Carb or Injected

Hey, i was just wondering what the edvantages/disadvantages/differences are between the two (in terms of hp, torque, rpm, mpg, ware, sound, etc)
I always wondered which was better, all the old muscle cars have carbs, all the new cars are injected, why don't i hear of new cars having carbs or people injecting muscle cars.

Thanks ahead for your input.

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=208987

The search function is your friend, use it.

Ever heard of the new mustangs, corvettes, and camaros? I doubt they are carbureted

Hey, i was just wondering what the edvantages/disadvantages/differences are between the two (in terms of hp, torque, rpm, mpg, ware, etc)
I always wondered which was better, all the old muscle cars have carbs, all the new cars are injected, why don't i hear of new cars having carbs or people injecting muscle cars.

Thanks ahead for your input.
Ever heard of the new mustangs, corvettes, and camaros? I doubt they are carbureted

Ever heard of the new mustangs, corvettes, and camaros? I doubt they are carbureted
that's exactly what im saying, none of the new ones have carbs and none of the old ones are injected why?

The old cars did not have the technology to be properly and reliably injected, the new cars, why would they want to be? they make more hp, get better mileage and dont pollute - a carb on a modern car would be a criminal waste.

people do retrofit older cars. GMs L98 TPI and Fords EECIV are highly adaptable and show up everywhere - from 34 ford 3 window coupes to muscle cars, and if you dont want to adapt an OEM system, Holley et al make a system you can apply to nearly any motor.

Neither system has much bearing on HP - if you can push in air and fuel, it will make power.

However, the nature of the feedback electronic systems - which are VERY reliable, be it a simple TBI unit or a modern SFI system - allow for precise metering - raising mileage and nearly eliminating pollution - todays ULEV cars will pollute less over their entire lifetime than an old car will on 1 tank of gas. Thats kind of a neato benefit.

And to contrast old vs new:

1970 Camaro with LT1: 375hp (gross - appx 300ish net), 11mpg highway, appx 1000 ppm HC at cruise

Last year of the camaro: 340hp NET, 25-26mpg highway, nearly undetectable HC at cruise.

As to why more people dont convert the classics: an original, period proper muscle car with mathing numbers can fetch well over $30000. Take off the parts to install EFI, cut that in half.

I'm not sure if you understood what I meant, I meant that the new muscle cars such as the ones specified in the last post are fuel injected.

If you did understand what I said, I will say this then: fuel injection = new technology
Carbs = old technology

New car = new technology
Old car = old technology

Many of the classic performance cars are converted daily by the installation of a crate motor.

But there many reasons why most of the EFI conversions fail.
The electronics needed to control a EFI are best matched by one vendor and then you can buy performance components such as power programer and modified FPR.

I have seen many supercharger installations provide limited preformance on EFI, and when they install a carburetor the performance is all there.

I only own EFI equipt cars but since I have a mobile dyno I have to make changes to allow the running of carburetors always.

That means keeping the carburetor equipt cars level since they have only the jets and the fuel level to set mixture. Most have set the fuel level high enough that the fuel will overflow the fuel bowl if not level.

That is also the cause of the carburetor corner stall if road racing.

EFI is more efficient and has better expandability , but when you are talking over 400hp the sound is more important than the idle.

Later,