Re: SPICA fuel injection -- bah humbug

[richard bies <bies@domain.elided>]

The raps against the SPICA system are many -- but not that mechanical fuel
injection is not able to deliver high power, or efficiency.

It had been proven in many expensive racing applications.  If memory
serves correctly, it was part of the legendary MB 300SL.

First, conceptually, it was employed in the US not to improve performance,
but to limit performancde to meet EPA regulations, the "Global Warming"
agenda more influential in the US than elsewhere.

Second, it obviously added cost to the vehicle, seemingly with no
performance gain.

Third, historically (and still somewhat the case) just how it worked was
Top-Secret -- it was not user -- or reasonably, tunable, or maintainable.
(As intelligence started squeaking out, things turned upon "dummy
acatuators", ambiguous clearances (where, and under what conditions), and 
you couldn't do much with it anyway.)

Perfect, it worked well, and for quite a while.

But there was one engineering blunder, which still plagues -- in order to
start and run in widely different temperatures, a thermostatic actuator
was used (logical), with the standard operating conditions set not by the
static position, but dependant upon the extent of lengthening in operation
(really poor).  This failing was addressed by the user-operated "Sure
Start".  Rube Goldbergian.

The objections are partly for historical reasons, partly because of
non-maintainability (which is exactly as the EPA wants it).  It actually
worked pretty well.

r.m.bies

------------------------------