Direct injection, good technology or EPA forced?

Status
Not open for further replies.
DI allows for a significant increase in compression ratio which provides for more power and efficiency. this is possible because DI prevents pre-ignition and detonation. the down-side is that there is a struggle with deposits on valves since there is no fuel washing across the valves to clean them. I suspect that we will eventually see an engineering solution.
 
I will honestly say-->I love my Port-Fuel Injected 5.7L Hemi-->One of the main reason I chose my new Ram {No Direct Injection}!

Our Audi w/Direct Injection 2.0LT has been nothing but a nightmare with valve Deposits.

If I can avoid Direct Injection I will.
 
I'll take PFI any day!!,, and live with the few CON's with it.

39.gif
DI
 
At its core the technology is fantastic, but unfortunately certain laws and requirements cause undesirable side effects. Like everything else, it's a compromise between many different factors.
 
Originally Posted By: tomcat27
DI allows for a significant increase in compression ratio which provides for more power and efficiency. this is possible because DI prevents pre-ignition and detonation. the down-side is that there is a struggle with deposits on valves since there is no fuel washing across the valves to clean them. I suspect that we will eventually see an engineering solution.


How does a diesel deal with this?
 
Does anybody know if the newest Toyota 2.5L engine is DI ? I can't find anything that says one way or another.
 
Originally Posted By: Donald
Originally Posted By: tomcat27
DI allows for a significant increase in compression ratio which provides for more power and efficiency. this is possible because DI prevents pre-ignition and detonation. the down-side is that there is a struggle with deposits on valves since there is no fuel washing across the valves to clean them. I suspect that we will eventually see an engineering solution.


How does a diesel deal with this?


Diesels don't have a throttle plate, and most have a turbo so the airflow over the valve is massive compared to SI. It doesn't stop deposits completely but helps a lot
 
Originally Posted By: zach1900
Does anybody know if the newest Toyota 2.5L engine is DI ? I can't find anything that says one way or another.


Which one? The AR series use DI, can't say for sure without an engine code.
 
Great technology with some teething pains exhibited by some manufacturers. There definitely is a disproportionate amount of worry.

No issues and we're on our 4th d.i equipped vehicle.

I actually love the diesel clatter of the 2.4. The 2.0T is much quieter.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Olas
At its core the technology is fantastic, but unfortunately certain laws and requirements cause undesirable side effects. Like everything else, it's a compromise between many different factors.


+1.

In the highly polarized world of politicking that occurs in the USA today, everyone is looking for something to be enraged about,msomething to blame someone else about, etc.

End of the day, DI isn't new, it's not evil, heck, it isn't that advanced. It's essentially how diesels have been making power for decades.

One really has to look at it in a reasonable middle ground without going in looking to get panties in a bunch.

There are very efficient, very clean operating, high mpg non-di engines

There are very inefficient, high polluting, low MPG di engines

If people would learn something besides how to polarize and argue, they might understand the thermodynamic benefits of DI.

It's a developing technology for sure. But then again if traditional FI was so great we wouldn't have a fuel additives section where fi cleaner sells like wildfire and people worry about maintenance doses for their engines.

Instead of looking at how to blame the EPA for di, why not get out second year engineering textbooks and try to learn why one might want it in the long run.
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
Great technology with some teething pains exhibited by some manufacturers. There definitely is a disproportionate amount of worry.

No issues and we're on our 4th d.i equipped vehicle.

I actually love the diesel clatter of the 2.4. The 2.0T is much quieter.


I pity those of us who are "early adopters."
crackmeup2.gif
 
There are diesels that have problems with intake tract deposits. Some BMW and VW will have to have the aftercoolers and intake mechanically cleaned. Some diesels, such as the Cummings have CCV filters. The intake tract deposits are mostly from condensed crankcase vapors and EGR. I would recommend that anyone with a DI gas engine add a ccv filter or catchcan. Best is a cool location that can be drained easily. It will not hurt and might help.
Anyone with a diesel not already fitted with a CCV might want to add one. Many folks use programmers to eliminate EGR, but this of course is illegal for on road
grin.gif


Well the ccv catch can or filter is probably also illegal, I will say that one of these has very little potential in increase emissions and is way better than putting in a road draft tube as some advocate.

DI is excellent technology, that will eventually be common and well accepted. The comment about early adopters finishing the R&D is well deserved.

Rod
 
Originally Posted By: Donald
Originally Posted By: tomcat27
DI allows for a significant increase in compression ratio which provides for more power and efficiency. this is possible because DI prevents pre-ignition and detonation. the down-side is that there is a struggle with deposits on valves since there is no fuel washing across the valves to clean them. I suspect that we will eventually see an engineering solution.


How does a diesel deal with this?
With the fuel I think. The only downside is the new emissions systems are killing some of them. At least from the little digging I've been doing on the www.

It looks like model year 2015 might be the last year for Chrysler before they swing over to DI. I'm getting conflicting information. Some sources say the GC and Ram with get DI in 2016, with the Wrangler following in 2017. I'm very interested in how this plays out.

ragtoplvr summed it up above as I was typing.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
But then again if traditional FI was so great we wouldn't have a fuel additives section where fi cleaner sells like wildfire and people worry about maintenance doses for their engines.

The use of DI technology does not necessarily negate the need for FI cleaners.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: Olas
At its core the technology is fantastic, but unfortunately certain laws and requirements cause undesirable side effects. Like everything else, it's a compromise between many different factors.


+1.

In the highly polarized world of politicking that occurs in the USA today, everyone is looking for something to be enraged about,msomething to blame someone else about, etc.

End of the day, DI isn't new, it's not evil, heck, it isn't that advanced. It's essentially how diesels have been making power for decades.

One really has to look at it in a reasonable middle ground without going in looking to get panties in a bunch.

There are very efficient, very clean operating, high mpg non-di engines

There are very inefficient, high polluting, low MPG di engines

If people would learn something besides how to polarize and argue, they might understand the thermodynamic benefits of DI.

It's a developing technology for sure. But then again if traditional FI was so great we wouldn't have a fuel additives section where fi cleaner sells like wildfire and people worry about maintenance doses for their engines.

Instead of looking at how to blame the EPA for di, why not get out second year engineering textbooks and try to learn why one might want it in the long run.


Good points. I was a LITTLE bit nervous about buying the Impala with DI, but after doing some research on various forums, it doesn't seem to be a problem for GM. I am willing to "risk it" for the benefits - that is a decent amount of power with pretty good MPG.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top