Carb to EFI Swap WORTH IT?
02-22-2014, 12:02 AM
#14
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Carbs can be tuned to the point where they start easy and run great. If you know how to tune a carb. I'm pro efi but have nothing against carbs. I'm of the notion if you have a carb boat keep it that way. If you have efi keep it that way. Both are great in thier own right and can accomplish the same thing
02-22-2014, 07:44 AM
#15
Registered
iTrader: (3)
Looking for some guidance
I'm currently swapping a 454 /330 with a carbureted 502 mag and both engines are out of the boat.
Would the addition of the efi kit in the]below be a good way to improve power and driveability?
One caveat is I plan on running stock manifolds and thru hull exhaust, would adding this conversion be a waste with stock exhaust and or would I risk reversion?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]518320[/ATTACH
THANKS
I'm currently swapping a 454 /330 with a carbureted 502 mag and both engines are out of the boat.
Would the addition of the efi kit in the]below be a good way to improve power and driveability?
One caveat is I plan on running stock manifolds and thru hull exhaust, would adding this conversion be a waste with stock exhaust and or would I risk reversion?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]518320[/ATTACH
THANKS
If stock, smooth running, reliable, is you're thing, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by the mannerisms of the 502/390HP carb engine. Really not much less docile than a stock 330 454.
02-22-2014, 08:05 AM
#16
Registered
iTrader: (3)
Carbs can be tuned to the point where they start easy and run great. If you know how to tune a carb. I'm pro efi but have nothing against carbs. I'm of the notion if you have a carb boat keep it that way. If you have efi keep it that way. Both are great in thier own right and can accomplish the same thing
Heres a good example. I owned a Stock 1978 Trans Am (400CID), a stock 1976 Cadillac Coupe Deville (500CID), and a couple others similar. I can tell you that, on any cold morning, in that Caddy, two pumps of the accelerator, and a flip of the key, she was running. She ran smooth, didn't sputter cough, or stall. Sure it went into high idle, and you let it warm up a minute before kicking it down and driving off, but that was the norm. Now, what baffles me, is both of those vehicles I owned, were about as aerodynamic as a Fuking BRICK. The Cadillac weighed about as much as todays SUVs. Yet, somehow, that caddy, my stock Trans Am, with dinosaur smog engines, and carburetors, and BIG cubic inches, got better fukin economy on a road trip, than my new modern sophisticated hemi Jeep, that drops cylinders in eco mode. And almost as good as my modern Lincoln on a road trip. My 78 Trans Am, when bone stock, had a log book, of every time the car was filled with gas, the miles were noted, and the MPG were hand calculated, since it was brand new. (My uncle bought it new and is super anal). That car AVERAGED between 15-19mpg per tank of gas both hwy and city. Now, keep in mind, that was a 1978 400CI carbed engine, with a HEI ignition. No modern EFI, Engine management systems, ECO modes, Cylinder dropping, or any of that stuff. Hell, they had flat tappet cams, awful emissons systems, 3spd transmissions, etc. I find it ridiculous, that my 5.7 Hemi Jeep, cannot even get that kind of mileage, and its 30+ years newer.
I guess the point I am trying to make, is carbs aren't as bad on fuel as most think. Sure, if they are out of tune, they will waste fuel. But generally speaking, they can be efficient, and support gobs of HP. While they are no where near as good as EFI, they still have a place, and can work well for most boaters.
02-22-2014, 08:41 AM
#18
Registered
iTrader: (2)
I feel the same way. I wont argue EFI is awesome, and for sure is where the future is in fuel delivery. But I disagree with some posts regarding carbs lately. I am not old by any means, prob younger than most of you guys. But I grew up owning old cars from the 70's, hanging around with the gear head guys, working on cars, and of course doing the HI perf boating thing for a while now. These days, people here you have a ''carbed" engine, and right aways its "dinosaur" and fouls plugs, gets horrific fuel mileage, hard to start, and plain old runs like crap.
