2006 Suzuki Hayabusa
- Thread starter mountainmotor
- Start date
Yeah, when is the last time you had to adjust the idle on a car, even when it's freezing azz cold?
Carbs suck, well of course they suck, but they suck figuratively too. I had one lousy Mikuni on a Sportster once. Air jet, pilot jet, main jet, slide cutaway, needle position, idle air adjust, enrichner (Mikuni's answer to a choke). Thing didn't even have an accelerator pump. I can only imagine four of them sucking away
A carb is short for carburettor, or carburetor. Unlike fuel injection, crburetors drive air into the engine when you open the throttle, instead of injecting fuel.whats a carb????
A downside is that fuelling is choppier than FI...
Fuel Injected.
1127 TO 1299
Registered
even thought I love the choppiness of my 88 gixxer1100, I hated cleaning them all the time.
FI is almost troubble free
FI is almost troubble free
Everyone is focusing mostly on the laziness or let's say maintenance aspect of fuel injection versus carbs.
The only reason there is fuel injection is to meet EPA standards. You still have to raise your BUSA's idle on a cold start.
Fuel economy is not always better with fuel injection. In fact, its more often worse.
Havent you guys ever noticed how choppy FI is when you are diddling along in stop and go traffic? On a carbeurated bike, you can do that a lot better than a fuel injected bike...which leads me to my next statement....
Carb bikes when tuned properly, run better.
And when a fuel injection system fails, - oh boy...look out. The computer goes nuts and your bike ain't going anywhere.
Fuel injection is convenient if you are trading maps, but it definitely costs more...when you consider that you have to buy an inline PC type device and get it mapped everytime you change something about its a/f ratio. Not to mention when it breaks down.
Doing a carb synch is a pain too...
So I vote Fuel injection for the simple ease of maintenance and convenience...but I choose carbuerated when thinking only of the smoothness and the ride.
<!--EDIT|HayaVegas
Reason for Edit: None given...|1127518343 -->
The only reason there is fuel injection is to meet EPA standards. You still have to raise your BUSA's idle on a cold start.
Fuel economy is not always better with fuel injection. In fact, its more often worse.
Havent you guys ever noticed how choppy FI is when you are diddling along in stop and go traffic? On a carbeurated bike, you can do that a lot better than a fuel injected bike...which leads me to my next statement....
Carb bikes when tuned properly, run better.
And when a fuel injection system fails, - oh boy...look out. The computer goes nuts and your bike ain't going anywhere.
Fuel injection is convenient if you are trading maps, but it definitely costs more...when you consider that you have to buy an inline PC type device and get it mapped everytime you change something about its a/f ratio. Not to mention when it breaks down.
Doing a carb synch is a pain too...
So I vote Fuel injection for the simple ease of maintenance and convenience...but I choose carbuerated when thinking only of the smoothness and the ride.
<!--EDIT|HayaVegas
Reason for Edit: None given...|1127518343 -->
wickedsprint
Registered
lets all go back to manually adjustable ignition timing via a lever on the left side of the engine to adjust while riding. I'll stick with EFI, helluva alot simpler than a carb.
The only reason there is fuel injection is to meet EPA standards.[/QUOTE]
Really? Then why are carbureted bike still on the market? Also my 1982 CX500T is FI and I don't recall much of any EPA regulations back then concerning motorcycles.
You still have to raise your BUSA's idle on a cold start.
[/QUOTE]
Not a big deal and only due to the bean counters at Suzuki. My old 500T doesn't have a fast idle lever, starts up at sub zero or 100+ degrees with nothing more than a push of the button. Idle is automatically held at perfection.
Fuel economy is not always better with fuel injection. In fact, its more often worse.[/QUOTE]
BWAAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Is that why a new Corvette gets better fuel economy than an old 4 banger Ford Pinto? FI keeps an optimum air/fuel ratio at all times (rpm, ambient temp, elevation, wear and tear, ect.) through the use of an ECU and multiple sensors...how does an old mechanical carb go about doing the same?
Worse fuel economy means wasted fuel and more pollution and yet you stated earlier that the only reason for FI is due to the EPA? Sounds like a bit of a contradiction doesn't it?
Havent you guys ever noticed how choppy FI is when you are diddling along in stop and go traffic? On a carbeurated bike, you can do that a lot better than a fuel injected bike...which leads me to my next statement....[/QUOTE]
Can't say I've ever noticed any choppiness in any of my 3 FI bikes. I have heard some FI models, like the old 16 bit ECU Busa's exhibit that "digital" feeling, but blame that on the designers not FI in general.
Carb bikes when tuned properly, run better.[/QUOTE]
In what ways?
And when a fuel injection system fails, - oh boy...look out. The computer goes nuts and your bike ain't going anywhere.[/QUOTE]
What?
Let's go back to my 1982 Honda CX500T which actually has a 1981 build date...older than some of the members of this board.
