Carb Conversion "Kits" ETA March-April 2016

[Lou and "Boo"]

Hello?!? I've been helping answer questions re: injector plugs.

Aside from taking Matt's bait I have made it extremely clear to anyone who actually reads my posts that I am not picking at you Bill, but rather helping by offering info.
I understand my understanding of the power valve was not technically 100% but it's useful information about a problem that affected my carb's performance. I would think you would want to share such information and experience, no?

Maybe not unless you are getting 100% attention.

Bill, YOU need to put the past behind you and move on in any gracious manner you can. I am not out to cause harm to you or foul you in anyway. Our past may have gone sour and I have explained exactly why. The question is, Why can't you move on and put the past away? I don't really care why but you need to stop. You erroneously change details of the experience to be in your favor but who cares anymore ! Let's be men and move on shall we? I think all the mods here would agree to that. I don't see why you won't.

[DMCVegas]

You inability to deal with being corrected on your numerous inaccuracies is not my problem in the least. Nor is it anyone else's.

And as I warned you a very long time ago, if you're going to start supplying a product to the community like a vendor, you are going to have to endure the challenges of one. One of those very challenges is criticism of your product, as well as your business practices. It is something that every single vendor has had to go through, and is a part of doing business. Regardless of what your cash flow situation is. Now I don't know Lou in the least, but he is expressing his experiences with both you as a supplier of the product as well as your support for said product. That indeed is something which is valuable to the community in order to help others make informed decisions.

Furthermore, when it comes to you and I (let alone other people), you have been nothing rude and unprofessional. You make make statements which have proven to be within a wide spectrum of inaccuracies. Each time you have ignored them and chosen to engage in an abusive pattern of attacking both the car, the marque, and even myself, including name calling. And this goes quite far beyond just this thread alone. Your actions and behavior have been this way in many different threads, across different discussion boards, over the course of many years.

Further proof of your ignoring of whatever facts do no suit you is right there in your latest post. You want to know what my motivation is? It has remained unwavering from any of the numerous times before I have reiterated it again and again. I am protecting the marque and members of it from misinformation and attacks on us and the cars. Both of which YOU are a repeated source of, and seek personal gain from. You keep posting incorrect, and dangerous information in this thread, and I'm going to be right here challenging and correcting you as necessary.

[content22207_2]

May I humbly suggest Robert add me to his "ignore" list.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[DMCVegas]

May I humbly suggest Robert add me to his "ignore" list.

Bill Robertson
#5939

Ignoring you defaming our cars and putting other people at risk is not an option.

[content22207_2]

Dude:

It is patently obvious that the things I write upset you.

Logical response would be to stop reading them.

If you persist reading things that upset you, you have no one to blame but yourself.

It's like sticking a needle in your eye, complaining that it hurts, then sticking it right back in again.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[content22207_2]

It should also be patently obvious that your ideas and opinions bear absolutely no weight with me.

You could write a library of diatribes, and I still wouldn't give them any credence.

(And to be perfectly fair, you feel the same way about me).

I would appreciate it if you would take your ideas and opinions to your own thread, rather than making a mess all over mine. That would be the polite thing to do.

I don't pollute your threads, please don't pollute mine.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[The Aviator]

Incorrect.

Full throttle enrichment valve is plumbed into the carb base, not the venturis. It responds to manifold vacuum *BELOW* the throttle plates. Full throttle enrichment valve literally is as far removed from the venturis as physically possible.

Venturis are *ABOVE* the throttle plates. They have a very important job to do, but it isn't manifold vacuum.

May I humbly suggest Louis read and study documents in this thread: http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?13...y-of-Operation

That thread should be required reading for any owner carbureting his DeLorean. Just sticking a mystery box on top of the engine without understanding what it is or how it works is not a solid foundation for future success.

Bill Robertson
#5939

I'm going to check that thread out tonight bill. thanks for linking it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lou and "Boo"]

Grow up.

Other than my setup and tuning post, everything posted in that thread was written 10-40 years ago. It's been public record for nearly half a century. I found it easily enough, as have millions of other people. If you are too damn lazy to do your own research, that's your problem, not mine.

Both you and Louis are very disruptive presences in this thread. Is that really your motivation -- to cause trouble?

May I humbly suggest you start your own thread in which to bitch and complain, rather than polluting this one.

Bill Robertson
#5939

I'm going to check that thread out tonight bill. thanks for linking it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That info is very valuable for carb owners for sure !!!

[DMCVegas]

No, Bill, none of that is the case here at all.

This isn't merely a case of how I have a different opinion than yours. The problem is that you keep on not only disparaging the marque, but you also continue to spread inaccurate & outright false information. Facts are not a simple difference of opinion; facts are indisputable.

And don't act like this is anything personal against you in particular, because it is not. If John Zachary De Lorean himself rose from the grave and immediately started posting the same kind of crap you have been trying to spread around to boost yourself up, I'd take him to task just as quickly.

Eaxmple: Cars are no more safer with a Carburetor than they are Fuel Injection of any kind. Your opinions to the contrary are inconsequential to the truth of the matter. That is the kind of thing I am challenging you upon, and precisely why you cower away each time and continue to try and change the subject so that you avoid the painful truth: You're wrong.

If you don't like my challenging of your inaccurate information, then you need to stop posting it. Stop attacking me because of your ignorance.

[Drive Stainless]

It should also be patently obvious that your ideas and opinions bear absolutely no weight with me.

You could write a library of diatribes, and I still wouldn't give them any credence.

(And to be perfectly fair, you feel the same way about me).

I would appreciate it if you would take your ideas and opinions to your own thread, rather than making a mess all over mine. That would be the polite thing to do.

I don't pollute your threads, please don't pollute mine.

Bill Robertson
#5939

Speaking of patently obvious, Bill's thoughts about high pressure fuel systems are not unique. For example:

U.S. Patent 6,264,437 granted 7/24/2001
col. 2, lines 7 - 10

In the particular case of high pressure fuel injection, if the element that breaks is the element delivering the fuel, fire will inevitably break out.

U.S. Patent 5,437,255 granted 8/1/1995
col. 2, lines 41 - 57

Among the disadvantages of conventional fuel injection are the following:
(1) A high degree of mechanical complexity, with the accompanying increase in possible modes of failure; (2) High cost of manufacture and maintenance due to the complexity of the systems; (3) Safety hazards due to the use of high pressure fuel pumps in most conventional fuel injection systems. In automotive applications, for example, the rupture of a high pressure fuel line due to a collision or other failure presents a serious hazard—and expensive safety systems must be employed to guard against this danger. (4) Conventional fuel injection systems are “analog” in nature, requiring some kind of digital-to-analog interface in order to allow computer control. These problems of conventional fuel injection have tended to prevent its universal adoption despite its many advantages.

U.S. Patent 4,125,101 granted 11/14/1978
col. 3, lines 41 - 60

Keeping the operating pressure for this fuel injection system at low levels such as those indicated makes it much easier, especially with already existing engines, to avoid leaks at various sealing points throughout the system. With a higher pressure fuel injection system, leaks are likely to occur, for example, at the piston rings, which will dilute the lubricating oil on the cylinder walls and wash a portion of the oil down into the oil pan and create a fire hazard there. Keeping the operating pressure low will also avoid the stretching and weakening of any rubber lines in the system that can occur with higher pressures. And it is further desirable to avoid high operating pressures because they would tend to magnify the effects of small obstructions in the fuel lines, and the resulting imbalance in the flow of gasoline to the various cylinders, which can produce off balance operation of the engine through irregular gas feed to different cylinders, with accompanying scoring of the cylinder walls, the cocking of pistons, and strain on the bearings and connecting rods.

Lastly, Bosch's own U.S. Patent 4,227,501 describes:
col. 3, lines 18 - 24

[T]he fuel supply pump must deliver a high supply pressure, which increases its cost and its power consumption and results in greater wear. Furthermore, there is the increased danger at high pressures which can cause leakage and breaks in the lines with the result that the engine may catch fire.

Moral of the story: Replace your fuel lines & copper washers if uncertain about age or condition. The risk outweighs any cost savings.