BoatBanter.com - View Single Post - The 2-Cycle Gasoline Engine

wrote:
Del,
REMEMBER BACK 9 YEARS AGO, WHEN YOU STARTED READING THIS NEWSGROUP, A
LOT OF FOLKS POSTED ABOUT THEIR FICHT PROBLEMS WITH THE '98 AND SOME
'99 150-175HP ENGINES? OMC CAME OUT WITH THE FICHT 150 IN LATE SUMMER
OF '96.

This is dealer BS 98 was only 7 years ago:-) By claiming they were
released late 97 when the US season is over, they try to make it sound
longer.

IT WAS ONLY AVAILABLE IN A 20" SHAFT AND 150 HP AND THE MOTORS
MET THE 2006 EPA EMISSION LIMITS 10 YEARS BEFORE THAY HAD TO.

You keep using this same BS marketing line even with the E-Tecs, so
what??? hardly any of the Fichts lasted 10 years yet you quote the same
BS about E-tecs' EPA compliance, as if in hope they might still be
around & so what?? nobody is EPA outlawing older engines, but hey a
marketing deception is a marketing deception to you Bill & you are at it
again:-)

IN '98 THE FICHT CAME OUT WITH A 25" SHAFT FOR OFFSHORE BOATS, AND ON
THOSE APPLICATIONS, PROBLEMS SHOWED UP AFTER A WHILE IN CERTAIN
SITUATIONS. DAVID JONES, THEN PRESIDENT OF OMC, STATED THAT 1 IN 5
FICHTS WITH A 25" SHAFT HAD PROBLEMS, AND THEY WERE IN THE PROCESS OF
DETERMINING AND FIXING THEM. ALL THIS WAS IN THE MARINE MAGAZINES, ON
THE INTERNET, AND WAS SPREAD BY WORD OF MOUTH. EVEN THE AUSTRALIAN
BOATING MAGAZINES HAD ARTICLES ON THE PROBLEMS AND ON WHAT OMC WAS
DOING.

Read this para really carefully Tom, then re-read my explanations of
why & in what circumstances the Fichts failed.

Then imagine your new big heavy boat, with a high top speed therefore
having high prop pitch??? full of fuel & gear with your mates for a
trip, OK now imagine you're ploughing along in a no wake zone nose high
at say 1800 rpm, you know exactly what's happening inside the chambers
because I've told you oft enough, the totally uncooled almost
unlubricated pistons are getting hotter & hotter in the absurdly lean
poorly atomised mixture being ignited all over the place by a
continuously firing plug, maybe when the engines are a little old the
carbon buildup on a nick in the gasket or the spray protector???, means
just a single point on a single of your 12 pistons is over 250C???

You get to the end of the no wake zone & give it WOT, the spark goes
single fire, the mixture goes full rich, the throttle plates open, the
ECU advances the spark timing. "Suddenly" there is a perfect situation
to initiate detonation then unless you back off quickly it will be self
sustaining till???????? I predict if they're right about making the
pistons so strong they can survive then the heads will fail naxt!!! In 4
stokes they can even tulip the valves with detonation, cyl pressures can
momentarily spike to 1800psi, the entire block rings like a bell!!! (Hey
that was a Marcus line:-))

TO OMC'S CREDIT,

!!!!! Are you mad!!!! OMC was bleeding to death they would have just got
sued & gone to the wall more quickly if they hadn't fixed them!!!! Pity
they didn't really:-) could have saved lots of boaters lots of grief:-)

THEY SENT OUT SERVICE TEAMS TO RE-DO ALL THE '98 AND
'99 150-175'S IN THE FIELD WITH NEW CYLINDER HEADS AND REMAPPED
SOFTWARE, SPARK PLUGS, LINKAGE, ETC., ABOUT A 4 HOUR JOB PER MOTOR. THE
TEAMS WENT ALL AROUND THE COUNTRY TAKING CARE OF CUSTOMERS AND DEALER'S
MOTORS. THE MOTORS WORKED OK AFTER THE FIXES. NONE OF MY CUSTOMERS HAD
MAJOR PROBLEMS BUT I SAW MOTORS FROM other places that did. I also did
a lot of upgrade kit installations. I still service operational FICHTS
that are still used by families every season.

Merc's problems with Optimax resulted in a class action lawsuit, and
there may be one for the Yamaha 250-300 hp problems, but OMC did not
have any due to their effort to fix engines in the field and not just
gloss over the problem.

