Carburated VS Fuel Injection |
Post Reply | Page <123> |
Author | ||
halfnelly
Senior Member Joined: January-14-2013 Location: Maitland, FL Status: Offline Points: 253 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I would respectfully disagree. The horsepower ratings are more accurate today than the old days. For example, the new 5.0 Mustangs you mention regularly put down 380+hp on a chassis dyno, which is easily over 420hp at the crank. Conversely. most performance motors were usually underrated in the old days for insurance reasons. There have been countless engine builds using factory parts to duplicate the original specs that show how grossly underrated they were back then. I'm not surprised a 340 Six Pack Challenger would beat a new 425hp SRT-8. A new Challenger/Charger weighs as much as an F-150, and that "275hp" 340 probably makes somewhere closer to 350hp with a decent tune up. Power to weight ratio advantage goes to the first gen.
How many how many blown, carbureted 426 Hemis do you see that can make 707hp with turn-key reliability, pass an emissions test, idle smoothly, still make decent vacuum, and get 20+ mpg on the highway like a Hellcat? None, because EFI and modern technology make that possible. True, carbs usually make better power numbers in dyno tests, but EFI wins hands-down in enabling efficiency AND power production. It really just comes down to how much you're willing to deal with as far as tuning goes. My boat has a Holley on it and I'm perfectly fine with it here in FL. But for someone who isn't as mechanically inclined, skis in an area that has a wide variation in temperature or altitudes, EFI has an advantage. |
||
Gary S
Grand Poobah Joined: November-30-2006 Location: Illinois Status: Offline Points: 14096 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Pete I use my cell for everything. Turned off my land line when I left, uverse distance limitations were 3K feet,up north we are 5K. Down here since we are only here for 5 months didn't want to pay for the other 7. If we get low we just buy extra data for the cells.
As to FI I'm not advocating to take a carb engine and convert it or to buy a FI engine and put a carb on it. But I am not afraid of change and FI is here to stay. |
||
john b
Grand Poobah Joined: July-06-2011 Location: lake Sweeny Status: Offline Points: 3241 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
EFI/DI always performs better given everything else is the same. It seems many attempt to return to a golden age of muscle cars that was never a reality as far as performance is concerned.
1970 HEMI 'CUDA ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 426 HEMI 2x4 BARREL AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.54 REAR PERFORMANCE / 13.10 @ 107 DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR CRAFT 11/69 2015 Mustang Engine: 5.0 liter/ 3.7 liter/ 2.3 liter Horsepower: 435/ 300/ 300 Torque: 400 lb-ft. 0-60 mph: 4.5 seconds 1/4 mile: 12.9 seconds @ 112 mph EPA: 15 mpg city/ 25 mpg highway Energy Impact: 17.3 barrels of oil/yr CO2 Emissions: 7.8 tons/yr There are other factors that influence the result here, the biggest being tires, but it still stands that the 2015 Mustang (standard, not a Shelby) beats the 426 hemi Cuda. The Hellcat is only good at melting tires without upgrades. Here |
||
1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox"
If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
||
Captain Nick
Senior Member Joined: December-01-2013 Location: Batavia, IL Status: Offline Points: 129 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I'm looking more towards a 90 to 93 Ski Nautique. What were the engines like in those? Are parts for the engine easy to find? Again I have to wait for my boat to get sold. Also need a tow vehicle and boat lift as well.
|
||
Live life to the fullest!
|
||
TRBenj
Grand Poobah Joined: June-29-2005 Location: NWCT Status: Offline Points: 21169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
No fuel injection until '94. Multiport EFI debuted in '95.
|
||
GlassSeeker
Grand Poobah Joined: November-26-2008 Location: Elk Grove, CA. Status: Offline Points: 2421 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Carbs every once in while, some more than others, need you to put the control in nuetral and open the throttle wide open or pump it or some such fiddling to start the boat...fuel injection you just turn the key to start.
|
||
This is the life
|
||
8122pbrainard
Grand Poobah Joined: September-14-2006 Location: Three Lakes Wi. Status: Offline Points: 41045 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Andy, In all honesty, If this is a problem with your carb'd boat or any others starting, please read Eddies (backfoot) post. It's the fifth into the thread. I feel a carb rebuild and tuning is needed. You're giving the carb'd engine a bad reputation! If the "fiddling" you mention is to get the engine to crank, then cable adjustment is needed to close the NSS (neutral safety switch) in neutral. Both carb'd and FI'd engines have NSS's. |
||
Orlando76
Grand Poobah Joined: May-21-2013 Location: Mount Dora, FL Status: Offline Points: 3108 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
||
Please support The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation
1976 Ski Nautique 351 Escort 1993 Ski Nautique purple and black 351 HO PCM |
||
TRBenj
Grand Poobah Joined: June-29-2005 Location: NWCT Status: Offline Points: 21169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Protec came out in '91... Very few boats built 91-93 without it.
