most cases it would require better heads and pistons anyway
> regardless of fuel delivery method.

Look, I came here for an argument, and by God I am going to get it,
one way or another!

--
'01 SV650SK1 '99 EX250-F13 '98 ZG1000-A13
OMF #7

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:37:34 -0500, Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid>
wrote:

>Bob Mann wrote:
>
>> Ironically, carbs can still be tweaked to gain more power than fuel
>> injection but they becaome far more sensitive and tempramental.
>
>In model-specific instances this can be true because the stock injectors
>and fuel pump aren't up to the task of flowing as much fuel as required
>for the engine's maximum possible horsepower, but there is nothing
>inherent in FI itself that makes this statement true in all cases.

That's true.
You can always, if available, add larger throttle bodies, intakes and
a higher capacity fuel pump.
It all becomes a game of find the weakest link.
In most cases it would require better heads and pistons anyway
regardless of fuel delivery method.
--
Bob Mann

It may be that your sole purpose in life
is to serve as a warning to others.

Mark Olson wrote:

> Look, I came here for an argument, and by God I am going to get it,
> one way or another!

Are not.

Turby wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 07:31:53 -0700 (PDT), "TOG@Toil"
> <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> So can I just anticipate your next flurry of worries with some advance
>> answers?
>>
>> 1. No, Japanese bikes will not explode if taken over 6,000rpm.
> ...
>> 20. JUST BUY A BLOODY BIKE! ANY BIKE!
>
> You forgot oil. And tires.

And cotter-pins.

.. <RhiannonX@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 10, 7:31?am, "TOG@Toil" <totallydeadmail...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Look, no offence, but you have posted paranoid question after paranoid
> > question for bloody weeks and I've just lost the will to continue
> > posting patient sensible replies.
>
> When were *you* ever "patient" or "sensible"?

Can't you read?

--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

On Mar 10, 12:31*pm, Bob Mann <B...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:37:34 -0500, Mark Olson <ols...@tiny.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> >Bob Mann wrote:
>
> >> Ironically, carbs can still be tweaked to gain more power than fuel
> >> injection but they becaome far more sensitive and tempramental.
>
> >In model-specific instances this can be true because the stock injectors
> >and fuel pump aren't up to the task of flowing as much fuel as required
> >for the engine's maximum possible horsepower, but there is nothing
> >inherent in FI itself that makes this statement true in all cases.
>
> That's true.
> You can always, if available, add larger throttle bodies, intakes and
> a higher capacity fuel pump.
> It all becomes a game of find the weakest link.
> In most cases it would require better heads and pistons anyway
> regardless of fuel delivery method.

I have the parts for a Stage II kit in a box (somewhere) for the Evo
in my Road Glide. They're from someone else's Evo that was brought
back to stock at 60K kms. Higher flow fuel injectors so, yeah, that
part of the equation that can be bumped up. The other components are
a more aggressive cam and a remap of the ECM.

I would have installed the kit in the Road Glide last winter or the
winter before, except for one problem: Too much hassle for what it's
worth. The bike runs great as it is (with a Stage I), so there's just
not enough reason to go monkeying with it.

On Mar 9, 7:07*pm, "Eigenvector" <m44_mas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "BryanUT" <nestl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:WK2dncC6RfJT_knanZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "David T. Ashley" <d...@e3ft.com> wrote in message
> >news:BL6dnVZUSvEUwknanZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@giganews.co m...
> >> "Eigenvector" <m44_mas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>news:0KWdnaO5jpJAyUnanZ2dnUVZ_qOknZ2d@comcast.co m...
>
> >>> No, unfortunately if a sensor goes out that bike won't go anywhere. *It
> >>> needs all of them to adequately compute how much fuel is required in the
> >>> cylinder. *Frankly I don't see the overall benefits that fuel injection
> >>> would add to a bike. *It would greatly improve efficiency, that it true,
> >>> but at the expense of greatly increased complexity - boy I'm not sure
> >>> about that, imagine getting rust in the tank, that would utterly trash
> >>> the injectors. *Bikes aren't cars, they don't operate in the same highly
> >>> controlled conditions and have the added detraction of increased
> >>> frequency of crashes, something that would stress the sensors and
> >>> computer.
>
> > What a load of crap. *You think a crash "stresses" the sensor and
> > computer. I'd be more concerned about the stresses to your body.
>
> I'd be more interested in stresses to my body too. *I'm not talking about
> racing here though. *Not to be argumentative, but pick up your home computer
> and drop it on the ground from 2 feet up - you can even take the hard drives
> out first. *How many times can you do this before it utterly fails? *To be
> very fair, the *"computer" in a vehicle is a dedicated CPU running specific
> programmed instructions it doesn't resemble your home computer *there are
> far less things on it to fail except for the delicate sensors - like the MAF
> and air temp sensor. *It is certainly padded and protected against the
> conditions seen on the road. *But delicate electronics subjected to sudden
> high accelerations are prone to failure.
>
>
>
> >>> Maybe just like fuel injection on cars, it'll take a bit of time for me
> >>> to trust it on a bike.
>
> > How much time? *My bike is 8 years old and is the first generation fuel
> > injected model. *I've run fuel injector cleaner through a tank of gas one
> > time. *Otherwise no other service on the fuel system.
>
> That's fine. *My own truck has about the same record. *That doesn't equate
> to me running out and upgrading. *I don't need the added expense at this
> time in my life. *Perhaps later. *I want to stress this isn't about truth
> ownership here. *These are my opinions subject to change as I take in more
> information on the subject. *I don't think you're "dumb" for disagreeing
> with me on this subject.