Heres a good example. I owned a Stock 1978 Trans Am (400CID), a stock 1976 Cadillac Coupe Deville (500CID), and a couple others similar. I can tell you that, on any cold morning, in that Caddy, two pumps of the accelerator, and a flip of the key, she was running. She ran smooth, didn't sputter cough, or stall. Sure it went into high idle, and you let it warm up a minute before kicking it down and driving off, but that was the norm. Now, what baffles me, is both of those vehicles I owned, were about as aerodynamic as a Fuking BRICK. The Cadillac weighed about as much as todays SUVs. Yet, somehow, that caddy, my stock Trans Am, with dinosaur smog engines, and carburetors, and BIG cubic inches, got better fukin economy on a road trip, than my new modern sophisticated hemi Jeep, that drops cylinders in eco mode. And almost as good as my modern Lincoln on a road trip. My 78 Trans Am, when bone stock, had a log book, of every time the car was filled with gas, the miles were noted, and the MPG were hand calculated, since it was brand new. (My uncle bought it new and is super anal). That car AVERAGED between 15-19mpg per tank of gas both hwy and city. Now, keep in mind, that was a 1978 400CI carbed engine, with a HEI ignition. No modern EFI, Engine management systems, ECO modes, Cylinder dropping, or any of that stuff. Hell, they had flat tappet cams, awful emissons systems, 3spd transmissions, etc. I find it ridiculous, that my 5.7 Hemi Jeep, cannot even get that kind of mileage, and its 30+ years newer.
I guess the point I am trying to make, is carbs aren't as bad on fuel as most think. Sure, if they are out of tune, they will waste fuel. But generally speaking, they can be efficient, and support gobs of HP. While they are no where near as good as EFI, they still have a place, and can work well for most boaters.
Heres a good example. I owned a Stock 1978 Trans Am (400CID), a stock 1976 Cadillac Coupe Deville (500CID), and a couple others similar. I can tell you that, on any cold morning, in that Caddy, two pumps of the accelerator, and a flip of the key, she was running. She ran smooth, didn't sputter cough, or stall. Sure it went into high idle, and you let it warm up a minute before kicking it down and driving off, but that was the norm. Now, what baffles me, is both of those vehicles I owned, were about as aerodynamic as a Fuking BRICK. The Cadillac weighed about as much as todays SUVs. Yet, somehow, that caddy, my stock Trans Am, with dinosaur smog engines, and carburetors, and BIG cubic inches, got better fukin economy on a road trip, than my new modern sophisticated hemi Jeep, that drops cylinders in eco mode. And almost as good as my modern Lincoln on a road trip. My 78 Trans Am, when bone stock, had a log book, of every time the car was filled with gas, the miles were noted, and the MPG were hand calculated, since it was brand new. (My uncle bought it new and is super anal). That car AVERAGED between 15-19mpg per tank of gas both hwy and city. Now, keep in mind, that was a 1978 400CI carbed engine, with a HEI ignition. No modern EFI, Engine management systems, ECO modes, Cylinder dropping, or any of that stuff. Hell, they had flat tappet cams, awful emissons systems, 3spd transmissions, etc. I find it ridiculous, that my 5.7 Hemi Jeep, cannot even get that kind of mileage, and its 30+ years newer.
I guess the point I am trying to make, is carbs aren't as bad on fuel as most think. Sure, if they are out of tune, they will waste fuel. But generally speaking, they can be efficient, and support gobs of HP. While they are no where near as good as EFI, they still have a place, and can work well for most boaters.
Last weekend I took a 1100 mile round trip in my 06 Tacoma with the wife and kid. We averaged 21mpg. About 15 years prior my father and I made the same trip (same route) in his 65 Impala SS and averaged 30mpg. Go figure a 327/300 hp 2spd powerglide boat with no overdrive got 9 more mpg. Than my 4.0 truck with 2 overdriven gears. I guess technology and efi has alot of catching up to do. Oh yeah the Impala was all stock with points ignition. It's a damb shame we pay all this money for stuff today and it can't out perform stuff from 30-40 years ago...
02-22-2014, 08:52 AM
#20
Registered
iTrader: (3)
Last weekend I took a 1100 mile round trip in my 06 Tacoma with the wife and kid. We averaged 21mpg. About 15 years prior my father and I made the same trip (same route) in his 65 Impala SS and averaged 30mpg. Go figure a 327/300 hp 2spd powerglide boat with no overdrive got 9 more mpg. Than my 4.0 truck with 2 overdriven gears. I guess technology and efi has alot of catching up to do. Oh yeah the Impala was all stock with points ignition. It's a damb shame we pay all this money for stuff today and it can't out perform stuff from 30-40 years ago...
I