Scenario #1:
A single sensor fails on the bike. ECU automatically compensates with a preprogrammed value for that sensor, red FI SYSTEM light on dash is turned on, fault code is displayed on read out right on the ECU itself. BIKE CONTINUES TO RUN NORMALLY.
Scenario #2:
Harness gets cut causing a major failure of multiple sensors.
ECU goes to MAP 3 which is also known as LIMP HOME MODE.
FI light on dash turns on. Codes are displayed on side of ECU. Bike continues to run but at reduced power and turbo is not allowed to spool up.
Scenario #3:
Major malfunction such as a stuck wastegate.
Once again LIMP HOME MOD and no grenaded engine all due to the FI computer.
Fuel injection is convenient if you are trading maps, but it definitely costs more...when you consider that you have to buy an inline PC type device and get it mapped everytime you change something about its a/f ratio. Not to mention when it breaks down.[/QUOTE]
What is the price difference when you factor in labor (or your time) to tear apart FOUR carbs to rejet, then find out it's still not quite right and tear things apart again for a different set of jets and then just settle for it because you aren't about to tear it apart a 3rd time?
And why do you need a PC device to diagnose a bike that's not running? Every FI system I've run into is self diagnosing with the exception of something like a '74 Cosworth Vega with a TTL ECU for the Bendix FI.
FI all the way!
Really? Then why are carbureted bike still on the market? Also my 1982 CX500T is FI and I don't recall much of any EPA regulations back then concerning motorcycles.
You still have to raise your BUSA's idle on a cold start.
[/QUOTE]
Not a big deal and only due to the bean counters at Suzuki. My old 500T doesn't have a fast idle lever, starts up at sub zero or 100+ degrees with nothing more than a push of the button. Idle is automatically held at perfection.
Fuel economy is not always better with fuel injection. In fact, its more often worse.[/QUOTE]
BWAAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Is that why a new Corvette gets better fuel economy than an old 4 banger Ford Pinto? FI keeps an optimum air/fuel ratio at all times (rpm, ambient temp, elevation, wear and tear, ect.) through the use of an ECU and multiple sensors...how does an old mechanical carb go about doing the same?
Worse fuel economy means wasted fuel and more pollution and yet you stated earlier that the only reason for FI is due to the EPA? Sounds like a bit of a contradiction doesn't it?
Havent you guys ever noticed how choppy FI is when you are diddling along in stop and go traffic? On a carbeurated bike, you can do that a lot better than a fuel injected bike...which leads me to my next statement....[/QUOTE]
Can't say I've ever noticed any choppiness in any of my 3 FI bikes. I have heard some FI models, like the old 16 bit ECU Busa's exhibit that "digital" feeling, but blame that on the designers not FI in general.
Carb bikes when tuned properly, run better.[/QUOTE]
In what ways?
And when a fuel injection system fails, - oh boy...look out. The computer goes nuts and your bike ain't going anywhere.[/QUOTE]
What?
Scenario #1:
A single sensor fails on the bike. ECU automatically compensates with a preprogrammed value for that sensor, red FI SYSTEM light on dash is turned on, fault code is displayed on read out right on the ECU itself. BIKE CONTINUES TO RUN NORMALLY.
Scenario #2:
Harness gets cut causing a major failure of multiple sensors.
ECU goes to MAP 3 which is also known as LIMP HOME MODE.
FI light on dash turns on. Codes are displayed on side of ECU. Bike continues to run but at reduced power and turbo is not allowed to spool up.
Scenario #3:
Major malfunction such as a stuck wastegate.
Once again LIMP HOME MOD and no grenaded engine all due to the FI computer.
Fuel injection is convenient if you are trading maps, but it definitely costs more...when you consider that you have to buy an inline PC type device and get it mapped everytime you change something about its a/f ratio. Not to mention when it breaks down.[/QUOTE]
What is the price difference when you factor in labor (or your time) to tear apart FOUR carbs to rejet, then find out it's still not quite right and tear things apart again for a different set of jets and then just settle for it because you aren't about to tear it apart a 3rd time?
And why do you need a PC device to diagnose a bike that's not running? Every FI system I've run into is self diagnosing with the exception of something like a '74 Cosworth Vega with a TTL ECU for the Bendix FI.
FI all the way!
MoFoTShirts
Registered
FI all the way for me. But.... find an honest review where FI has beat a carb in peak HP, on the same engine, and that will be a first for me. (I have more of a car background, and have seen plenty of reviews, comparing the FI vs. Carb, and the carb always wins in peak HP)
Just the same can you cite a review showing a carb producing more HP over FI on the exact same engine?
My Toyota truck has the optional FI 22RE engine. The base model had the exact same engine with carb (22R). The FI engine produces 17 more HP and 11 lbs more torque...all while getting much better gas mileage.
As far as bikes go, I believe the XX saw a nice increase in performance when Honda went to FI.
Similar threads
