Not to start a new thread on a topic that has been much discussed and bunches of information can be found by a search in the archives, but to summarize for the new builders, at the risk of over simplifying:
Fuel injection is the cats meow for a combustion engine. It solves all kinds of problems with intake design, fuel atomization, balanced mixture delivery, light weight engines, and so on... The problems with using these systems on an airplane come in 2 basic parts: 1) is the complexity of installing it by a person who is not thoroughly familiar with its design, so that he understands how critical the small details are in the installation, like how using just a different temp thermostat in the engine (water cooled setup) changes the way the computer controls things. Or the absence of a transmission, and catalytic converter/muffler assemblies changes cylinder dilution, and also has a negative effect on EGR operation due to reduced flow (ALL modern fuel injected engines use some form of Exhaust Gas Recirculation to reduce NOX emissions, and control detonation). 2) the difficulty of developing a light weight but strong PSRU, light weight cooling systems that are adequate, and having light weight but redundant systems to protect against failure are a huge challenge for the average builder. There are successful systems which I applaud, but most are expensive, and without the whole engine package being designed to maximize the injection system, are much more expensive than they are worth for just a smooth running engine. It is not an acceptance issue. Most builders acknowledge that it is better. It is the facts of an economical and safe alternative to systems that function without even electricity. I TOTALLY love modern electronic engines. But the thought of what would have happened the other day when leaving Massey Ranch Airpark and its 4000 foot long strip, which put me over the trees at 100 feet and no where to land, if I had lost my engine due to the one in a million electronic glitch, or the high pressure fuel pump failed causing total power loss, it is not if I would have crashed but where and how bad. It is not if it is good or not, but how it fails. Most builders don't understand how it works well enough to adapt it with the proper amount of support systems to make the takeoff failure not happen. If you have to take your car to a mechanic to do more than change the oil, because you don't know how to work on it, there is your answer for whether or not you should put such a system in your plane. No offense meant to anyone. I just know that I have worked on fuel injected cars for over 15 years, and WHEN I do install such a system into my plane, it will NOT just be a bolt-on setup. It is a major undertaking and should be treated as such. The KISS method works for most pilots because it is easy to install and get right, easy to maintain, and easy to troubleshoot when they have the inevitable problems that come with all things mechanical. For more discussion search the archives. There have been many threads on the topic, to include and extended one between Scott Cable and myself contrasting auto vs. aviation engines. FLY SAFE! Colin & Beverly Rainey Apex Lending, Inc. 407-323-6960 (p) 407-557-3260 (f) www.eloan2004cr.com crai...@apexlending.com
