Not actually a rich mixture, rather the charge density is so low it
won't burn properly -- high CO and high unburned hydrocarbons from the
very high manifold vacuum (and hence very low combustion chamber
pressure -- usually below atmospheric).
The slow close throttle prevents some of the
No, that's for CO control on decel, I think -- certainly it was true on
the 75 Audi that had plain K-Jet. KE-Jet won't have the problem
since the mixture is controlled closer.
Peter
Peter Frederick wrote:
No, that's for CO control on decel, I think -- certainly it was true on
the 75 Audi that had plain K-Jet.
I'm thinking we might be saying the same thing in different ways.
Wouldn't an excessively rich mixture cause high CO?
I'm slowly expanding my knowledge of CIS
Yup, D-Jet.
K-Jet DOES have a very short lag due to the need to pull the flap open, but
I've never had any problems with that. If that bothers you, DON'T get a
diesel! You have to use more pedal to get moving yet!
LH-Jet and similar systems respond faster, but the lurch forward at full
Peter Frederick wrote:
K-Jet DOES have a very short lag due to the need to pull the flap open, but
I've never had any problems with that.
Is the inverse of that effect why some K-Jet cars have a device to
prevent the throttle plate from snapping closed suddenly when you lift
off the
: Saturday, February 11, 2006 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] Four barrel enthusiast
I like it too, although people seem to treat it like it's some sort of
deep, dark magic. It's basically a carburator, but spread out all over
the engine. ;) It really is quite an ingenious system once you figure
it out
LH-jet is a later derivative of D-Jet -- uses a hall effect pickup for
injection timing and fires individual injectors instead of pairs, and
has a mass flow sensor rather than a pressure sensor. The actual
delivery guts were pretty much the same up to about 1993. Benz
started using it in 93
Agreed, CIS is better, just not that much smarter, i.e. it doesn't
analyze variables, then meter accordingly. Other than the cold start
circuit, it doesn't do much other than meter according to airflow in
the intake--much like a carburetor. I like CIS, sort of.
On 2/10/06, Peter Frederick
Certain Porsches and VW type 2 vehicles used L-jet, or AFC injection.
I think it might have been the last analog-based electrical injection
Bosch produced. Fairly robust, but the airflow meters were prone to
failure if the engine ever backfired.
On 2/10/06, Kaleb C. Striplin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zeitgeist wrote:
Agreed, CIS is better, just not that much smarter, i.e. it doesn't
analyze variables, then meter accordingly. Other than the cold start
circuit, it doesn't do much other than meter according to airflow in
the intake--much like a carburetor. I like CIS, sort of.
I like it
Peter Frederick wrote:
LH-jet is a later derivative of D-Jet -- uses a hall effect pickup for
injection timing and fires individual injectors instead of pairs, and
has a mass flow sensor rather than a pressure sensor. The actual
delivery guts were pretty much the same up to about 1993. Benz
10:26 AM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] Four barrel enthusiast
LH-jet is a later derivative of D-Jet -- uses a hall effect pickup for
injection timing and fires individual injectors instead of pairs, and
has a mass flow sensor rather than a pressure sensor. The actual
delivery guts were pretty much the same
I am not able to find that SLC listing from CL anymore, but the fellow
called and has dropped price to $3k instead of $4500. Nice blue car,
euro lights with heated seats.
Anybody interested, I will dig further.
On Friday, February 10, 2006, at 09:18 AM, andrew strasfogel wrote:
Yeah, and
Hendrik Riessen wrote:
It was never as popular as K-jet due to reliability and complexity, Swedish
bricks used the K-jet as well in some of their vehicles.
In particular, Volvo 240 Turbos were K-Jet.
No need for an acceleration pump, for instance, should tell you a lot.
I've always blamed our SLs' lack of instant acceleration (What, ME?
response to a throttle stab) on the lack of an accelerator pump
mechanism. (They are the only gasser FI cars we own. The rest are
carbs or diesels. All
740 turbos were LH-Jet though -- I know, I fixed my sisters.
