- This topic has 21 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by TrialsRider.
looking for first bike…fuel injected?
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 25, 2010 at 3:54 am #24654Sean_DParticipant
… comparing Apples to Apples. When I purchased my Bonnie I took one of the ’09’s, which are Fuel Injected for a test ride after I took the ’07 I purchased out. I just wanted to see what the differences between the two were and if there was anything there that made me want to buy new vs. used. Honestly I really didn’t notice much of a difference between the two one way or the other. But being a taller rider the ’07 had a taller seat hight than the ’09 models, with the exception of the top of the line T-100, so that was a plus for the ’07. The ’07 only had 2,300 miles on it and was significantly cheaper, so for me it was an easy choice.
But, long story short, I really didn’t notice any significant difference in how smooth one was over the other, and really no difference in how they sounded. If I could have purchased the ’09 T-100 for the same price, or even within $500 I probably would have gone with the FI ’09. But with a difference of a couple thousand plus, it was an easy choice to go with the carb’ed ’07.
But that is the closest to a direct comparison between mostly identical models I can offer.
February 25, 2010 at 9:12 am #24656RabParticipantI’ve had bikes with carbs and with EFI.
The warm-up is a non-issue for me as I would simply start the bike with choke full-out, immediately push it about half-way in (until revs just start to drop a little), put my gloves on, check the lights and then take-off. A mile or so down the road (depending on outside temperature), I’d push the choke all the way in and be done with it. Not a problem.
A drawback with EFI though (which is apparently quite common) is that when “coasting” (in gear), they can have an on/off feeling from the throttle (a.k.a. surging). This is difficult to describe, but it can be uncomfortable and annoying. Bikes with carbs don’t have this surging.
EFI bikes are definitely more fuel efficient though and it’s only a matter of time before carbs are phased-out completely on motorcycles due to ever more stringent air quality laws which carbureter fuelled engines will be unable to meet. In fact on the pre-EFI (carburetted) Bonnevilles, Triumph had to graft on secondary air injection in order to meet pollution regulations.
February 25, 2010 at 6:56 pm #24661Sean_DParticipant“In fact on the pre-EFI (carburetted) Bonnevilles, Triumph had to graft on secondary air injection in order to meet pollution regulations.”
Seems to be a popular mod to do the “airboxectomy” and remove it or at least remove the rubber intake snorkel on the air filter lid. I think one county in Arizona is the only place in the country to actually require Motorcycle Emissions Testing and I am not even sure that is still true. California I think had testing at one time and dropped it?
I haven’t done anything with mine, I have heard pros and cons and not sure it is the best idea for the type of riding I mostly do.. but thats another topic from this
February 25, 2010 at 10:21 pm #24664Gary856ParticipantSome carbureted bikes are more “cold blooded” than others due to lean factory jetting for emission reasons. GS500 is one example. My ’01 is not as bad as what owners of older models (slightly different carburetor design) describe, but even with temp in the high 50s, the engine would spit and buck at low rpm (not pretty) if you don’t let it warm up for a few minutes. Re-jetting the pilot jet to make it richer would cure this problem; I haven’t bothered w/ rejetting.
During my weekend rides I often go from sea level to close to 4,000 ft of elevation. No problem felt with my 2 carbureted bikes. I thought maybe you’d start to feel the power difference in a carbureted bike with something like 6,000 ft of elevation change. I ride with ambient temp from the 40s to over 100F and haven’t had the need to make any adjustment to the carburetors in my bikes.
FI is nice, but I wouldn’t hesitate buying a good carbureted bike.
February 26, 2010 at 2:09 am #24669TrialsRiderParticipantTook a look at the Triumph EFI offering after reading your ride un-impression, is it possible performance was not the primary design criteria? …brilliant marketing concept; manufacture an EFI unit that squeezes out Euro III emission standards and looks like a carb. Just, why did they make that look like a CV carb??? I’d spot that a mile away, classic Triumphs never had CV carbs , so why didn’t they spend your money to make it look like an Amal Mk1 ? P.S. not trying to flame the brand, I know how passionate you guys can be over the T120 look
February 26, 2010 at 4:52 am #24670Sean_DParticipantI am sure the idea was to maintain the look of the Hinkley “Modern Classics” which have CV carbs rather than go even more retro to the Meridian T-120. I am not a Triumph historian by any stretch of the imagination so don’t quote me on this.. but when John Bloor resurrected the Bonneville in 2001 didn’t they always use CV carbs?
I know there are folks who are crazy passionate about the T-120 and may have liked to have seen that, but I can understand the logic of wanting to maintain the consistency of the Hinkley line, particularly since the Amal didn’t seem to have the best of reputations. I am no expert on carbs by any stretch either, but from owners of Merdian bikes, I garner that there were many issues with construction quality and the like with the Amal Mk I.
I recall reading a review of the Kawasaki W650 awhile ago as I always like the looks of those as well. The review mentioned that perhaps the Kawasaki was working harder to make the W650 look like a ’69 Bonnie than the Triumph Hinkley models. But even that review applauded Kawasaki for not having the “dreaded Amal carburetor” and instead using CV carbs.
From Triumph’s standpoint of EFI in general are better fuel economy, automatic mixture adjustment, better performance, longer engine life.
I am sure that is all true, to what degree I don’t know. The better performance claim sounds like some of the computer overlockers who go on about 10% improvements in performance as though the average user would ever recognize that without benchmarking tools.
Maybe if you are the type of rider who really rings the snot out of every last ounce of performance you might notice. I am guessing for the average rider (like myself) , the performance difference is trivial.
In any case, I don’t have an EFI bike, so what they decided to hide the EFI unit in isn’t of much concern to me .. at least not until I decide to buy something else
February 26, 2010 at 7:14 pm #24673TrialsRiderParticipantPersonally I like the pre unit 1940’s 3H model Speed Twin.
In 2001 Triumph would have to equip with CV carbs to meet the emission standards of the time, so now I understand; they are trying to preserve the look of a 9 year old bike that was patterned to look like a 30 year old bike. BTW, improved low through mid-range power and precise throttle control is where EFI really shines, not full throttle. -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.