If I build a 1991 - 1998 4.0 with a 1979 4.2 crankshaft, would EFI be the best route for more power, or nat. asp.?
Also, I'm in California, the dreaded emissions state, and, I've heard that I have a better chance of passing emissions testing with EFI.
Thank you in advance for your thoughts!
Natural aspiration, or EFI???
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: August 27th, 2019, 5:12 pm
- Vehicle Year: 1979
- Vehicle Make: jeep
- Vehicle Model: cj5
- SkylinesSuck
- Donator
- Posts: 545
- Joined: February 14th, 2009, 11:11 pm
- Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
- Vehicle Year: 1998
- Vehicle Make: Jeep
- Vehicle Model: Wrangler
- Location: Northern VA
Re: Natural aspiration, or EFI???
Naturally aspirated means no forced induction i.e. supercharger or turbocharger. EFI is electronic fuel injection.
I think you are asking EFI vs. carb, and while both can work and pass emissions just fine, EFI (especially with tuning) would have an advantage, along with drivability.
I think you are asking EFI vs. carb, and while both can work and pass emissions just fine, EFI (especially with tuning) would have an advantage, along with drivability.
- Cheromaniac
- I live here
- Posts: 3190
- Joined: March 8th, 2008, 12:58 pm
- Stroker Displacement: 4563cc
- Vehicle Year: 1992
- Vehicle Make: Jeep
- Vehicle Model: Cherokee
- Location: Cyprus
- Contact:
Re: Natural aspiration, or EFI???
EFI wins hands down for drivability under all conditions, more power, better fuel economy, and lower exhaust emissions.
In your case the choice between EFI & carb is a no brainer.
In your case the choice between EFI & carb is a no brainer.
1992 XJ 4.6 I6 - 5MT - Stroker build-up, Stroker "recipes" Sold
1995 Mustang GT - 4AT - Modded Sold
2006 Mustang GT - 5MT - Modded Midlife Crisis Car
1995 Mustang GT - 4AT - Modded Sold
2006 Mustang GT - 5MT - Modded Midlife Crisis Car
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Google [Bot] and 26 guests