Coming Soon
Home > Forum


Author Topic: Direct Injection - for and against  (Read 22541 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Recovered

  • Guest
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #15 on: January 11, 2010, 09:09:06 AM »
In case I wasn't perfectly clear on the issue...I'm AGAINST DI and EFI for single cylinder 2T dirt bikes. 8)

Sorry for the confusion :P

Offline Out of Order

  • Expert
  • ****
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #16 on: January 11, 2010, 09:26:23 AM »
Quote
And guys have their bikes smoking all the time, spooge running out the pipe like Niagara Falls and people SEE this.
Oh man, that's a good one. ;D

Quote
you guys whose bikes smoke like Cheech and Chong on a blow out party day
WTF????? :o Now that was too much. I almost died when I read that, maybe I should put the joint down. LOL!! :-X


Offline MMS

  • Intermediate
  • ***
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #17 on: January 11, 2010, 09:28:54 AM »
I'm a bit confused why you continually refer to DI and EFI together when they are two completely seperate entities.

EFI is just another method of putting the fuel into a "conventional" engine (for want of a better word), whereas "direct injection" is a completely different type of engine and in many respects warrants little comparison with what we are familiar with as a two stroke.

It does however still retain many of the characteristics that I love of the two-stroke, light weight, relative simplicity (yes even the DI ones), cheaper manufacture, noise, easier and cheaper re-builds, etc, etc.

EFI is an alternative method of fueling.
DI is an alternative type of 2-stroke.

So by knocking DI you are in effect knocking the very engines which we are on here to support?

Offline meger z

  • Expert
  • ****
  • Posts: 133
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #18 on: January 11, 2010, 10:58:21 AM »
diesel engines are DI and have been for years the intake valves just let air into the cylinder . 

Offline MMS

  • Intermediate
  • ***
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #19 on: January 11, 2010, 01:09:39 PM »
diesel engines are DI and have been for years 

Indeed, and they can achieve a thermal efficiency in excess of 50%, which is more than twice that of the average 4 stroke petrol engine.

So the principle of DI is sound and proven elsewhere. It's the Japanese domination which is slowing it's take up in the two-wheeled world but hopefully it will get there eventually.

Offline 2smoker

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 807
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #20 on: January 11, 2010, 01:58:14 PM »
Guys! I see DI 2 stroke  everywhere here in the Winter and the ski-doos sound really good! just a bit less pop-corn. Oh well! the guys put aftermarket pipes and the thing frigging scream still! and the thing is just bad-ass and has power everywhere..You guys worry way 2 much lol
Formula over substance will ALWAYS sell more.

Recovered

  • Guest
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #21 on: January 11, 2010, 02:10:37 PM »
I refer to EFI and DI at the same time because I don't like either on a SINGLE CYLINDER 2 STROKE DIRT BIKE.

Sorry, I have never seen the internal combustion engine that is more than about 30% efficient, regardless of DI or fuel used. ICE's are NOT thermally efficient.

Explain to me how the clutches and transmissions work in a snowmobile. Then we can discuss it.

Offline Out of Order

  • Expert
  • ****
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #22 on: January 11, 2010, 03:23:16 PM »
Quote
Explain to me how the clutches and transmissions work in a snowmobile. Then we can discuss it.
Snowmobiles has a transmission? I thought they didn't. I'm no snowmobile guy so some explanation on this would be good. Don't they run off a CVT type clutch to go so fast. I hear these things are rockets in the snow.

Offline JETZcorp

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Life, Liberty, and Horsepower
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #23 on: January 11, 2010, 03:30:05 PM »
You say that DI can't fix stupid.  Well, when stupid is causing smoke, and the DI just flat out *does not* put fuel into the cylinder until the exhaust is closed... well there you go.  It's not going to fix stupid, but I think it'll put a pretty good set of training wheels on stupid.  Stupid will easily be able to mess up the bike's power, but it won't be able to mess up the bike's emissions as easily, I think.  How many people have a poorly-tuned carbed two-stroke that spews smoke?  Everyone!  Including me!  How many poorly-tuned E-Tec engines have you seen spewing smoke?  QED.

I'm still not solid on either method, but it seems to me that on the emissions angle, a carb would be harder to screw up on.  But of course, I don't know much of anything about 3-circuit carbs, and haven't been keeping up in the Technical section.


Is this Maico a 440 or only a 400?  Well in all the confusion, I forgot myself.
But considering this is a 1978 Magnum, the best-handling bike in the world, you have to ask yourself one question.
Do you feel lucky, punk?