Peter
Yeah, I've heard from several sources about the lack of throttle
response of MB EFI systems. Not true on the 280 SE 4.5 -- that one
dumps out black smoke from extra fuel (you also get 10% enrichment at
full throttle, not an inducment to thrifty driving).
I think it's much more a matter of
Yeah, I've heard from several sources about the lack of throttle
response of MB EFI systems. Not true on the 280 SE 4.5 -- that one
dumps out black smoke from extra fuel (you also get 10% enrichment at
full throttle, not an inducment to thrifty driving).
That's the D-Jet system, right?
I
On Friday, February 10, 2006, at 08:42 PM, Hendrik Riessen wrote:
It was never as popular as K-jet due to reliability and complexity,
Swedish
bricks used the K-jet as well in some of their vehicles.
As did Porsche and Datsun/Nissan IIRC.
Johnny B.
I Mac Therefore I am
John Berryman wrote:
On Friday, February 10, 2006, at 08:42 PM, Hendrik Riessen wrote:
It was never as popular as K-jet due to reliability and complexity,
Swedish
bricks used the K-jet as well in some of their vehicles.
As did Porsche and Datsun/Nissan IIRC.
Also DeLorean, I
No, that's exactly my point! Those crazy Europeans with their weird little
fuel-injected engines at the wrong end of the car! A carbureted V-8 ought
to have been good enough for anyone in 1968.
Spoken like a a true Pontiac Bonneville owner. Also, 1968 was the first year
for emission control,
CIS injection (more effective mixture control than D-Jet) is good for
at least 10% more hp and 15% better fuel milage on the same engine as a
carb. Unless you have a fairly esoteric manifold system (hard to put
under a hood), carbs provide pretty poor atomization, and suffer badly
from lousy
One would think so, but why did I get in the 20's mpg in the 283
(4640cc) '58 chevy with a four barrel, and only 15 mpg in the CIS
450SLC (275ci)? Emission controls?
Yes - the type III 2.0L VW bus I had was far more reliable than the
1.2L with the single Solex even.
I did love to tune 2 and 3
Yeah, and my CIS 450 SLC got 12-15 mpg tops!
On 2/9/06, OK Don [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One would think so, but why did I get in the 20's mpg in the 283
(4640cc) '58 chevy with a four barrel, and only 15 mpg in the CIS
450SLC (275ci)? Emission controls?
Yes - the type III 2.0L VW bus I had
Peter Frederick wrote:
CIS injection (more effective mixture control than D-Jet) is good for
at least 10% more hp and 15% better fuel milage on the same engine as a
carb. Unless you have a fairly esoteric manifold system (hard to put
under a hood), carbs provide pretty poor atomization, and
CIS isn't a whole lot smarter than a carburetor, but it is simple
and relatively easy to diagnose. D-jet is a cruel joke, but I
actually like L-jet for its simplicity.
On 2/10/06, David Brodbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My personal experience with open-loop fuel injection (systems without a
Yeah, and my CIS 450 SLC got 12-15 mpg tops!
I think our SL has hit 17 a time or two, but 14-15 is normal IIRC.
-- Jim
Easy: 2.76 rear end gears in the 58 chevy and 3.55 rear end gears in
the Benz. The Chevy also produces somewhat less hp and torque.
Emission controls on the later (post 74) SLC also cause serious fuel
milage penalties.
Peter
I beg to differ -- K-Jet is MUCH better at fuel metering than a carb --
the variation in mixture as throttle varies is much less. The fact
that the injectors are placed for maximum dispersion and no intake with
fuel/air mix running through it make all the difference in the world.
No need for
what uses L-jet? Not familiar with that.
Zeitgeist wrote:
CIS isn't a whole lot smarter than a carburetor, but it is simple
and relatively easy to diagnose. D-jet is a cruel joke, but I
actually like L-jet for its simplicity.
On 2/10/06, David Brodbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My personal
30 matches
Mail list logo