Experience with motorcycle F.I. .....

I have a 1994 Ducati 916 with fuel injection and it was crashed,
rebuilt, customized, shown, sat, resuscitated, ridden, etc for
fourteen years and the fuel injection system works flawlessly.

I had a 1997 and a 1999 Triumph Speed Triple, both FI, never a problem
with either one.

Ditto 1992 Ducati 851 Superbike.

Ditto 2004 (37,000 miles) and 2006 (25k+ miles) Harley FLT and FLH
series baggers.

Ditto 2007 Ducati S4Rs.

Ditto 2003 Ducati 620SS, 800SS, and 2005 800SS racebikes.

In fact, I have never had a single case of fuel injection failure or
problems with any of the fuel injected bikes I've owned.

Can't really say that for the carburated bikes.

I seriously doubt I will EVER own another carburated motorcycle.

On Mar 10, 10:31*am, "TOG@Toil" <totallydeadmail...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> Look, no offence, but you have posted paranoid question after paranoid
> question for bloody weeks and I've just lost the will to continue
> posting patient sensible replies.
>
> So can I just anticipate your next flurry of worries with some advance
> answers?
>
> 1. No, Japanese bikes will not explode if taken over 6,000rpm.

(Two through nineteen snipped tm)

> 20. JUST BUY A BLOODY BIKE! ANY BIKE!

LOL!

On Mar 9, 7:19Â*pm, "Krusty Kritter" <Rhiann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 9, 4:06�pm, "David T. Ashley" <d...@e3ft.com> wrote:
>
> > When I turned the key on the GSX650F in the showroom, the only mystery is
> > why [what I believe was] the fuel pump only whirred for a couple of seconds.
>
> Yes, my FZR has an electronic timing circuit in the ECU that allows
> the fuel pump to pressurize the fuel system.
>
> Then the pump shuts off, and, if I want the pump to run again, I have
> to recycle the ignition switch (turn the key off and on), but, by that
> time, the fuel system is already pressurized and the solenoid pump
> only clicks a few times.
>
>
>
> > Maybe there is some strategy built in to the controller so that it doesn't
> > come on again until you engage the starter motor and then is on constantly
> > while the engine is running?
>
> Yes, the fuel pump runs again when you start cranking the engine with
> the starter. The ECU gets a pulsing signal from the pulser coil which
> also tells the injector valve to open for "x" milliseconds. If it gets
> the continuous "run" signal from a running engine, the fuel pump keeps
> pumping.
>
> Consider what would happen if the FI system didn't operate this way.
> If you crashed and the engine quit running, the pump would keep right
> on pumping fuel, perhaps all over the ground, maybe on a hot exhaust
> pipe.
>
> So, having the timer circuit and the enabling signal going to the ECU
> makes total sense.
>
> My FZR has a third insput to the ECU that controls the fuel pump. The
> "Reserve" switch doesn't operate a valve, it just sends a signal to
> the ECU to keep pumping gasoline when the fuel level is low.

Bravo. Great post.

Bob Mann wrote:

>On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:37:23 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>>BryanUT wrote:
>>
>>>> $750 for the darned fuel injection computer.
>>>
>>>A part you will never need to replace.
>>
>>Carbureted bikes of the last couple decades also have "computers" that
>>can go-out.
>
>Those are ignition timing though.