Offline 2smoker

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 807
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #24 on: January 11, 2010, 04:11:17 PM »
Guys.. Ski Doo Rev XP is pretty much the king of the sled world right now. Lighter, better fuel consumption, DI 2 stroke engine..

This is how a stocker sounds like... Almost no smoke.. the sled is indoor.. Like I said, there is less pop-corn sound to it...

08 MXZ Rev XP 800R for Sale

I like my 2 stroke but I also like the environment... I'll go in details later about the tranny and engine.

This is the same sled racing against a bigger displacement Yamaha 4 stroke... The video speak by itself..

Ski-Doo RevXP 800R vs Yamaha Apex RTX...


This is a Non-Di 2 smoker against a DI one. Same displacement. :-* The DI is on the right...  The technology works really good! but they want you to buy 4 junk instead!!
2008 800 MXZ X REV XP vs 2002 800 MXZ X
« Last Edit: January 11, 2010, 04:27:41 PM by 2smoker »
Formula over substance will ALWAYS sell more.

Offline ford832

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 1532
  • I PITY THE FOOL THAT RIDES A FOURSTROKE
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #25 on: January 11, 2010, 04:29:44 PM »
DI and EFI are the same cat's kitten.DI isn't a different type of 2t.Both describe a method fuel delivery-injection.EFI in the intake of a 4t,DI in the cylinder of a 2t.
I'd rather a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal lobotomy.

Recovered

  • Guest
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #26 on: January 11, 2010, 05:10:15 PM »
Like I said, a snowmobile ain't a dirt bike, no matter how hard you push for the comparison. I have not ridden a "snowmobile" (for various reasons) but I was required to work on them. It's like saying the Evinrude system will work on a dirt bike. It's a dam sight easier to make a trolling motor on a fishing boat work than a dirt bike.
As for the environment...I'll just say this. If you think the 2T is killing the planet you are sadly mistaken. I'll stop here because it goes into the area of education/indoctrination and many will get all butt hurt on me.

Offline ford832

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 1532
  • I PITY THE FOOL THAT RIDES A FOURSTROKE
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #27 on: January 11, 2010, 05:45:33 PM »
According to the epa we must be.My last chainsaw had a catalytic muffler until it "disappeared"to be replaced by an older version.Most new stihls even have the high speed circuit fixed.
I'd rather a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal lobotomy.

Offline JETZcorp

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Life, Liberty, and Horsepower
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #28 on: January 11, 2010, 11:08:37 PM »
It's obvious that the two-stroke isn't the root of all environmental evil, but that doesn't exactly mean it's doing cleansing work, either.  I'd like to hear the Mad Scientist explanation for the blue haze that hovers over cities in SE Asia, which was notably reduced when the government decided that 4T was the law.

And don't think JETZ is getting soft here, because I should note that this move utterly destroyed the local economy, as no one could afford the maintenance or the "upgrade" itself, in spite of being forced to do so.  The EnviroFit solution, which retrofitted the 2T to DI, proved not only to be cheaper than a regular 2T in the long run (fuel savings) but also cleaner than a 4T.  But the fact remains, the old conventional 2T left a haze, the DI and 4T did not, or at least not to nearly the same extent.

HOWEVER!!!  I think this point might actually be mute in the future.  I present to thee, the future of fuel, algae!  All the carbon in algae-based fuels must first be sucked out of the atmosphere, making an algae fuel (in theory) carbon-neutral.  And because the raw product is virtually identical to crude, your resulting fuel is nearly identical as well, meaning that no modification of the engine is required.  Above everything else, I think this path should be pursued most vigorously, because it would put an end to 100% of these little fuel usage and emissions debates.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm rather passionate about the algae.

FUEL Preview - Algae


Is this Maico a 440 or only a 400?  Well in all the confusion, I forgot myself.
But considering this is a 1978 Magnum, the best-handling bike in the world, you have to ask yourself one question.
Do you feel lucky, punk?

Offline MMS

  • Intermediate
  • ***
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: Direct Injection - for and against
« Reply #29 on: January 12, 2010, 12:57:33 AM »
DI and EFI are the same cat's kitten.DI isn't a different type of 2t.Both describe a method fuel delivery-injection.EFI in the intake of a 4t,DI in the cylinder of a 2t.

Sorry, should have made it plainer. I differentiate the two from the point of view that ANY engine whatsoever with a carb can be fuel injected. Only an engine designed for direct injection can be directly injected as it must be super-charged or in the case of the Di-Tec Aprilia fitted with an air-compressor to injected the combustion air into the engine.

For this reason I consider DI as much an engine design principle as a fuelling system.