|
||
8122pbrainard
Grand Poobah Joined: September-14-2006 Location: Three Lakes Wi. Status: Offline Points: 41045 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Nick,
I'd like to back up what Todd and Tim have said about the Protec. If you really want a 90 to 93 CC and it still has the Protec, do plan on a conversion. It's not too hard if you are mechanically inclined. There are several members here who have done it and there's even a couple threads on it. Why are you looking at those years? Are you mechanically inclined? Unless you have lots of extra $$$, (and time) you do not want Watercraft to do it. Sorry John and Ryan! |
||
TRBenj
Grand Poobah Joined: June-29-2005 Location: NWCT Status: Offline Points: 21169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The NWZ was cc's first "great" slalom boat... Not quite on par with the tsc hulls but still very good. It's also a very spacious boat as that is when they went to the 19'6"/91" hull. 90-93 are the best looking (IMHO) with the classic bold stripe gel scheme. The NWZ hull in general is a pretty good value, but the 90-92 boats (pre-composite) often get overlooked and bargains certainly exist on those years... Just gotta do your due diligence as with all wood structure cc's that preceded them.
|
||
63 Skier
Grand Poobah Joined: October-06-2006 Location: Concord, NH Status: Offline Points: 4269 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The way prices have dropped on those year boats, I'd have a hard time justifying not going with a '93, think if you're patient you can find one in a similar range to the '90-'92. If you plan to keep a boat long term it's a great comfort to have a no-wood 20 plus year old boat.
If you see a non-runner, don't discard it out of hand, if it's otherwise OK but the Protec crapped out you can get quite a discount for a non running boat with a pretty inexpensive fix. Of course always a risk buying something that doesn't run ...... |
||
'63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique
|
||
TRBenj
Grand Poobah Joined: June-29-2005 Location: NWCT Status: Offline Points: 21169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Your line thinking (while somewhat flawed, imho) seems to be common, and is the exact reason why the 90-92 boats are such great values. |
||
Hollywood
Moderator Group Joined: February-04-2004 Location: Twin Lakes, WI Status: Offline Points: 13513 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
damn whoever started this thread
|
||
63 Skier
Grand Poobah Joined: October-06-2006 Location: Concord, NH Status: Offline Points: 4269 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Can't remember, what was the original subject? |
||
'63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique
|
||
63 Skier
Grand Poobah Joined: October-06-2006 Location: Concord, NH Status: Offline Points: 4269 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Flawed as in, find a '90-'92 with stringers in good shape and if you take care of it you'll never have a problem? I get it, but my take is that stringer inspection is not always a science. I'd buy an older boat with wood stringers in a heartbeat if it was what I was looking for, but when you get that close to a year with no wood just seems like a good choice. I meant to mention that I 2nd your comments on the NWZ, every time I'm in one I look around at it and think what a terrific boat they are. |
||
'63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique
|
||
Riley
Grand Poobah Joined: January-19-2004 Location: Portland, ME Status: Offline Points: 7953 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
NWZ are nice boats, but that sloped transom seems pretty impractical. Form over function? I can see paying more money for a composite as if you find out a year or two later that you've got a rot problem in your non composite boat, there goes $3-4k in value down the tubes. If I were buying a 15-20 year old boat, I'd only go for efi if it was one that had a good track record for dependability. Main characteristic I would look for is overall condition of the boat and not fuel system.
|
||
TRBenj
Grand Poobah Joined: June-29-2005 Location: NWCT Status: Offline Points: 21169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Stringer inspection is also not brain surgery. If wood stringers were such a death sentence then no one would ever buy a 2001 or a Barefoot Nautique, let alone a classic from the 60's or 70's. My point is that stringer jobs on wood structure boats are not a foregone conclusion- they can last indefinitely if properly cared for. On cradled boats (80+ for the SN), they can last a loooong time without major issues even WITH pervasive rot.
