Re: Re:spica vs webers

["Tony Sims" <simstony@domain.elided>]

I'm gonna score Greg as a Weber fan . . .


Let's see, that 347 for Webers, 347 for Spica -- oh surprise, another hung
jury! (wait, I forgot the 3 people who swear by Dellortos)

Here's my advice -- run whatcha want, run watcha like, run whatcha brung,
and don't expect to get a consensus from any group of enthusiasts on how
best to set up any part of your car.  You'll have better luck herding cats.

Tony
1 car with mechanical carbs
1 car with electronically controlled carb
1 car with mechanical sequential injection
1 car with electronic sequential injection
1 cat, going her own way


----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Hermann" <bearbvd@domain.elided>
To: "Gowin, Lawrence" <Lawrence.Gowin@domain.elided>; <alfa-digest@domain.elided>
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 4:50 PM
Subject: Re:spica vs webers


> At 4:34 PM 11/25/02, Gowin, Lawrence wrote:
> >I'm a bit behind in my digests so I apologize for my late input...
> >
> >There was a lot of talk about carbs or specifically Webers atomizing
> >fuel better than fuel injectors.  I believe this to be absolutely
> >untrue.
>
> What you believe, in this case, happens to be incorrect.
>
>   Carburetors, including Webers, are jetted for a specific target
> >setting like drivability, fuel economy, high rev performance, etc.
>
> Precisely what one might expect to hear from someone who knows little to
> nothing about truly setting up carbs such as Webers !
>
> >Operation outside of this target band is going to be compromised.
>
> Nonsense.
>
>  A
> >Weber may give great atomization at a particular engine load point, but
> >I cannot believe that this would be true across the board.
>
> They moost certainly do. And FAR better atomization than nearly any
> injection system gives at ANY operating point over virtually their ENTIRE
> operating range.
>
>   EFI
> >(electronic fuel injection) systems if set up properly will operate
> >across a much wider rev/air velocity range.
>
> Sometimes, but not necessarily ! Good carbs, for instance, have FAR less
> granularity of mixture adjustment at idle and light load than many to most
> EFI systems !! Most EFI systems have a HARD time giving as much "dynamic
> range" as good carbs will give !
>
>   This idea can be extended
> >to drivability as well.  While Webers can be set up for good
> >drivability, a well set up EFI setup will allow for the same or more
> >likely better tractability.
>
> Close call here. BUT--no WAY EFI, right or not, can BEGIN to match the
> instant throttle response that properly done Webers will give !! The
> atomization factor is a big part of the why on this one.
>
>   Carbs are no longer used by major
> >manufacturers because they don't offer the same precision and tuning
> >granularity as EFI.
>
> Nonsense. Carbs, even Webers, do tend to go rich on over-run, and cannot
be
> made to do the low emissions at cold start thing the way EFI can, nor can
> they (easily) compensate for weather or altitude.
>
> All of which means that the mfgrs. can meet EMISSIONS rules more cheaply
> with EFI , but which has little to do with the original point.
>
> >Lawrence
> >'71 GTV
> >
> Lawrence, I'm afraid you are a victim both of "marketing hype" and of
> mechanics ignorant of how to REALLY make Webers perform !!
>
> Greg
> --
> to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
> or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided
--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided