Does Fuel Injection really give that much of an advantage?

directinjection · 3rd May 2006, 15:33

One only has to look at watches to realise the benefits of electronics - so much more accuracy and actually less expensive to buy - compared to the conventional mechanical watches.

I remember reading about a famous comment (can't recall who made it) which went something like this:

If research and development in the car industry had matched the progress made in the manufacture of watches (thanks to electronics) then today, a new Rolls Royce would have been costing a 100 Pounds and giving a mileage of 120 KMs per litre of fuel!

(I remember the comment only vaguely and so the actual statement might be varying.)

So, the benefits of FI probably outweigh the higher cost and hassles they come with.

Zappo · 3rd May 2006, 16:37

There is another advantage here. Carbs always meant fixed setting. Its almost like hard-coding something (techies/programmers will know what I am saying). Thus if the environmental factors changed drastically one had a problem in hand. For example, if you drove your car to somewhere in the higher altitudes (hills)... The FI and ECU combine with their sensors manage to negate such problems to a big extent.

DRC · 3rd May 2006, 16:54

If an industry standard comes into place for the ECUs, and they become generic, soon they will become as cheap or cheaper than the carbs,

Remember, cost of a elctronic gizmo lies in hidden info...when this is cracked, they are dirt cheap,

A regular PC, you have at home is much more complex than an ECU, but is really cheap.

nitinbhag · 3rd May 2006, 20:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steeroid

You've got the drift, viper. I dont think I have questioned the benefits of FI - what was intended was a cost-benefit analysis, and most of you will agree that the costs associated with an FI engine are much higher than that with a carb-based engine.

And when repairs are required, as in Nitin's case, they are usually very expensive.

Exactly, the poll was about ease and cost of ownership where carbs score way over FI..

Till today I have spent 6K, 6 weeks, cost of towing twice, 2 garages, 2K worth of petrol for testing, etc.. The verdict after all the exercise is still 'change ECU'.. costs 15K.. spare not available in town

I guess, everybody would vote for FI till their ECUs fail..

All the technology orgasm has made us (manufacturers, dealers, users) blind to the KISS (keep it simple, stupid) principle which is basic to any field of engineering. Good carbs can be tuned for efficiency, power, emissions.

JKD, whats the point of living if you dont get grease on your hands?

DRC · 3rd May 2006, 20:57

I would say, once bitten twice shy! No offence meant, I was also in the same boat when I bought Fiat.

Remember, we all get used to ECUs some day, it becomes our second nature. then a new env rules comes in, new technology to replace ECUs, Then I am sure we all feel, good old ECUs what was wrong with them, they were so easy to tune,

.. This is life dude...

Old time were good, you enjoyed it, today should be better. In the process some make money. Sad but true!

rdkarthik · 3rd May 2006, 21:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRC

If an industry standard comes into place for the ECUs, and they become generic, soon they will become as cheap or cheaper than the carbs,

Remember, cost of a elctronic gizmo lies in hidden info...when this is cracked, they are dirt cheap,

A regular PC, you have at home is much more complex than an ECU, but is really cheap.

True... The most expensive part of an ecu is its firmware (including maps). So till we get to a point when we have a common ecu platform and when ecu software piracy is inevitable, we cant help but pay the premimum for it

.

DRC · 4th May 2006, 12:22

BTW, do you know when mfrs say 32 bit processor, 16 bit processors etc, what is the processor they are using, do you think 32 bit proc they mean an intel pentium?

..

Many a times it would be a cheaply available RISC processor like Hitachi, whose development kit is available for as less as 1500 bucks including software..
Sorry to get into too tech details...

DRC · 4th May 2006, 12:37

Any techies in this forum worked on ECUs' software..(Robert bosch, delphi)?

RX135 · 4th May 2006, 12:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRC

Remember, we all get used to ECUs some day, it becomes our second nature. then a new env rules comes in, new technology to replace ECUs, Then I am sure we all feel, good old ECUs what was wrong with them, they were so easy to tune,

.. This is life dude...

Old time were good, you enjoyed it, today should be better. In the process some make money. Sad but true!

Bang on target, DRC! One can't put it across any better than that.

rdkarthik · 4th May 2006, 17:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRC

Many a times it would be a cheaply available RISC processor like Hitachi, whose development kit is available for as less as 1500 bucks including software..

You probably mean in dollars. If not its most likely a demo board for an extremely low-spec processor

.. To get a higher-end RISC processor to work, you have tons of overheads. The software development suite itself would cost a couple of lakhs. Have been into ecu development myself, and have dealt with quite a few chip and development tool vendors, and i can say is its definetly not cheap.

DRC · 4th May 2006, 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdkarthik

You probably mean in dollars. If not its most likely a demo board for an extremely low-spec processor

.. To get a higher-end RISC processor to work, you have tons of overheads. The software development suite itself would cost a couple of lakhs. Have been into ecu development myself, and have dealt with quite a few chip and development tool vendors, and i can say is its definetly not cheap.

No, I meant, a 32 bit 40MHz processors..~1500INR and yes development demo kits, with real hardware.. Those are what are used in ECU

And yes, High end RISC procs are very expensive. No way they are using present gen PPC in ECUs. FYI, I work on them

DRC · 5th May 2006, 14:12

Check this link out

http://www.bgsoflex.com/megasquirt.html

Interesting..?

DRC · 5th May 2006, 15:57

An other advantage of ECUs is to switch between the modes, say economy mode, sport mode, just by changing the look up tables,

I think this feature was there in some car for the tranny, (Is it Opel?), and this could be for the engine too...

Imagine, drive in city mode with a lot of torque at low end, inside teh city, and then when you are on the highway just flip a switch to change to highway mode to zoom away. and you do not have to stop or pop the hood.