While deals do exist, 93 SN's, generally speaking, command a premium over 90-92's because of the composite stringers. That premium may be worth it to some buyers for the peace of mind, whether the perceived advantage is real or not. I contend that a reasonably well taken care of wood stringered boat (as verified by a simple inspection at purchase) is unlikely to cause any issues for many, many years if it's continued to be taken care of.... And certain savvy buyers may be better off taking the money they save and put it into the gas tank (or Protec replacement). |
||
TRBenj
Grand Poobah Joined: June-29-2005 Location: NWCT Status: Offline Points: 21169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Bruce, the angled transom may have been done for looks, but it doesn't give up anything in terms of practicality, imho... No wasted space under that slope, the fuel tank goes in the same place it always does. The distance to the cockpit is the same, but less of a rear deck to step over. No lifting rings, vents or gas caps preventing you from sitting down... Up until they added an upholstered sunpad/trunk in '02, it seems to have been as practical as anything in practice. Looks are subjective though! Personally I like it, certainly more attractive than the bubble butt TSC1.
|
||
Riley
Grand Poobah Joined: January-19-2004 Location: Portland, ME Status: Offline Points: 7953 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I've grown to like them all, bubble butt included, but that NWZ is a stretch for me. Good for the hamstrings I guess. No doubt a very well maintained non composite NWZ is a very good value.
|
||
JPASS
Grand Poobah Joined: June-17-2013 Location: Orlando Status: Offline Points: 2283 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
We loved the slant back look of our '92. It made a comfortable back rest when chilling on the platform relaxing.
|
||
'92 Correctcraft Ski Nautique
|
||
Orlando76
Grand Poobah Joined: May-21-2013 Location: Mount Dora, FL Status: Offline Points: 3108 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Well said. The slope transom is awesome to me. My '93 was ordered without a back seat making it a simple short swing with a leg to get in and out. On the 2000 and 2007 I ski it feels like I'm leaping the Mississippi River to get to the platform (at least the 07 has a practical trunk). I prefer the look of the slant back over the bubble butt and I feel 28' off drills are better on my NWZ over the TSC3. Sure am glad I chose the carb'd NWZ over the TSC1's I was looking at for nearly the same $$, mine's a keeper. |
||
Please support The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation
1976 Ski Nautique 351 Escort 1993 Ski Nautique purple and black 351 HO PCM |
||
TRBenj
Grand Poobah Joined: June-29-2005 Location: NWCT Status: Offline Points: 21169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Step over distance is the same Bruce, LOL. Just less transom there to step over. If making a step from the platform to the rear seat, the distance is the same NWZ/tsc1/tsc2(3). NWZ gives you step plates at platform and gunnel level though. You have the option to step on the sun pad with the tsc2/3, which is also a nicer place to sit- but I don't know many people who step on their vinyl as a regular practice so the hamstring workout would be the same if stepping over. The earlier boats (2001, bfn) with square transoms were the same. Arguably a better place to sit if you didn't mind sitting on gas caps, lifting rings and scoops or vents. More gel to step on if you like, same hamstring workout if you don't. |
||
john b
Grand Poobah Joined: July-06-2011 Location: lake Sweeny Status: Offline Points: 3241 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The slope transom boats are distinctive and attractive. Sounds like I can add practical although I've never been in one.
|
||
1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox"
If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
||
TRBenj
Grand Poobah Joined: June-29-2005 Location: NWCT Status: Offline Points: 21169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I'm not sure I would call them any more practical... But I wouldn't call them impractical either. Purely a style choice.
|
||
Hollywood
Moderator Group Joined: February-04-2004 Location: Twin Lakes, WI Status: Offline Points: 13513 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The slant isn't as bad of a step as you might think. It might even be easier than the bubble butt... Where's M3Fan?
|
||
TRBenj
Grand Poobah Joined: June-29-2005 Location: NWCT Status: Offline Points: 21169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^^^closet NWZ fan^^^
|
||
Hollywood
Moderator Group Joined: February-04-2004 Location: Twin Lakes, WI Status: Offline Points: 13513 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I wrestled with the thought of posting that all morning.
|
||
lcgordon
Gold Member Joined: June-24-2014 Location: Denver Status: Offline Points: 500 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
This has gone a long way from carb vs FI
|
||
Hollywood
Moderator Group Joined: February-04-2004 Location: Twin Lakes, WI Status: Offline Points: 13513 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
This is CCF
|
||
Post Reply | Page <123> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |