captain720
Full Access Member
It is my personal theory that could be totally wrong that the IDI uses the head design to achieve complete fuel burn whereas the DI uses the turbo to achieve complete fuel burn.
There are a lot of DIs that came non turbo in heavy equipment, and trucks, that I'm sure completely burn fuel. I've always felt they burned cleaner to be honest, but that could just be my experienceIt is my personal theory that could be totally wrong that the IDI uses the head design to achieve complete fuel burn whereas the DI uses the turbo to achieve complete fuel burn.
Wow thanks for sharing! Appreciate the info.There are a lot of DIs that came non turbo in heavy equipment, and trucks, that I'm sure completely burn fuel. I've always felt they burned cleaner to be honest, but that could just be my experience
And I really don't think the turbo would make a difference whether DI or IDI, either way the turbo is forcing more air in the mix, thus a cleaner burn. No matter what engine, more air in will give a cleaner burn, IDI or DI.
If anything, the DI heads flow better, but that's beside the point
Rock
My thought has always been that the DI design is more efficient at using the combustion event, especially under power. Have always felt like the IDI design has some losses with combustion starting/happening in the pre chamber. I dont think the DI burns fuel more completely, especially cold and under low load...that is the smoke and stink.I wouldnt be surprised if the PSD ( I assume thats what we mean when saying "DI"?) achieves more complete combustion across the RPM range simply because of it's engine control systems being more precise and adaptable to different loads and speeds.
I prefer the mechanical nature of the IDI myself but theres no denying the performance benefits of the PSD+ systems.
Well when it comes to an ICE, "more efficient" and burning fuel more completely are one and the same. Besides, the PSD can actively adjust it's injection pressure and pulse duration based on demand whereas the IDI cannot.My thought has always been that the DI design is more efficient at using the combustion event, especially under power. Have always felt like the IDI design has some losses with combustion starting/happening in the pre chamber. I dont think the DI burns fuel more completely, especially cold and under low load...that is the smoke and stink.
That's ok. Most of us have heard that before. I believed it until it was explained to me. I think it's one of those urban legends that just won't die.DOH! I guess I heard wrong.
Yes.On another note, how does the oil get to the valves to lube them? Is it all through the push rods?