You learn this exact line at dealer school don't you Bill?? Dave gave
the same crap back then but hehehe, then came slinking back here trying
to sell Mercs:-) The same Mercs he'd told us he knew of warehouses full
of blown Opti powerheads:-) Ahh how sweet:-)

Also in 1999 OMC came out with the V4 FICHT in 90 and 115 hp sizes, as
well as a big block 200-225hp, and these motors did NOT HAVE THE
PROBLEMS THAT THE MID-SIZED 150-175'S DID.

So what!!!!! You behave as if "some" survive then it's all OK??? it
isn't it's a failed technology was from long before OMC even heard of
it. Had been dismissed out of hand as nonsense, all you, OMC & now E-tec
do is use consumers money to do the testing to prove it.

FOR 2000, the FICHT system was improved quite a bit and called FICHT
Ram, and really did well. It was quieter and smoother than the earlier
series, and was better on fuel use. In 2001 they came out with a new
block, the 3.3L and it is still used today, and that really made the
motors perform even better while the hp increased to 250. These
versions are still being produced today.

They went bankrupt Bill they didn't make engines at all!!!!

This is going beyond marketing spam & looking like you think people are
as stupid as you.

If the FICHT was so bad why is it still in production after 9 years?

There you go again!!! Ficht has not been in production for 9 years it
was for 3 then it sent a US icon Co bankrupt, it was then partly
resurrected so Bomb could comply with the coast guard recall so they
didn't actually start killing people!!! Again the detonation was causing
first the injectors to be forced from the heads then the fuel lines
started spraying fuel everywhere, because of the detonation vibration!!!
Detonation wrecks all sorts of things, bearing, blocks, heads & anything
attached to them.

Wouldn't you think that all you would read about was blown up motors
and powerheads stacked by the roadside? Why would a company still make
motors that are "blowing up"? Whay would Bombardier buy Johnson and
Evinrude knowing the motors were junk? Think about it !

It was all you could read about, they were all over the place even bill
boards ("Bill" boards get it:-)) were put up in Texas because Ficht were
blowing up & OMC dealers were not fixing!!!!!

Bomb is just like OMC, in trouble & selling a super cheap to build 2
stroke for the same price as a properly engineered 4 stroke; why???
maybe because it looks like quick US cash to the French???? Wake up Bill
you're the only one who has actually been taken in (OK maybe Tom to:-))

After a rocky start, FICHT and now its new E-TEC cousing is doing well.
It is only in the mind of "Karen-down-under", without any credentials
or experience in the outboard industry that FICHT is no good.

You asked about buying a '98 150 FICHT. Well, if you believe Karen,
then there is no such thing. There could not be any used FICHTS. Every
one blew up, there are piles of powerheads littering the landscape, and
owners have something else.
I stll maintain old FICHTS for customers who are doing fine with them.

1 in 5 failed!!! Chrysler tried lean burn in the 70s it had too hard
starting & too high a failure rate, Honda tried it in the 80s too high a
failure rate, OMC tried it in the 90s too high a failure rate except
unlike Chrysler & Honda they persisted & lost the Co:-) The French are
trying again in 2005 it too will have too high a failure rate. NB not
every single engine but enough that people will not buy them when they
find out your stories are BS Bill.

K

Been busy today so I'll keep the Krause lie of the day short.

This lying simpleton, after it became clear he was losing a thread
where he was displaying his usual lack of patriotism much less gratitude
for the brave men & women out there risking their everything, to keep
the likes of him safe, he just reverts to type.

But seriously can you imagine this uneducated union thug now claims
he is reviewing universities!!! & wait for it he poo poos the
engineering course!!! this from a lying uneducated union thug who
couldn't use a toaster without a union authorised electrician in attendance.

I've included just one of the followup responses but it was such a
bald faced lie it even embarrassed the rejoinders:-)

I have visited West Point, the Naval Academy, the Air Force Academy and
the sub training facility at Groton. Some years ago, I actually did look
over descriptions of some of the course material at Annapolis and the
c.v.'s of some of the faculty. I'm sure the engineering course material
is fairly rigorous, though it is more "trade-oriented" and did not look
up to MIT or CalTech standards. I mean, if your goal is to be an
aeronautical engineer, you're going to get better training at MIT or
CalTech or at any of a large number of other engineering schools. I
thought the faculty academic credentials no better than what is found at
a typical smaller four year public university. The military academies
turn out military officers with an education, not highly educated
military officers. But that is their purpose, eh?

--

Holy molly, grandma, put on your high boots.

Harry Krause, admitted graduate in the humanities with a degree in
English
is hereby qualified to critique the engineering curriculum of not
only West
Point, but also that of the Naval Academy and the Air Force Academy and
compare it to that of MIT and CalTech.

The above paragraph is a classic.

You missed your calling Harry.