What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Which fuel injection

Greenley

Well Known Member
Planning to make my final engine choice shortly and start placing orders this Summer for an IO540 and accessories. Currently looking at the 6 cyl PMag for ignition(it is being introduced at Sun-N-Fun), but still wondering what to do for fuel injection. Currently looking at airflow performance and efii. More complicated to setup the efii, is it worth it? Will there be a significant difference in fuel efficiency between the airflow performance mechanical injection system and the efii electronic injection system?
 
EFII

Planning to make my final engine choice shortly and start placing orders this Summer for an IO540 and accessories. Currently looking at the 6 cyl PMag for ignition(it is being introduced at Sun-N-Fun), but still wondering what to do for fuel injection. Currently looking at airflow performance and efii. More complicated to setup the efii, is it worth it? Will there be a significant difference in fuel efficiency between the airflow performance mechanical injection system and the efii electronic injection system?

I have the complete EFII system on my 7 and didn't find the fuel injection system difficult to setup at all. There is a little bit of extra plumbing to do because there is a fuel rail that feeds the injectors along with a fuel return line to incorporate, but it's not difficult to setup and it's a very nice system. As a matter of fact, the fuel rail and the fuel return line is basically one in the same. Unless you're just partial to P-mag for your ignition source, you might consider incorporating the complete EFII system for both your fuel injection and and ignition needs. If you already have the SDS computer installed to operate the electronic fuel injectors, you might as well let the computer control your ignition as well and let the entire system talk to each component like it's designed to do. I guess you could forgo one of the coils and use a P-mag or regular magneto in its place, but if you have all of the other backup components in place that Robert recomends, you'll have a very modern and rock solid system.
 
I have no experience with efii, but went with AFP because that is what Allen Barrett recommended for my IO540. It has been rock solid over 3 years.

Jim Berry
RV-10
 
FI

Mine is ECI and I couldn't be happier. The electronic fuel injection and ignition system sound very interesting though.
 
AFP!

2 airplanes and AFP is what I have and could not be happier.
If (when) I build a third, it is going to be AFP again.
Don Rivera is a frequent contributor in this forum and a very
knowledgeable man.
 
P Mag deliveries

P Mag has promised to start delivering the 6 cylinder model for at least 5 years now at each of the airshows they are at. Don't believe any delivery dates that they quote to you.

Gary Specketer
 
EFII systems for O-540

Hi Bill,
We make dual high energy electronic ignitions for the O-540 in both single and dual ECU versions. We also make a complete electronic engine management system including electronic fuel injection and dual high energy electronic ignition for your engine. The full system is also available in both single and dual ECU versions.

In addition, our system is modular. If you choose to start out with just our ignition, you would have the option of adding the additional components for the fuel injection in the future.

If you have any additional questions, please contact me at:
[email protected]

Best of luck with the project,
Robert Paisley
 
FI

Hi Bill,
We make dual high energy electronic ignitions for the O-540 in both single and dual ECU versions. We also make a complete electronic engine management system including electronic fuel injection and dual high energy electronic ignition for your engine. The full system is also available in both single and dual ECU versions.

In addition, our system is modular. If you choose to start out with just our ignition, you would have the option of adding the additional components for the fuel injection in the future.

If you have any additional questions, please contact me at:
[email protected]

Best of luck with the project,


Robert Paisley

I have a Bendix fuel injection system overhauled by Don and crew at AFP. Great guys.

I also have Robert Paisley's totally redundant dual electronic ignition. It has it's own separate battery in case the main buss fails. It is a great system, uses automotive Iridium plugs, starts quickly and allows me to lean the fuel flow about one gph less than I could before. I am very pleased with and highly recommend his electronic ignition.

I can't comment on his fuel injection system as I haven't seen or flown with one yet.
 
Okay folks well I was speaking with several different people regarding my RV10. I just recently ordered my IO 540 Thunderbolt (ETA 12/2024) with EIS and AFP. I WAS leaning towards EFII but I heard Stein Air does not build panels with EFII. I guess that is due to some insurance issue. Not my problem, however:

IS there any substancial benefit to deleting my AFP and EIS from Lycoming and going with EFII system 32? I know many people have different opinions so I am just seeing what experienced builders have to say.

And I will be building my own panel and is it more difficult to incorporate EFII?

Pardon my ignorance but I am a first time builder:)
 
IS there any substancial benefit to deleting my AFP and EIS from Lycoming and going with EFII system 32? I know many people have different opinions so I am just seeing what experienced builders have to say.

Looking beyond marketing material there is one clear advantage to EFII or SDS, the higher fuel pressure reduces the vapor lock problem if you plan on running autofuel. You have to determine if the added cost and complexity is worth it to you to get that benefit.

The system is not more fuel efficent, nor does it produce more engine power than an AFP system and pMags.

