VTEC single cam DOUBLE CARBY??

[Sp00ny]

good post! Just a question, within the Tubro and spuercharger, which is cheaper?? and which one is worth it? As i read through, supercharger has more compatibilaty of non-heating up issues, gas as etc, where the turbo charger does...

To be honest. Here in Australia... A supercharged setup would most likely be more costly. As the parts are more difficult to source and it is much more difficult to find a reputable/capable place to install/tune. The cost does vary greatly depending on quality of parts and desired power figures.

Also another pro to add to that list is a major one. The linear power response/delivery of a supercharger is much more suited to the track where linear power delivery and mid range torque is necessary to keep the car predictable and stable. Nothing worse than coming into boost mid-corner and changing the balance of the car... I owned a WRX and its not that bad because its AWD but a RWD/FWD would be awful for this...

However, the majority of time turbo's can produce the higher peak power figures...

[jdmEG5]

(y) ++1

[trism]

ultimately id love a supercharger for the linearity, and the supercharger whine lol

[tiksie]

Haha punchonz with matt, owning a EG GLi, EG VTi, EG Breeze and EG GL I can tell you guys that I got heaps of KM's out of the Breeze (1.3l single carby motor) and 2nd most is the GL (1.5l twin carby motor) then 3rd (1.5 EFi motor) then 4th VTi (1.6 EFi Motor).

Breeze: 600km/tank+
GL: Nearly 600km/tank
GLi: 540ish km's/tank
VTi: 520ish km's/tank

All on BP Ultimate.


EDIT:

All cars were dead stock when tests were conducted, no mods.

[trism]

BUT

did you drive the breeze like a granny and flog the vti?

or all driven the same?

just proves my point that people like commenting on shit they dont know, when you get people like tiksie who actually have experience

[tiksie]

To get a accurate reading I drove all of them the same (granny style).

It's normal for me to 'run the car in' in a sense when I first buy it to see ultimately how many KM's it can go on a full tank driving normally.

After getting a accurate reading, I go for gold on the next fill up haha.

[Sp00ny]

Haha punchonz with matt, owning a EG GLi, EG VTi, EG Breeze and EG GL I can tell you guys that I got heaps of KM's out of the Breeze (1.3l single carby motor) and 2nd most is the GL (1.5l twin carby motor) then 3rd (1.5 EFi motor) then 4th VTi (1.6 EFi Motor).

Breeze: 600km/tank+
GL: Nearly 600km/tank
GLi: 540ish km's/tank
VTi: 520ish km's/tank

All on BP Ultimate.


EDIT:

All cars were dead stock when tests were conducted, no mods.

I'm not trying to argue your results as I am sure you are probebly correct...but that doesn't prove anything about a carburettor based engine... all that proves is that particular engine is more fuel efficient.

Another point, why would you use BP Ultimate in a low compression N/A engine thats designed to be used with 91? The fuel isn't going to give any measurable benefit and it may adversly effect performance/efficiency, The only reason I could understand would be because of the cleanliness of a higher grade fuel... All it's really going to do is cost you more money

just proves my point that people like commenting on shit they dont know, when you get people like tiksie who actually have experience

I'm not 100% certain about the stock EG's power output but you can't compare directly a car that makes for eg. 1.5L 74kw carby to a 1.5L 85kw EFI ... the car that has more torque/power will most likely use more fuel. It also depends on where in the rev range the engine makes the most torque. If the EFI is designed to have more power/torque higher in the rev range then you will find that you will have to change your shifting habits accordingly which in turn... would use more fuel.

To me it's common sense... I have no problem with carby's however if they were really significantly more efficient... the car industry wouldn't of phased them out.

Some people say that the reason they got phased out was because of emissions...which when you think about it... relates to poor fuel efficiency. More unburnt fuel passing through the exhaust/catalytic converter == higher emissions.

[~Sp33~]

why would you use BP Ultimate in a low compression N/A engine thats designed to be used with 91? The fuel isn't going to give any measurable benefit and it may adversly effect performance/efficiency,

I don't see how it would adversely effect any aspect of efficiency.

I'm not 100% certain about the stock EG's power output but you can't compare directly a car that makes for eg. 1.5L 74kw carby to a 1.5L 85kw EFI ... the car that has more torque/power will most likely use more fuel.

I think a comparison is viable when both engines are identical, and the only difference is the induction system in the case of the d15b2 and the d15b4 which was a point i made earlier.

Some people say that the reason they got phased out was because of emissions...which when you think about it... relates to poor fuel efficiency. More unburnt fuel passing through the exhaust/catalytic converter == higher emissions.

At the time, carb systems that Honda were using were equal to, or more efficient then the (then) current EFI systems. Clearly these days, with more then 20 years of fine tuning the EFI systems are much more of an accurate way of fuel delivery.

Carbs met a point of maximum efficiency which fell short of the growing emission demands. The demands which could be met and surpassed by a more expensive EFI system.

Carbs still have their place in the automotive industry, just not being applied to fuel saving, emission friendly grocery getters.

[Sp00ny]

I don't see how it would adversely effect any aspect of efficiency.





I think a comparison is viable when both engines are identical, and the only difference is the induction system in the case of the d15b2 and the d15b4 which was a point i made earlier.



At the time, carb systems that Honda were using were equal to, or more efficient then the (then) current EFI systems. Clearly these days, with more then 20 years of fine tuning the EFI systems are much more of an accurate way of fuel delivery.

Carbs met a point of maximum efficiency which fell short of the growing emission demands. The demands which could be met and surpassed by a more expensive EFI system.

Carbs still have their place in the automotive industry, just not being applied to fuel saving, emission friendly grocery getters.

So after all that, your point isn't against current EFI or EFI in general its a carburettor vs. first introduction of EFI? Because that I can understand... I personally still wouldn't believe that an identical engine running carbs vs EFI would be more fuel efficient given the same amount of engineering level and sophistication until I saw it with my own eyes.

The discussion is now starting to become alot clearer... because surely you must understand how obsurd it would of been to think that todays EFI vs Today's carbs, the carbs would turn out on top...

[tiksie]

I'm not trying to argue your results as I am sure you are probebly correct...but that doesn't prove anything about a carburettor based engine... all that proves is that particular engine is more fuel efficient.
.

onlykillz said that the carby in civics are shit on fuel, I just proved that wrong thats all.

I wasn't trying to make any other points.

Using 91 and Ultimate in all of my cars, I have gotten 40-50 more kms out of using Ultimate, so I'm guessing it does make a difference.

All measured till the fuel light went on then driven another 20kms after.

[~Sp33~]

So after all that, your point isn't against current EFI or EFI in general its a carburettor vs. first introduction of EFI?

Well, the original argument was for the twin carb system from back in the late 80's. Not that the late 80's were the introduction of EFI though.

[4age8u]

onlykillz said that the carby in civics are shit on fuel, I just proved that wrong thats all.

I wasn't trying to make any other points.

Using 91 and Ultimate in all of my cars, I have gotten 40-50 more kms out of using Ultimate, so I'm guessing it does make a difference.

All measured till the fuel light went on then driven another 20kms after.

correct and i feel putting 98 on a d15b4 makes it smoother