Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Benefits of Carburetor over Fuel Injection?

  1. Jul 8, 2015 #1

    RaulTheUCSCSlug

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    What are the benefits of carburetors over fuel injection methods in engines? I have started working on motorcycles and have noticed that even modern motorcycles are carb'ed rather than fuel inject. Is it because of the cost of adding a computer? Or is there something else to it?

    I know that some motorcycle companies tend to get away from modern technology to retain a brand image, but working on my carburetor on my motorcycle I notice how much I can change the fuel system just by changing the jets, shimming the needle, changing the air/fuel mixture etc. But for a fuel inject, wouldn't it just be connecting it to a computer, pushing some buttons and off you go?

    Are there any benefits to carbs vs. fuel inject? Carbs seem pretty easy to work with to be honest, but I do understand that there is a bigger chance of wasting fuel. Also for cars and not motorcycles, how is it working with the carburetor?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 8, 2015 #2
    Fuel injection allows the computer to be dialed in just right to reduce emissions, optimize power, or improve fuel economy, depending on conditions. If there were fuel economy and emissions standards for motorcycles as rigorous as for cars, I bet they would have a fuel injector and a computer controlling it.

    Carbs are cheaper, more reliable, and easier to fix.
     
  4. Jul 8, 2015 #3

    RaulTheUCSCSlug

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I am still unsure on how fuel injection works though, is there some form of diagrams that are available that can explain it more thorough? I know how a carburetor works since I've taken them apart myself, and seen diagrams on how they work, but have yet to work with a fuel inject system.

    California motorcycles still have to meet EPA standards even if they are out of state.

    Is there is a difference in price or complexity between EFI systems and direct fuel injection?
     
  5. Jul 8, 2015 #4

    RaulTheUCSCSlug

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Also I believe that there are "lower" standards for motorcycles since they often have a better miles per gallon when compared to a car (unless you look at higher cc engines from 1200 and up). But I still don't comprehend how two stroke motors are still legal! All that oil burning cannot be good for the environment...
     
  6. Jul 8, 2015 #5

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_injection

    :smile:
     
  7. Jul 8, 2015 #6

    jack action

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Carburetor: A restriction creates a pressure drop in the air stream that pulls the fuel into the air stream. The pressure drops «tells» the carburetor how much air goes in such that fuel can be correctly metered.

    Fuel injection: A pump is used to push the fuel into the air stream. Some measuring device must be installed into the air stream to measure how much air goes into the engine.

    I would say that carburetor are simpler because they don't need a pump (the engine is the pump) and an extra measuring device. Fuel injection are usually less restrictive to the airflow.

    You can have one central carburetor/injector or one carburetor/injector per cylinder (the latter being better than the other). You can also add to both systems electronic sensors to add precision in the metering of the fuel.

    What turn most people to fuel injection in the 80's is due to a lot of «unfair» comparisons. Multi-injectors were often compared with single central carburetor. Most motorcycle already had one carburetor per cylinder, thus there wasn't much improvement going to multi-port injection for them. The other point was that electronic fuel injection was often compared with mechanical carburetor. But sensors and variable jets can be added to carburetors to do the same thing as injectors. But in all fairness, with all the electronics added, I think fuel injection gives an advantage in the packaging department. Marketing «new» fuel injection systems is also easier than selling «improved» carburetors.

    Though, nowadays, fuel injectors are injecting fuel directly into the cylinders. That gives a huge advantage (better air-fuel mixing) that carburetors will never be able to accomplish.
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2015
  8. Jul 8, 2015 #7

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Carbs are cheap to make and work fairly well over the operating range of an engine. They are hard to start on cold mornings and can get flooded easily if the operator isn't skilled at working the throttle.

    FI systems have been around since before computers got small enough to carry around. The mechanical FI systems used a lot of precision parts in order to function, which made them more expensive than most carb setups, except probably multiple carb engines.

