Gene Kearns wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 21:12:12 +1100, "K. Smith" wrote:



Have you noticed.........



That there is never a citation?

Sorry Gene but once you have the text it really is a doddle to google it
up. I got abused for using ID's because well the forums are actually
trying to sell this crap like the dealers are, also I don't want to ping
anyones privacy which is fair enough.

I wish you blokes were so keen to make the E-Tec spruikers give any
material at all to back their clearly false claims??

Take this example of recent times, in his sad efforts to support E-Tec
he comes out with total BS & you say nothing??? What are you that lonely
you dare not even ask for fear the bullies won't play with you
anymore??? Don't be, they're just the usual non boating idiots we have
to tolerate around here always have & always will, but at least hold
them to their own blatantly false claims.

paste of just some E-Tec claims all from just one E-Tec spruiker but hey
this one is a true Krausite (please Gene NB he claims "side by side"
testing!!! what a smuck!!!);

dont get the verado - heavy and its a fuel pig. not to mention that
the supercharging is a joke - optimax engines beat the snot out of
verados in side-by-side tests for speed, hole shots, etc.

optimax is reasonably better in fuel efficiency, weight and power.

buy a boat with etecs - lighter, faster, more efficient.

OR (NB Gene he's claiming 34% over the previous yrs Fichts!!!
breathtaking; even by Krause standards)

Above idle the ETec seems to use as much or 0-15% more fuel as other
motors. This is based on the performance data I have seen so far.


interesting - it certainly isnt what i see with mine - we, my partner
and i, saved over 34% fuel based against the previous years fichts.

where did you get the performance data from?

OR Gene!!!! Read this "cruising" @ 35MPH on his claimed E-Tecs 8-11 US
gph!!!!! The contender with twin 225 anythings will be almost 30 gph at
35mph.

really? and you base this one what?


Thats the way BRP shaped the pistons to help distribute the fuel around
the sparkplug in lean burn. As why it is not so efficient at higher
rpms ... Any book about combustion engine design will tel


bull****. i average a little around 8 to 11 gph at cruise which is 35
mph. thats a damn sight better than any four stroke or two cycle on
the market today.

and who the hell cruises at wot?

OR (NB again Gene 30%!!!! imagine 30% less fuel!!! you'd see it on the
evening news, the Arabs would be bombing Canada:-))

Dont get me wrong .. I think the ETecs are great motors and I am close
to getting one ... but its just that from the data I have seen, their
fuel efficieny is just not better as 4stroke or Optimax.


what kind of - data - are you looking for? compared to what other
boats use for fuel in my marina, similar boats - regulators, bluefins,
and one contender with twin hpdi yamahas - compared to mine with
optimaxes, i use less fuel by at least 30% - in fact, one guy is
selling his optimaxes with less than 400 hours on them to get etecs.


OR;- do you really think this nuffnuff has any idea what a contender
might weigh, much less that he owns one with twin 225 E-Tecs????? Come
on Gene embarrass yourself as usual & say you think this is for real,
I'll send it to the contender people for you:-)

selling his optimaxes with less than 400 hours on them to get etecs.


let me hear what the results are .. I honestly doubt he will save fuel
by doing that..


we will see - i'm betting he saves at least 20%. ill know by the end
of feb which is when he takes delivery.

i can tell you that i get the exact same gph rate with the contender
fisharound (31 foot long) that is 7,000 pounds heavier than its
predecessor. a contender 31 cc. the cc had 225 fichts, the fisharound
has 225 etecs.

OR ................ well that's enough for now:-)





But when the "real" side-by-side tests for speed, hole shots, etc.
facts arrived it was just another lie!!! as big & false as any the
dealers will tell:-) Except this one tries to gain cred by claiming to
have bought 2 of these slow, heavy, expensive & fuel hungry things &
that's not even mentioning the risks related to the Ficht based design &
you say nothing??? Cowards you really are.

Paste of the truth about false advertising at it's best;

I'm sorry to provide a contradictory data point, courtesy of the folks at Bass and Walleye Boats. In the 12/2005 issue they had the 200HP DFI shootout where they compared the Optimax, HPDI, and Etec on identical bass boats. In Optimum Fuel Economy, the Etec was last at 4.4 mpg, compared to 5.5 on the HPDI and 5.8 for the Optimax. At WOT it was 3.7 for the etec, 4.2 for the merc, and 4.1 for the yamaha.

Top speeds were almost identical.

0-30 hole shot was 8.2 for the etec, 7.6 for the Optimax, and 6.7 for the HPDI.

And list price was highest for the etec.

Note, the hulls were weighed and made to be exactly the same.

All setups were done by the bass cat factory folks

Here is a quote "After all the emissions and mileage hype from Evinrude, we expected the E-Tec HO tr really put a hurtin' on the other two when it came to the fuel fillup. Yet that was not the case at all."


& the answer the E-Tec BS'ter gives is & you'll love this it's the
admission & final confirmation that all his E-Tec claims are nothing
more than BS.

I'm sorry to provide a contradictory data point, courtesy of the folks
at Bass and Walleye Boats. In the 12/2005 issue they had the 200HP DFI
shootout where they compared the Optimax, HPDI, and Etec on identical
bass boats. In Optimum Fuel Economy, the Etec was last at 4.4 mpg,
compared to 5.5 on the HPDI and 5.8 for the Optimax. At WOT it was 3.7
for the etec, 4.2 for the merc, and 4.1 for the yamaha.


bull....


Yet the original BS'ter who I suspect doesn't even have an E-Tec by the
way, you let off scott free??? none of you even ask??? Pathetic no
wonder you get ripped off by this low injection pressure, lean mixtures
at power, continuous spark, no proper lubrication mumbo jumbo, you've
been warned ............................. again:-)


K