So?

dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> BryanUT wrote:
>
> >> $750 for the darned fuel injection computer.
> >
> >A part you will never need to replace.
>
> Carbureted bikes of the last couple decades also have "computers" that
> can go-out.

In my experience, they either work or they don't. They don't gradually
lose their settings.

Explain?


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

On Mar 9, 3:03 pm, "David T. Ashley" <d...@e3ft.com> wrote:
> "Road Glidin' Don" <langkd_NO_S...@shaw.ca> wrote in messagenews:47d43658.499398457@shawnews.ed.shawcab le.net...
>
>
>
> >>Oh God. Just make your fucking mind up, and buy anything. Stick a pin in
> >>a chart or something.
>
> > It just had to be said... <g>
>
> I understand your thought process there.
>
> I have my eye on a 2008 GSX650F.
>
> The issue in my mind is, among other things, buying a bike where they put in
> electronic fuel injection but kept the sticker price low. This means they
> may not have thrown enough money at it to do it right.

I can assure you that the carb setup on YZF600 is just a fucked up
as the fuel injection in the first gen F6.

>
> I really don't need to be getting out scopes and things diagnosing this
> sensor or that sensor ...

Exactly. If that is a concern get Kawasaki:
their yardstick is smooth power delivery
(unless some clown installed a fart can and did not
do re jetting right).

> And fuel injection is necessary for the bike to run ... if anything dies,
> you ain't going nowhere.

Yes, but unfortunately I got news for ya:
there are other pieces of electroniks in there that could die jast as
well.

> Well-written software might tolerate a sensor that

Bwahhhhhaaaaahahaha. That piece of shit from toyoda comes to mind:
about 5x times the recall rate compared to the industry average.

> goes bad, but if the fuel pump or the computer or any of the injectors die

Well, duh, bikes use ancient technology and are on average much
less reliable than cages despite the shitload of elecktronics in the
latter.
Where there is news?

On Mar 10, 12:31 pm, Bob Mann <B...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> It all becomes a game of find the weakest link.

that would not be an idiot with the carb tune kit,
would it?
that or the vacuum leaks on a "bargain" 20k miles
14 y.o. bike that you bought to "save" some money :-]

> It may be that your sole purpose in life
> is to serve as a warning to others.

good observation :-)

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:38:16 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>Bob Mann wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:37:23 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>BryanUT wrote:
>>>
>>>>> $750 for the darned fuel injection computer.
>>>>
>>>>A part you will never need to replace.
>>>
>>>Carbureted bikes of the last couple decades also have "computers" that
>>>can go-out.
>>
>>Those are ignition timing though.
>
>So?

We were discussing fuel delivery reliability.
Carb vs Fi.
--
Bob Mann

It may be that your sole purpose in life
is to serve as a warning to others.

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:26:12 -0700 (PDT), "Road Glidin' Don"
<d.langkd@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Mar 10, 12:31*pm, Bob Mann <B...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:37:34 -0500, Mark Olson <ols...@tiny.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Bob Mann wrote:
>>
>> >> Ironically, carbs can still be tweaked to gain more power than fuel
>> >> injection but they becaome far more sensitive and tempramental.
>>
>> >In model-specific instances this can be true because the stock injectors
>> >and fuel pump aren't up to the task of flowing as much fuel as required
>> >for the engine's maximum possible horsepower, but there is nothing
>> >inherent in FI itself that makes this statement true in all cases.
>>
>> That's true.
>> You can always, if available, add larger throttle bodies, intakes and
>> a higher capacity fuel pump.
>> It all becomes a game of find the weakest link.
>> In most cases it would require better heads and pistons anyway
>> regardless of fuel delivery method.
>
>I have the parts for a Stage II kit in a box (somewhere) for the Evo
>in my Road Glide. They're from someone else's Evo that was brought
>back to stock at 60K kms. Higher flow fuel injectors so, yeah, that
>part of the equation that can be bumped up. The other components are
>a more aggressive cam and a remap of the ECM.
>
>I would have installed the kit in the Road Glide last winter or the
>winter before, except for one problem: Too much hassle for what it's
>worth. The bike runs great as it is (with a Stage I), so there's just
>not enough reason to go monkeying with it.
>
Had a guy in the shop ;last week going on about his FXR evo with
Branch heads.
If you already have the parts I'd do it but since you just rebuilt the
top end recently (IIRC) I would say don't bother until next time.