    Reciprocating aircraft engines were the first to use FI, because it eliminated a lot of problems related to keeping carbs functioning at different altitudes and under the motion of the aircraft, which can change suddenly and in three dimensions.

    Outside of cost and ease of maintenance, there's not much.

    FI systems are widespread on autos because emission controls and fuel economy are highly regulated by various local and national governments. If your cars can't meet these regulations, they either can't be sold legally or the manufacturer must pay hefty fines.

    Electronic FI systems allow for the precise metering of fuel over a wide range of operating conditions, they are easier to start in cold climates (or even hot ones, where vapor lock might give carbs fits), and the sealed nature of the FI system means that less raw fuel is allowed to evaporate from an engine when it is shut off, reducing overall pollution.
     
  9. Jul 8, 2015 #8
     
  10. Jul 8, 2015 #9
    The old FIs were a pain in the butt. One of the criteria when I bought a vehicle...no FI. Today, in contrast they are much, much more reliable.

    If I rode a motorcycle, I'd prefer a carb so I could tweak it. Take it off..,clean it. Part of the fun.

    Yes, carbs had issues but nothing that couldn't be adjusted, fixed or replaced in a few minutes. Always used carbs, parts available. Many a lad started off with a bucket, brush, Varsol, repair manual flipped open to carburetor. Everything taken apart, cleaned , back together and fingers crossed when the key was turned.
     
  11. Jul 8, 2015 #10

    jim hardy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    You'll enjoy this article
    http://www.allpar.com/cars/desoto/electrojector.html
    it has a good rundown on the differences.
    It's really written about this car,
    the one 1958 Desoto left on the planet with its analog electronic fuel injection system intact.

    adventurer.jpg


    I think you hit the nail on the head - simplicity.
    If you have carb and magneto ignition there's no need for even a battery. Use the kick-starter( real motorcycles have one) or roll down a hill.
     
  12. Jul 8, 2015 #11

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Yeah, Chrysler got tired of all the maintenance and warranty headaches with this system, IIRC, and developed a dealer-installed kit to convert the injection cars back to regular carburetion. Most owners took advantage of the swap, and with DeSoto being dropped soon after by Chrysler, time has taken care of the rest of these cars, save one.

    The competing fully mechanical system developed by GM about the same time had somewhat more success. At first, it was available in selected models of full size cars along with sportier lines like Corvette, but its use eventually dwindled down to just that last model until 1965, when it was dropped for big block engines and multi-carb setups which were then proliferating. Still, surviving cars equipped with this FI system are rare today and highly prized by collectors. A second hand FI system in good condition can fetch upwards of $10,000-$15,000 alone today, with a few original new old stock (NOS) units still out there, commanding the highest prices.
     
  13. Jul 9, 2015 #12

    jim hardy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    1957 ? Doubtless it was germanium transistors... Although the February 2003 IEEE Spectrum wrote an article describing it as vacuum tubes, i see no tube sockets in the photos. Can you imagine such an analog computer in automotive temperature environment?

    Looks like a pair of transistor sockets underneath the circuit board.


    brain.jpg

    Reports are it wouldn't start below 40degF..
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2015
  14. Jul 9, 2015 #13

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I think the electronic control unit on the Bendix/Chrysler Electrojector EFI was built from discrete components, since this system pre-dated the invention of integrated circuits as we know them today.

    According to this SAE paper from 1957, written on the development of the Electrojector system, p. 760 in the available preview,

    http://papers.sae.org/570060/

    Bendix engineers first prototyped the ECU using vacuum tubes, but they soon found that tubes take a while to warm up before they can function. The production ECUs were re-designed to use transistors in place of vacuum tubes, hence their absence from the photo of the innards of the ECU. Tubes also required a relatively high current draw from the battery while the system warmed up. Apparently, the development of the ECU resulted in at least 4 different models, including the tube prototype, with each succeeding model getting smaller and drawing less current for operation.
     
  15. Jul 12, 2015 #14

    RaulTheUCSCSlug

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Now this is exactly what I wanted to hear, not just be directed to some wikipedia article. Thanks for all of your input and definitely helped me gain some more knowledge on the subject!
     
  16. Jul 12, 2015 #15

    jim hardy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Thanks !
    I have a soft spot for those Chryslers. My friend's grandfather had a '57 New Yorker with the 392 hemi, you'll see it in the first Godfather movie scene where they visit the old guy in Miami Beach - black 4 door , big fins...
    baubasChry.jpg

    Its acceleration was incredible for the day.

    Somebody mentioned the "sealed up" natue of FI.
    I have a '03 Ranger that sits sometimes for a year between starts.
    The system stays full so it always starts in one crankshaft revolution.
    A carb would have evaporated dry and probably gummed up.
     
  17. Jul 12, 2015 #16

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    That's one of the benefits of FI. As long as the system is functioning, and there is gas in the fuel line, the engine will start in just about any weather, hot or cold, since you get the fuel delivered already atomized by the injectors.

    The one draw back is that most cars and trucks equipped with modern EFI systems have an electric fuel pump installed in the gas tank, which keeps the fuel system pressurized. When those in-tank fuel pumps need replacing, man, you've got a job pulling and replacing that pump. The older mechanical FI systems didn't need those in-tank pumps and could work with a standard fuel pump mounted on the engine.
     
  18. Jul 13, 2015 #17

    RaulTheUCSCSlug

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Why the change in design to the fuel system?
     
  19. Jul 13, 2015 #18

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    There are several reasons.

    The engines which used the mechanical FI systems had been designed to use carburetors initially, and the engineers designed the mechanical FI systems to fit with a minimum of modifications to the existing fuel delivery system coming from the fuel tank.

    Carbs do not require fuel pumps with high delivery pressure and are fitted with a small fuel bowl to allow for excess gas storage. Fuel pumps could be driven mechanically directly from the engine by using a simple lever actuated by a cam attached to the crank or cam shaft, which pressed onto a diaphragm, pumping fuel from the tank to the carb.

    EFI systems require a pump which can deliver fuel at higher pressure than required by a carb and at greater flow rates. The older mechanical pumps could not perform effectively, so they got replaced by electrical pumps which did not need to be driven mechanically by the engine. Because of this, and due to cramped engine compartments in most cars, engineers could move the fuel pumps away from the engine and mount them instead in the gas tank. The FI equipment mounted on the engine typically has no reservoir for any excess fuel to accumulate, so a fuel return line back to the gas tank must be provided to prevent excess fuel from building up in the system.

    Electric pumps can also pressurize the fuel system almost immediately when the ignition switch is turned on, unlike mechanical pumps which must have the engine turning in order to produce any pressure. Electric pumps eliminate the need to crank the engine to pressurize the fuel system before starting.
     
  20. Jul 13, 2015 #19

    jim hardy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    When i was in high school(1961) a friend dragged home a 1931 Model A Ford. It was only thirty years old at the time...

    It does kids a lot of good to bring one of those back to life.
    Carbureted of course,

    spark advance is manual by a lever in middle of steering wheel,
    three brush generator so there's no voltage regulator,
    fuel tank mounted up behind the dashboard so gravity suffices for a fuel pump,
    fuel line is the white tube from upper left to carburetor bottom center.
    http://oldcarandtruckpictures.com/ModelAFordRebuild/1928_Model_A_Ford_Model_60B_Leather_Back-nov10h.jpg [Broken]
    http://oldcarandtruckpictures.com/ModelAFordRebuild/ [Broken]

    We learned our basics on something simple enough for fourteen year olds to figure out.


    But - should you ever get one - upgrade the mechanical brakes to hydraulic.
    We often resorted to the emergency brake , for emergencies like stop signs.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 7, 2017
  21. Jul 13, 2015 #20

    RaulTheUCSCSlug

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Oh man, those must have been the good old days! Interesting with the brush generator, and if the car was run to higher altitudes, was it just rejetted?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook