He rides MotoGP, he started in 125 like 10 years ago...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentino_Rossi

 

I do prefer the carb after riding both, the performance difference was small at best and at east there is the fact that I CAN work on carbs...

Also, I do prefer the sound that carbed makes in the throttle.

And, if the fuel injection is easier to start, then you need to adjust the carbs, both should fire with little coaching.

Just my 3 cents.

Have a great day!


~brian

 

Carbs are definetly less responsive stock, and adjustment (re-jetting) isnt fun or cheap (if done by someone else). There is less throtle response and slightly less immediate HP. Carbs are more sensitive to weather conditions. Injection just seems to work better all of the time, however it is controlled by computer, so you may have an issue there but i doubt it. It is also easy to upgrade an injected bikes intake performance... buy a chip and plug it in.

i have a carb bike and it can be more tempermental in cold starts. however, it as an authentic feel/sound to it i really like.
in terms of nostalgia think of the old carbed cars like mustang/camero/charger vs. new cars of the same make (or even the rice rockets). -- the newer ones tend to work better but there is an element people just like about the old school technology

(this from someone who is having carb/fuel issues with my bike right now... suprised myself a little with this one)

 

I never had no problems starting my cbr f4 carbs even when it rains or is hot even cold but to tell you the truth i live in Florida so i dont know if i would have a problem if i lived in new york that get way colder there but when it get cold here in FL i think my bike performs better. all i know is that there is no f4i fuel injected that can keep up with my f4 so i really think carbs are way better but again thats my personal opinion and i respect everybodys opinion.

 

I like carb.. The only real difference I'v noticed between the two are fuel injected is a quicker responce system.. but not by too much... i'll stick too carb as long as i can...I own a 93 CBR600 and i love every second I'm riding!

 

FI is better or they would still be using carbs....as far as starting up FI is way better, starting up my F4 when its 30 degrees outside is a pain, the longer it sits the harder it is to start....FI uy dont have to deal with choke +1 right there, and FI starts easier on cold starts.

everybody has there opinions but I look at it this was if carbs were better all vehicles would be running them.

 

the following is my own opinion...

This isn't quite an apples-to-apples comparison for carbs and FI on bikes. The reason being that a carburetor does several jobs within the fuel delivery while the FI is only one component of the fuel delivery and requires other components to do all the things that carbs do (e.g. throttle bodies, etc). Look at the fuel delivery systems as a whole and you'll notice there aren't very many differences.

The differences between carbs and the throttle bodied FI they use on bikes aren't very big. Look at the carbs and compare them to throttle bodies. They very similar in their mechanical design and identical in function.

I don't believe the manufacturers have gone to FI because its necearily "better" from a performance perspective. But more so from a business perspective. Because FI has less moving parts, it makes it a bit more reliable and less probablility of it breaking down. From a manufacturing and assembly perspective, FI is more plug-n-play. This saves huge costs over carbs.

The only real difference is the higher precision tuning that can be achieved because (with a pciii) you can tune at different positions of the throttle (and no fuel delivery system is ever truly linear).

Again, this is comparing carbs to throttle bodied FI. The differences between carbs and FI become much greater when you're talking about a different type of FI (e.g. multi-port), at least from a mechanical perspective.

 

One HUGE reason for the change to FI is federal emissions. The precision that you have over a carb is amazing when it comes to emissions. Also it is more user friendly with FI because you don't have to use the choke. It's not really that big of a deal though, my f4 starts at 30 degrees with only about 1/2 choke. I wouldn't base my purchase on whether a bike is carb or FI unless you are planning upgrades (a powercommander is far easier than a rejet).

 

I would say for autos that carbs vs FI is a much bigger issue. And it's pretty much always is better to have FI. In the world of bikes I would say it definitely depends on your own preferences. I love my carbed F4 but eventually would like an F4i. But I'm definitely in NO rush.

 

This was the same debate when Ford swapped the 5.0 carbs for the FI in mid-1986.

Fanboys HATED the FI, and wanted nothing to do with it although H.P. increased about 20% simply from the FI itself.

That was in 1986 - they've come to love it now. Unless you're running 1/4 miles, there is no reason to run carbs.

I have ridden my buddies 02 F4i and compared to my 96 F3, the most noticealbe difference is certainly not the FI. The FI does make it nice to start in cold mornings though. Although pulling the choke doesn't bother me, I couldn't imagine going right out and thumbing the starter.

FI also is more efficient, and while opinions differ, the consensus seems to be that there is a slight MPG improvement in the FI bikes, though minimal. Also, there doesn't seem to be any serious HP gain from the FI on bikes that we seen in comparable cars - I wonder why that is?

As someone said before, there is really no reason to stay with carbs - FI FTW!