These can be done, for some reason, mfrs don't want to give those to us?

Psycho · 5th May 2006, 16:10

Well all these features are available with the aftermarket ECU's. The market today does not require a manufacturer to even be compliant to OBD2 for a user of a car to realise what is wrong with their cars based on the fault codes however worldwide OBD 2 is becoming mandatory. This could help consumers.

But at the same time access to modify ECU's are still limited to chip burning and tweaks. So if one feels the need to have a better control over their vehicle it is always better to have an aftermarket ECU / Piggyback unit connected to control the car.

greatmana2000 · 5th May 2006, 17:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by directinjection

When Indica was launched, its petrol version came fitted with a carburettor and developed (if I remember correctly) 60 or so BHP. When Indica 2000 was launched in 2000 with an MPFI version of the same engine, the power went up to 75 and then again to 85 in the Indigo/Cityrover version. The increase in power was obtained while still retaining the two-valves-per-cylinder configuration. So, it is probably wrong to attribute Esteem's power hike only to the four-valve set up.

I agree to this ,having more valves does not really change things ,its just a marketing hype ,infact ,more valves =more moving parts which inturn consume more energy ,more incidence of failures etc ...

View Poll Results: Is Fuel Injection really such a great boon?
Yes, we're much better off without carbs and mechanical induction.	39	90.70%
No, carbs were cheaper to own, maintain and tune and gave us similar power and FE.	4	9.30%
Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll

3rd May 2006, 15:33	#31
directinjection Senior - BHPian Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Faridabad/Delhi Posts: 1,704 Thanked: 780 Times	One only has to look at watches to realise the benefits of electronics - so much more accuracy and actually less expensive to buy - compared to the conventional mechanical watches. I remember reading about a famous comment (can't recall who made it) which went something like this: If research and development in the car industry had matched the progress made in the manufacture of watches (thanks to electronics) then today, a new Rolls Royce would have been costing a 100 Pounds and giving a mileage of 120 KMs per litre of fuel! (I remember the comment only vaguely and so the actual statement might be varying.) So, the benefits of FI probably outweigh the higher cost and hassles they come with. Last edited by directinjection : 3rd May 2006 at 15:35.
	() Thanks

3rd May 2006, 16:37	#32
Zappo Team-BHP Support Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Hyderabad Posts: 5,922 Thanked: 2,699 Times	There is another advantage here. Carbs always meant fixed setting. Its almost like hard-coding something (techies/programmers will know what I am saying). Thus if the environmental factors changed drastically one had a problem in hand. For example, if you drove your car to somewhere in the higher altitudes (hills)... The FI and ECU combine with their sensors manage to negate such problems to a big extent.
	() Thanks

3rd May 2006, 16:54	#33
DRC BHPian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cockpit Posts: 911 Thanked: 64 Times View My Garage	If an industry standard comes into place for the ECUs, and they become generic, soon they will become as cheap or cheaper than the carbs, Remember, cost of a elctronic gizmo lies in hidden info...when this is cracked, they are dirt cheap, A regular PC, you have at home is much more complex than an ECU, but is really cheap.
	() Thanks

3rd May 2006, 20:57	#35
DRC BHPian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cockpit Posts: 911 Thanked: 64 Times View My Garage	I would say, once bitten twice shy! No offence meant, I was also in the same boat when I bought Fiat. Remember, we all get used to ECUs some day, it becomes our second nature. then a new env rules comes in, new technology to replace ECUs, Then I am sure we all feel, good old ECUs what was wrong with them, they were so easy to tune, .. This is life dude... Old time were good, you enjoyed it, today should be better. In the process some make money. Sad but true!
	() Thanks

4th May 2006, 12:22	#37
DRC BHPian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cockpit Posts: 911 Thanked: 64 Times View My Garage	BTW, do you know when mfrs say 32 bit processor, 16 bit processors etc, what is the processor they are using, do you think 32 bit proc they mean an intel pentium? .. Many a times it would be a cheaply available RISC processor like Hitachi, whose development kit is available for as less as 1500 bucks including software.. Sorry to get into too tech details... Last edited by DRC : 4th May 2006 at 12:31.
	() Thanks

4th May 2006, 12:37	#38
DRC BHPian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cockpit Posts: 911 Thanked: 64 Times View My Garage	Any techies in this forum worked on ECUs' software..(Robert bosch, delphi)?
	() Thanks

5th May 2006, 14:12	#42
DRC BHPian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cockpit Posts: 911 Thanked: 64 Times View My Garage	Check this link out http://www.bgsoflex.com/megasquirt.html Interesting..?
	() Thanks

5th May 2006, 15:57	#43
DRC BHPian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cockpit Posts: 911 Thanked: 64 Times View My Garage	An other advantage of ECUs is to switch between the modes, say economy mode, sport mode, just by changing the look up tables, I think this feature was there in some car for the tranny, (Is it Opel?), and this could be for the engine too... Imagine, drive in city mode with a lot of torque at low end, inside teh city, and then when you are on the highway just flip a switch to change to highway mode to zoom away. and you do not have to stop or pop the hood. These can be done, for some reason, mfrs don't want to give those to us?
	() Thanks

5th May 2006, 16:10	#44
Psycho Senior - BHPian Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Bangalore Posts: 1,043 Thanked: 110 Times View My Garage	Well all these features are available with the aftermarket ECU's. The market today does not require a manufacturer to even be compliant to OBD2 for a user of a car to realise what is wrong with their cars based on the fault codes however worldwide OBD 2 is becoming mandatory. This could help consumers. But at the same time access to modify ECU's are still limited to chip burning and tweaks. So if one feels the need to have a better control over their vehicle it is always better to have an aftermarket ECU / Piggyback unit connected to control the car.
	() Thanks