Carl
 
Looking beyond marketing material there is one clear advantage to EFII or SDS, the higher fuel pressure reduces the vapor lock problem if you plan on running autofuel...
Carl

Be careful before you paint all builders with the same brush. Though the vapor lock thing is indeed a valuable benefit, it was not even close to the benefit of rapid tuning to different engine configurations (intake, exhaust, induction, CR, cooling, etc). Just a few keystrokes can compensate for all kinds of engine variables. That was by far the most important thing to me. I'll bet other builders have additional features that are important to them.
 
it was not even close to the benefit of rapid tuning to different engine configurations (intake, exhaust, induction, CR, cooling, etc). Just a few keystrokes can compensate for all kinds of engine variables.

I know nothing about EFII or SDS and I am sure they work perfectly as advertised.
However, rapid tuning with a few keystrokes seems to be more of a benefit
to the seller (one fits all) of the system rather than the customer/builder, unless you are a racer or someone who changes engine configurations frequently.
Most builders order their engine and it stays the same for the life of the airplane or perhaps until the first overhaul.
If you choose AFP for example, there is nothing to configure, same for LSE ignition.
I am not saying one is better than the other but pointing out some significant differences that may or may not suit a particular builder.
 
Looking beyond marketing material there is one clear advantage to EFII or SDS, the higher fuel pressure reduces the vapor lock problem if you plan on running autofuel. You have to determine if the added cost and complexity is worth it to you to get that benefit.

The system is not more fuel efficent, nor does it produce more engine power than an AFP system and pMags.

Carl


I assume you have the data to support your statement…

Not saying you are wrong but making that statement without supporting data is no better than the vendors stating that it is more efficient or more powerful without supporting data.

Anecdotally, I would stand my EFII setup against a comparable pmag or afp system any day…
Just sayin…
 
Last edited:
I assume you have the data to support your statement…

Not saying you are wrong but making that statement without supporting data is no better than the vendors stating that it is more efficient or more powerful without supporting data.

Anecdotally, I would stand my EFII setup against a comparable pmag or afp system any day…
Just sayin…

My comment just reflects posts on VAF from SDS. If there is data to show a gain in engine efficiency or power as compared to an AFP injection system and pMags I would be happy to say I'm wrong.

Carl
 
From a plumbing standpoint, both SDS and EFii have full returns to the tanks. They both require a duplex fuell selector valve----and right now thats about 9 months lead time from Andair. Newton has the V10 valve, it has rear inlets so plumbing is different. The tanks need the return bungs installed, and a return firewall bulkhead fitting for the return. The 2 different systems have 2 different plumbing systems---the EFii has supply and returns via a 'fuel rail'system (my terminology); the SDS uses a fuel block an individual injector hoses, similar to a mechanical injection layout.

I'd weigh the costs of converting to the systems, or using a mechanical injection system. We've done a BUNCH of each version.

Tom
 
…..(snip)….IS there any substancial benefit to deleting my AFP and EIS from Lycoming and going with EFII system 32? I know many people have different opinions so I am just seeing what experienced builders have to say.

And I will be building my own panel and is it more difficult to incorporate EFII?

Some benefits of SDS/EFII:
1. Tune-ability
2. Each injector/fuel flow can be tuned individually, so CHT’s are very even.
3. Vapor lock (even when running auto fuel) is a thing of the past, so your engine will start easily in both hot and cold conditions.
4. All solid state, so no moving parts, so nothing to wear out or service.
5. Repeatability. A computer will do the exact same thing every time, where we as humans can’t do that. Once the system is dialed in, it’s going to do the same thing every time.
6. Your engine will operate smoothly, even at VERY LOP settings.

Regarding integration into your panel, it’s not difficult to do at all. They’re basically standalone systems, so even if the avionics shops won’t do it for you, you’ll easily be able to do it yourself. In my opinion, both SDS and EFII systems really modernizes theses old technology air-cooled engines with modern day ignition and injection technology.
 
Thanks gentlemen for your thoughts. One thing I DID DO was I DID INSTALL ONE EFII fuel bung on each of my ER tanks I just completed (LEAK FREE TOO BTW WOOHOOO)!! So with regard to additional plumbing for the EFII system, I guess I have that requirement out of the way. I am also going with the FS2020 Andair duplex fuel valve. I will be ordering this shortly.

One other potential issue….. please feel free to voice opinion here…
I just ordered my engine and prop. I ordered the MTV 12-B which is the lighter MT 3 blades rated for up to 260 HP. If the Thunderbolt with my standard compression is paired with EFII will this pose an issue and require the 9B??
I’m waiting to hear back from MT.
 
My comment just reflects posts on VAF from SDS. If there is data to show a gain in engine efficiency or power as compared to an AFP injection system and pMags I would be happy to say I'm wrong.

Carl

But what data will you accept?

I have shown a repeatable 3 knot gain between the timing at best power and advancing to the best LOP via the LOP switch of the SDS CPI and Bendix FI. Did this years ago on this very forum - many posts with much data. PMag cant do that. (I know, I've owned both). Thats a performance advantage

I have shown a repeatable zero loss in TAS when activating the LOP function of the SDS EFI. This is airspeed measured at 150 ROP and 25 LOP. ZERO, Nada, nyet, none loss of TAS, but an instant 5 GPH drop in FF. Thats an efficiency advantage.

