I realize that ambient temperature will have a larger effect with regards to to fuel temperatures than ohmic heat generated by motors and solenoids in the fuel system. But until someone comes up with a bolt on that can control the weather, I think we're stuck with what we're dealt.

I realize it may seem like a nit picky thing to mention, but when you're dealing with motors already operating at incredible volumetric efficiencies and people are willing to shell out several hundred dollars for a cat back exhaust to pick up 2 hp over 500 RPM of the power band, I say its all about the details, and warrants mention.

As far as me teaching a lesson, I know I prefer to know the reasons behind the answers and I'm sure others do too. I realize yourself and others are also quite knowledgeable, but a lot of other people are still learning. I'm still pretty new to the game myself, as I am a recent convert from the muscle car camp. But when it comes down to it, I'm allowed to post whatever I like so long as I obey the forums guidelines, and there will be times where I might be mistaken as I am not infallable. It is your decision on whether you want to read my posts or not. I know I will most likely read yours.

Oh, and by the way

Atomization is a mechanical process resulting in a change in surface area having nothing to do with heat, Vaporization is a thermodynamic process resulting in a change of state, having everything to do with heat

But I'm sure you knew that already

 

True enough, my mistake in using the wrong terminology, fact still remains that higher pressures are not the solution to a possible lean condition, however, it CAN prevent damage in the event that the injectors cannot flow the demanded amount of fuel for the condition. On Honda engines, you will NOT find this method commonly used on supercharged or turbocharged engines, but it is quite common practice in sub-75 shot nitrous tuning, and the reason is simple. Nitrous has a lower boiling point than gasoline, so it will absorb the heat from the intake air, while introducing more oxygen into the intake tract, at the same time, the fuel rail pressure increases and you run the risk of having a poorly atomized "stream" [as opposed to spray, which is by far the more desireable dispersion] being injected into the engine, but since there is a higher concentration of dense oxygen atoms in the intake, atomization is handled by the collisions between fuel molecules and the atoms in the intake air. Boosted powerplants, on the other hand, cannot use this same technique as effectively because the intake air relies on higher pressure to move more air into the cylinder, rather than a higher concentration of fast moving oxygen [which would be able to break the fuel into smaller, more efficient molecules for combustion without the need for full vaporization], and since the intake air on a turbo engine will likely never be as low as in a nitrous engine, proper atomization is important in order to give enough time for the fuel to vaporize and disperse about the cylinder.

But my point is still that this is all a moot point since he plans to swap an engine in anyways, and will likely end up buying the right jets to turn the current engine into a large paperweight...

 

Which is why I suggested he goes with the larger injector, I just used a reliability argument instead of a fuel delivery argument, but both are crucial and valid