I don't know about the high flow injectors with stock heads and
pistons though. Unless things have changed a lot, the stock injectors
can handle a lot more flow than a simple cam upgrade.
I'm still running the stock injectors on a stage III kit.
In will have a new computer, map and dyno run by the end of the week
though.
--
Bob Mann

It may be that your sole purpose in life
is to serve as a warning to others.

On Mar 10, 4:36 pm, "tomor...@erols.com" <tomor...@erols.com> wrote:
> On Mar 9, 7:07 pm, "Eigenvector" <m44_mas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "BryanUT" <nestl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:WK2dncC6RfJT_knanZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@comcast.com ...
>
> > > "David T. Ashley" <d...@e3ft.com> wrote in message
> > >news:BL6dnVZUSvEUwknanZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@giganews.co m...
> > >> "Eigenvector" <m44_mas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > >>news:0KWdnaO5jpJAyUnanZ2dnUVZ_qOknZ2d@comcast.co m...
>
> > >>> No, unfortunately if a sensor goes out that bike won't go anywhere. It
> > >>> needs all of them to adequately compute how much fuel is required in the
> > >>> cylinder. Frankly I don't see the overall benefits that fuel injection
> > >>> would add to a bike. It would greatly improve efficiency, that it true,
> > >>> but at the expense of greatly increased complexity - boy I'm not sure
> > >>> about that, imagine getting rust in the tank, that would utterly trash
> > >>> the injectors. Bikes aren't cars, they don't operate in the same highly
> > >>> controlled conditions and have the added detraction of increased
> > >>> frequency of crashes, something that would stress the sensors and
> > >>> computer.
>
> > > What a load of crap. You think a crash "stresses" the sensor and
> > > computer. I'd be more concerned about the stresses to your body.
>
> > I'd be more interested in stresses to my body too. I'm not talking about
> > racing here though. Not to be argumentative, but pick up your home computer
> > and drop it on the ground from 2 feet up - you can even take the hard drives
> > out first. How many times can you do this before it utterly fails? To be
> > very fair, the "computer" in a vehicle is a dedicated CPU running specific
> > programmed instructions it doesn't resemble your home computer there are
> > far less things on it to fail except for the delicate sensors - like the MAF
> > and air temp sensor. It is certainly padded and protected against the
> > conditions seen on the road. But delicate electronics subjected to sudden
> > high accelerations are prone to failure.
>
> > >>> Maybe just like fuel injection on cars, it'll take a bit of time for me
> > >>> to trust it on a bike.
>
> > > How much time? My bike is 8 years old and is the first generation fuel
> > > injected model. I've run fuel injector cleaner through a tank of gas one
> > > time. Otherwise no other service on the fuel system.
>
> > That's fine. My own truck has about the same record. That doesn't equate
> > to me running out and upgrading. I don't need the added expense at this
> > time in my life. Perhaps later. I want to stress this isn't about truth
> > ownership here. These are my opinions subject to change as I take in more
> > information on the subject. I don't think you're "dumb" for disagreeing
> > with me on this subject.
>
> Experience with motorcycle F.I. .....
>
> I have a 1994 Ducati 916 with fuel injection and it was crashed,
> rebuilt, customized, shown, sat, resuscitated, ridden, etc for
> fourteen years and the fuel injection system works flawlessly.
>
> I had a 1997 and a 1999 Triumph Speed Triple, both FI, never a problem
> with either one.
>
> Ditto 1992 Ducati 851 Superbike.
>
> Ditto 2004 (37,000 miles) and 2006 (25k+ miles) Harley FLT and FLH
> series baggers.
>
> Ditto 2007 Ducati S4Rs.
>
> Ditto 2003 Ducati 620SS, 800SS, and 2005 800SS racebikes.
>
> In fact, I have never had a single case of fuel injection failure or
> problems with any of the fuel injected bikes I've owned.
>
> Can't really say that for the carburated bikes.
>
> I seriously doubt I will EVER own another carburated motorcycle.

experience with motorcycle carburation.......

i own a 2001 suzuki vl800 with two carburetors and it's gunked up and
i never adjusted the idle screw and i never took them apart, i just
run through bottles of carb cleaner and hope it runs marginally better
(it does when the weather is warmer, which may have nothing to do with
the carb cleaner)

hehe....




and not to be a jerk, but on behalf of all the other newbies ...
please stop asking so many questions, OP! the rest of us have real
ones!