I have experienced significant GAMI divergence at very low fuel flows with a Bendix - but the EFI remains rock solid at ANY fuel flow. This follows normal hydraulic theory of course, where the planned leak at the nozzle of the Bendix is a big part of the metering scheme. Not so with EFI. Same fuel pressure, same nozzle spray pattern, regardless of engine load, RPM or flow.

Its also nice to remove that red knob and throw it in the spare parts bin, but that's just me.

While I agree that EFI is not going to post better all out HP numbers compared to a properly tuned mechanical FI setup (and I'll bet you cant find anywhere that Ross ever claims "more power"), the EFI will kill the Bendix in every other category. Thats a solid "win" for operating efficiency and also the reason you have not been able to buy a new car with a carb for decades.
 
Last edited:
Thanks gentlemen for your thoughts. One thing I DID DO was I DID INSTALL ONE EFII fuel bung on each of my ER tanks I just completed (LEAK FREE TOO BTW WOOHOOO)!! So with regard to additional plumbing for the EFII system, I guess I have that requirement out of the way. I am also going with the FS2020 Andair duplex fuel valve. I will be ordering this shortly.

One other potential issue….. please feel free to voice opinion here…
I just ordered my engine and prop. I ordered the MTV 12-B which is the lighter MT 3 blades rated for up to 260 HP. If the Thunderbolt with my standard compression is paired with EFII will this pose an issue and require the 9B??
I’m waiting to hear back from MT.

I run an MT prop. My engine made just shy of 300 hp on the dyno. I spoke with MT several times before I ordered my prop. They noted that the MTV-12 is rated for a maximum of 300 HP. As my engine makes nearly this value, they recommended the MTV-9, which is rated for 450 HP. The penalty is about 11 lbs in weight. What they said was that the MTV-12 would work but from a longevity standpoint, the MTV-9 was a better match.

I opted for the MTV-9 and have been very happy with it.

Some will say that the extra weight in the nose is a problem. I do not see it that way; basically everything loaded into an RV-10 moves the CG aft. With the extra weight in front, I will almost always reach my gross weight before I reach the aft CG limit. This isn't necessarily the case with the lighter prop. Obviously, that is different for every build.

I generally carry some ballast when I fly solo so as to move the CG near the middle of the range. Having flown the entire CG range, I like the way it flies at mid CG...personal preference, really.

Not trying to sway you either way, just giving you a data point in your research...
 
Andair Duplex Valve

John---do yourself a favor and order the duplex valve configured for installation in the RV10. We use 4 EF20 elbows for the wing supply and return ports, and 2 MF20 Straights for the front discharge and return ports. IF you order one with the NPT fittings for use with AN822-6D adapters, you may end up with some minor orientation issues. Decide FIRST if you are going to use rigid tubing for the plumbing, or hose ( like ours, no plug here:eek:) or a do it yourself version. IF its rigid tubes, you may spend alot of time getting the orientation of the tube to fitting connection correct. LOL---thats part of that 'education and recreation' thing.

Tom
 
Three and now four things have sold me on SMS.

1. Plumbing, and this was the big one. The difference between car gas and avgas can be $4/gal where I live. For that price difference, it's worth it to burn auto fuel. By the time a mechanical FI system is modified to fix vapor lock concerns, it's electrically dependent (2 fuel pumps near the tanks). So might as well have electrons run the brains too.

2. Tune-ability for LOP. The thought of doing mixture sweeps, order new fuel nozzles, install new fuel nozzles, do another mixture sweep, repeat as necessary. Then that's only accurate at one power setting, and a compromise everywhere else. That doesn't appeal to me. SDS (probably EFII too) is a bunch of button pushing and done. Go flying, balance the injectors on the EFI controller and it's set. No fiddling with buying new fuel nozzles, no compromise, just push some buttons and done.

3. Burning auto fuel, means no lead. That means O2 sensors and SDS can do closed loop. The computer tweaks the mixture to maintain the desired AFR. This feature is still in development, but has me very excited.

4. I'm Canadian and so is SDS. ;)
 
I know nothing about EFII or SDS and I am sure they work perfectly as advertised.
However, rapid tuning with a few keystrokes seems to be more of a benefit
to the seller (one fits all) of the system rather than the customer/builder, unless you are a racer or someone who changes engine configurations frequently.

While I am among a minority who fully intends to make changes (sometimes significant) to my airplane through its life, there are still plenty of pilots who are interested in tuning their Bendix and ignition for best efficiency. GAMI has plenty of satisfied customers, after all. SDS offers the ability to do exactly that tuning, and it's very easy to do. Much easier and faster than changing nozzle restrictors and doing repeated flights to hone in on "perfection".


Most builders order their engine and it stays the same for the life of the airplane or perhaps until the first overhaul....

...If you choose AFP for example, there is nothing to configure, same for LSE ignition...

If you ever have to swap nozzles to tighten up a GAMI spread, adjust idle mixture or even touch the red knob in flight, you have demonstrated the required "tuning skills" that make EFI an advantage.
 
Back
Top