Jump to content
Check your account email address ×

2019 artic cAt preedictions!!!111


Rod

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, f7ben said:

sure...SDI injects somewhere other than directly in the cylinder.....hence why its called SDI :lol: 

Correct so now you agree Polaris CFI is NOT DI :thumbsup: it does not inject into the cylinder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kev144 said:

I don't think Ben ever said polaris cfi was direct injection :dunno: 

Yes your right but he said that CFI Polaris sleds inject fuel into the top of the cylinder which would make it DI,,,,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HSR said:

Yes your right but he said that CFI Polaris sleds inject fuel into the top of the cylinder which would make it DI,,,,

I quoted from Snowtech magazine that said they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HSR said:

Well there's your first mistake lol

:lol: Cat has injectors on thee CTEC injecting directly into the cylinder bore and it is called a Semi Direct Inject design

There is significant confusion in the vernacular surrounding how these systems are defined. Maybe they should be also broken down into HPDI and LPDI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, f7ben said:

Arctic Cat C-TEC2 600 Cutaway

The point is, those injectors are firing into the cylinder. NOT the combustion chamber or top of the cylinder.  Which are ABOVE the exhaust ports.

 

BTW if I recall correctly, under certain engine parameters, those injectors ALSO fire under the piston dome.

 

Edited by Legend
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Legend said:

The point is, those injectors are firing into the cylinder. NOT the combustion chamber or top of the cylinder.  Which are ABOVE the exhaust ports.

 

Yes and nobody refers to the ctec as DI....in fact its called DSI by cat and we all made a big stink about it being a low pressure system 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, f7ben said:

Yes and nobody refers to the ctec as DI....in fact its called DSI by cat and we all made a big stink about it being a low pressure system 

I agree.

 

Though I dont give a shit about it being low psi.

IMO, I DONT want a DI sled or any gasoline engine for that matter.

Edited by Legend
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Legend said:

I agree.

 

Though I dont give a shit about it being low psi.

IMO, I DONT want a DI sled or any gasoline engine for that matter.

I'm torn over it....they offer incredible performance ,reliability and efficiency if executed correctly but I love to mod shit and they are near impossible to mod because of the fuel systems. Most times you end up adding aux injectors to supply additional fuel needs from the sounds of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, f7ben said:

I'm torn over it....they offer incredible performance ,reliability and efficiency if executed correctly but I love to mod shit and they are near impossible to mod because of the fuel systems. Most times you end up adding aux injectors to supply additional fuel needs from the sounds of it. 

More complex, more weight, more heat, more expensive are cons.

More performance? Maybe. More reliable? Not yet they arent. Not saying more unreliable in sleds though either. More efficent? Yeah, I give it that.

 

Im not saying DI is bad. But I dont want it, YET.

 

If a person trades in every 2-3 years, or has dealer do all the maintenence or work, sure no problem. But thats not me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly.....take a look at where the CFI injectors are....they spray into the transfer passage right below where the port is. Since it is low pressure there is no difference at all between that injector being there or directly in the cylinder. I'm not saying there arent significant fluid and thermal dynamic differences....just that as an overall system it makes little defined difference if they are there or 10mm higher and spraying directly into the cylinder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Legend said:

More complex, more weight, more heat, more expensive are cons.

More performance? Maybe. More reliable? Not yet they arent. Not saying more unreliable in sleds though either. More efficent? Yeah, I give it that.

 

Im not saying DI is bad. But I dont want it, YET.

 

If a person trades in every 2-3 years, or has dealer do all the maintenence or work, sure no problem. But thats not me.

DI definitely adds performance on pump fuel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rod Johnson said:

DI definitely adds performance on pump fuel. 

there is no doubt....can run more compression and more advanced timing at a leaner A/F and precisely controlled with incredible speed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, f7ben said:

there is no doubt....can run more compression and more advanced timing at a leaner A/F and precisely controlled with incredible speed

Guys are getting crazy increases too with E85 on DI NA car engines too. Like 25 rwhp with just a fuel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rod Johnson said:

Guys are getting crazy increases too with E85 on DI NA car engines too. Like 25 rwhp with just a fuel

yup....not all fuel systems have capacity for e85 but with a content sensor you can run e30 or e50 or whatever your system will support and see nice gains 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...