=P

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:52:10 -0500, Bob Mann <Bobo@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:26:12 -0700 (PDT), "Road Glidin' Don"
><d.langkd@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mar 10, 12:31*pm, Bob Mann <B...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:37:34 -0500, Mark Olson <ols...@tiny.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Bob Mann wrote:
>>>
>>> >> Ironically, carbs can still be tweaked to gain more power than fuel
>>> >> injection but they becaome far more sensitive and tempramental.
>>>
>>> >In model-specific instances this can be true because the stock injectors
>>> >and fuel pump aren't up to the task of flowing as much fuel as required
>>> >for the engine's maximum possible horsepower, but there is nothing
>>> >inherent in FI itself that makes this statement true in all cases.
>>>
>>> That's true.
>>> You can always, if available, add larger throttle bodies, intakes and
>>> a higher capacity fuel pump.
>>> It all becomes a game of find the weakest link.
>>> In most cases it would require better heads and pistons anyway
>>> regardless of fuel delivery method.
>>
>>I have the parts for a Stage II kit in a box (somewhere) for the Evo
>>in my Road Glide. They're from someone else's Evo that was brought
>>back to stock at 60K kms. Higher flow fuel injectors so, yeah, that
>>part of the equation that can be bumped up. The other components are
>>a more aggressive cam and a remap of the ECM.
>>
>>I would have installed the kit in the Road Glide last winter or the
>>winter before, except for one problem: Too much hassle for what it's
>>worth. The bike runs great as it is (with a Stage I), so there's just
>>not enough reason to go monkeying with it.
>>
>Had a guy in the shop ;last week going on about his FXR evo with
>Branch heads.
>If you already have the parts I'd do it but since you just rebuilt the
>top end recently (IIRC) I would say don't bother until next time.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking too. If I ever have to tear it down
again, *then* it's almost a sure thing I would put that stuff in -
even if only for substituting for (what would be) a fresher cam and
injectors in the kit I have laying around. The engine's only got
about 50K kms on it since the top-end work though.

>I don't know about the high flow injectors with stock heads and
>pistons though. Unless things have changed a lot, the stock injectors
>can handle a lot more flow than a simple cam upgrade.
>I'm still running the stock injectors on a stage III kit.
>In will have a new computer, map and dyno run by the end of the week
>though.

The injectors have changed quite a bit from the Evos to the Twinkies,
so maybe that's why. For the Evo Stage II upgrade, different
injectors are a part of the kit.

--

Home page: http://xidos.ca

On Mar 10, 9:36*pm, langkd_NO_S...@shaw.ca (Road Glidin' Don) wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:52:10 -0500, Bob Mann <B...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:26:12 -0700 (PDT), "Road Glidin' Don"
> ><d.lan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>On Mar 10, 12:31*pm, Bob Mann <B...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:37:34 -0500, Mark Olson <ols...@tiny.invalid>
> >>> wrote:
>
> >>> >Bob Mann wrote:
>
> >>> >> Ironically, carbs can still be tweaked to gain more power than fuel
> >>> >> injection but they becaome far more sensitive and tempramental.
>
> >>> >In model-specific instances this can be true because the stock injectors
> >>> >and fuel pump aren't up to the task of flowing as much fuel as required
> >>> >for the engine's maximum possible horsepower, but there is nothing
> >>> >inherent in FI itself that makes this statement true in all cases.
>
> >>> That's true.
> >>> You can always, if available, add larger throttle bodies, intakes and
> >>> a higher capacity fuel pump.
> >>> It all becomes a game of find the weakest link.
> >>> In most cases it would require better heads and pistons anyway
> >>> regardless of fuel delivery method.
>
> >>I have the parts for a Stage II kit in a box (somewhere) for the Evo
> >>in my Road Glide. *They're from someone else's Evo that was brought
> >>back to stock at 60K kms. *Higher flow fuel injectors so, yeah, that
> >>part of the equation that can be bumped up. *The other components are
> >>a more aggressive cam and a remap of the ECM.
>
> >>I would have installed the kit in the Road Glide last winter or the
> >>winter before, except for one problem: *Too much hassle for what it's
> >>worth. *The bike runs great as it is (with a Stage I), so there's just
> >>not enough reason to go monkeying with it.
>
> >Had a guy in the shop ;last week going on about his FXR evo with
> >Branch heads.
> >If you already have the parts I'd do it but since you just rebuilt the
> >top end recently (IIRC) I would say don't bother until next time.
>
> Yeah, that's what I was thinking too. *If I ever have to tear it down
> again, *then* it's almost a sure thing I would put that stuff in -
> even if only for substituting for (what would be) a fresher cam and
> injectors in the kit I have laying around. *The engine's only got
> about 50K kms on it since the top-end work though.
>
> >I don't know about the high flow injectors with stock heads and
> >pistons though. Unless things have changed a lot, the stock injectors
> >can handle a lot more flow than a simple cam upgrade.
> >I'm still running the stock injectors on a stage III kit.
> >In will have a new computer, map and dyno run by the end of the week
> >though.
>
> The injectors have changed quite a bit from the Evos to the Twinkies,
> so maybe that's why. *For the Evo Stage II upgrade, different
> injectors are a part of the kit.
>
> --
>
> Home page:http://xidos.ca- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

