Barry Grant Fuel Injection?

[rrauscher at nni.com]

Between that and higher VE%, TBI is the way to go! The
heck with this port stuff. What good is it squirting fuel
at a closed intake valve?

BobR.

Now if GM would just build us a decent 4bbl TBI setup!


>   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