Eric Hysteric wrote:
I would bet 1.000 dollar, that it's impossible to get better emissions in all range with a carburator engine than a modern EFI engine with a "shitload" of sensors and mapings.
Magnificent!
Let's be perfectly clear -- reduced emissions is
not within the scope of my motivations. Instead, my motivation is firmly rooted in economics.
1. Gasoline is expensive and I don't want to spend any more on it than absolutely necessary.
2. Motor vehicles are a major expense so I want mine to last as long as possible.
So, reduced emissions is merely an indicator of efficient operation and fuel consumption. (Arguably, reduced emissions equals better use of the fuel consumed.)
As a scientific evaluation, the competition between my Bronco and a 'new' car was flawed.
The engine in my Bronco was new, with completely refurbished ignition and fuel/air delivery systems. Likewise, we'd put extensive effort, bordering on NASCAR pre-race preparations, into adjusting and tuning the engine.
The car was 'straight off the streets' with several thousand miles on it. Furthermore, it had
'suffered' routine minimal maintenance, typical of most vehicles on the road.
So, the 'competition' wasn't really fair.
Subsequent to the competition, the car's owner did, or had done, many of the things I'd done to the Bronco. Some of the routine things were oil change, new oil and air filter, new sparkplugs with proper gap, and new distributor cap and rotor. He also had the injectors cleaned, using special solvent and equipment rather than the common gas tank injector cleaner additive. Finally, he had the engine adjusted and tuned on the same diagnostic machine we'd used on my Bronco.
The result was a notable reduction in emissions and improvement in fuel economy.
He actually tracked me down and proposed re-running the competition. I declined, telling him what he'd done would probably mean his car would beat my Bronco.