IIRC the problem (in general, not specificly for Harleys) is
atomization. Carbs vaporize the fuel better than injectors. To
counter that they try to inject as far as possible from the cylinder
to give the gas time to vaporize. But that can lead to fuel on the
side of the intake tract rather than in the cylinder. The other
approach is to use an injector with smaller holes that makes finer
droplets and aim it right at the back side of the valve.

Bruce

Bob Mann wrote:

>On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:38:16 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Bob Mann wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:37:23 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>BryanUT wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> $750 for the darned fuel injection computer.
>>>>>
>>>>>A part you will never need to replace.
>>>>
>>>>Carbureted bikes of the last couple decades also have "computers" that
>>>>can go-out.
>>>
>>>Those are ignition timing though.
>>
>>So?
>
>We were discussing fuel delivery reliability.
>Carb vs Fi.

We were discussing electronics reliability. You know, the stuff that
controls the FI.

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:31:17 -0500, Bob Mann <Bobo@nowhere.com> wrote:

>It may be that your sole purpose in life
>is to serve as a warning to others.

But, but, but...The world really _will_ end some day!

--
Turby the Turbosurfer

"Bob Mann" <Bobo@nowhere.com> wrote

>>You'd be surprised. It's been a couple of decades since I did any
>>military electronics, but I've seen what a shaker table (vibration
>>test) can do. It's pretty impressive. A fighter plane that goes
>>through 13Gs puts electronics through far more stress than a
>>motorcycle. Yeah, they're mil-spec, but there really isn't that much
>>difference between those and commercial parts.
>
> The Russkies do it with tubes.
> Same ones that seem so delicate in a guitar amp.

Ah, but the ones in Russian military applications get beer spilled on them
rather infrequently in comparison...

P. Roehling wrote:
> "Bob Mann" <Bobo@nowhere.com> wrote
>
>>> You'd be surprised. It's been a couple of decades since I did any
>>> military electronics, but I've seen what a shaker table (vibration
>>> test) can do. It's pretty impressive. A fighter plane that goes
>>> through 13Gs puts electronics through far more stress than a
>>> motorcycle. Yeah, they're mil-spec, but there really isn't that
>>> much
>>> difference between those and commercial parts.
>>
>> The Russkies do it with tubes.
>> Same ones that seem so delicate in a guitar amp.
>
> Ah, but the ones in Russian military applications get beer spilled
> on
> them rather infrequently in comparison...

Well, _beer_ sure, but Russian radars are cooled with issue vodka,
which is so foul that the crews put it in the radar and drink the
issue coolant.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:16:24 -0700, "P. Roehling"
<nowayjose@uh-uh.edu> wrote:

>
>"Bob Mann" <Bobo@nowhere.com> wrote
>
>>>You'd be surprised. It's been a couple of decades since I did any
>>>military electronics, but I've seen what a shaker table (vibration
>>>test) can do. It's pretty impressive. A fighter plane that goes
>>>through 13Gs puts electronics through far more stress than a
>>>motorcycle. Yeah, they're mil-spec, but there really isn't that much
>>>difference between those and commercial parts.
>>
>> The Russkies do it with tubes.
>> Same ones that seem so delicate in a guitar amp.
>
>Ah, but the ones in Russian military applications get beer spilled on them
>rather infrequently in comparison...
>
Point well taken.
--
Bob Mann

It may be that your sole purpose in life
is to serve as a warning to others.

"Bob Mann" <Bobo@nowhere.com> wrote

>>Ah, but the ones in Russian military applications get beer spilled on them
>>rather infrequently in comparison...
>>
> Point well taken.

On the bright side, watching some wanna-be heavy metal goon spill a beer
into his percolating 500 watt power amp is a sight not to be missed for
those who wait anxiously every year for July 4th.

!POOF!-ZZZZZZZZZZZ***WAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH......plink.