"Keen "to replace V6 with inline Gas engines

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

In other words...determining power, power bands is more often than not, now controlled by electronic management.

I was with you until you said ^^^^^. That's not true at all.

You have to look no further than the new NHRA ProStock class to see that's not true.

These are some of the most sophisticated engines in the world. 5 HP can make the difference between making the field and putting your car back on the trailer.

Last year they were all carbureted. This year NHRA mandated they go EFI and no hood scoop. Same cubic inch, same bore, same stroke.

The cars lost a lot of HP. This shows that the EFI did nothing for power gain and the air intake made the engine lose a bunch of power.

Pretty amazing that the lowly carb that was invented over 100 years ago can not only compete with modern EFI but beat it power wise in a modern engine.

With Pro Stock the engines are built to make maximum HP. The carburetors used are designed to maximize as much cubic feet per minute as it is possible, they are not designed with considerations such as idling, low speed operation , smoothness...they are flat out let's jam as much fuel/air mixture as we can down them throats.:) That's the focus with little consideration for other criteria.

A carb or fuel injection on a street engine has to deal with starting in all weather, including very hot, very cold extremes, idle for long periods, smoothness, getting good MPG, developing good power throughout the power band, emissions, etc.

I think there will be a learning curve and knowing drag racer mechanics, it will be fast as they are quick learners. Fuel injection is a new thing for Pro Stock as you say. Once they get more experience under their technical belts, say in a couple years (max) I can see FI generating as much or more power than carbs.

I don't know this for sure, I'm speculating. But when I think how engine power has increased mightily over the years with street engines
due mostly to electronic engine management and fuel injection, I think the same thing will happen to Pro Stock.

My son bought a new Yamaha sports bike last year, a YZF R3. It has a 321cc twin cylinder, but generates around 43 hp. My '67 Matchless Scrambler has a Norton 750cc twin which is rated around 49 hp.

The Norton Twin (Atlas) has twin carbs, sports cam, etc, the Yamaha is a modern, liquid cooled, fuel injected twin. The Norton was considered a high performance engine in it's day.

But at well over twice the cubic capacity, it only generates a measly 6 more hp.

The Yamaha starts much more easily, generates good low, mid and high power throughout it's rev range. The Norton is ready to sign off at a little over 6,000 rpm, the Yamaha red lines at 13,000 rpm.

Quarter mile times are about the same, around 14 flat, top speed the Yamaha is around 117, the Norton engine is good for 109-110 mph.

Now if we were to go to the next step up Yamaha, the YZF-R6 with a 600cc...the 1/4 mile is around 10.7 and it's still giving away about 150cc.

I realize these are not 'scientific' or probably fair comparisons....apples and oranges...but it does show how modern technology in the form of modern electronics, fuel injection has increased performance in street vehicles. I think a similar revolution, maybe not as marked, will take place in racing.

But I do like carbs. In my extreme cold winters (Western Canada), when it's 35 below and the carb flooded, I was always able to get an engine going, by forcing open the butterfly valve (as we called it) open with a screwdriver and get going. I had to have someone by the carb, ready to pull out the screw driver quickly.

I can't do that with fuel injection. In fact all I can do with a modern engine is stare silently at the plastic engine shrouds and dial on my cell phone to CAA(AAA) for a tow, if anything happens.:B