Barry Grant Fuel Injection?

[David & Cheryl Haggard]

   What BG says on that page is exactly true, the longer the fuel
droplets have to travel before reaching the combustion chamber, and
the faster they travel getting there, the better the atomization.
Also, reducing the pressure around a fuel droplet helps the droplet to
break apart more, like just below a venturi.
   **Keeping** the fuel suspended is the tricky part, and has
everything to do with manifold design.
   The downside of port injection is that the mixture can end up being
very uneven in density. GM's work on the new LS1 engine's injectors
and injection angles reflects this.

Dave Haggard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gmecm at diy-efi.org
> [mailto:owner-gmecm at diy-efi.org]On Behalf
> Of WEG1192 at aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 7:58 PM
> To: gmecm at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Barry Grant Fuel Injection?
>
>
> Anyone have any thoughts on this? Mine are that if this was a
> great thing, GM
> would have done it already. Sounds to me like BG just needed
> to use up the
> rest of their carb castings. I can't believe any significant
> atomization
> enhancement would come from the reduced pressure under a carb
venturi
> compared to the high pressure spraying of fuel into a more open
hole.
>
> http://www.gpt300.com/bgfuel/fuelinjectionframe.htm
>
> JW
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------
> To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without
> the quotes)
> in the body of a message (not the subject) to
> majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without the quotes)
in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org