Harry Krause wrote:
K. Smith wrote:



Had a look at the chart, what's the issue???

It confirms that the modern 2 strokes use less oil than the older ones,
but this is an allusion really when you take into account the extra
costs & while the dealers won't admit it you "should" clean the holding
tank every year.



An allusion, eh? An allusion is a pun. And how about providing some
legitimate cites that indicate modern two stroke oil tanks need to be
cleaned every year. Cites from manufacturers, refineries, et cetera. Not
your illusional bull.

I don't need any; my "bull" about these experimental engines has be
spot on since they were released, we said they'd fail & they did, but
most importantly we explained why & all actions by the spruikers still
trying to sell them have confirmed us as correct (NB "us/we" I've never
claimed & still don't that this is my personal work, my "blokes" include
some clever engineers & we have some local knowledge of orbital)

One of the defects in all the oil injection 2 stroke systems is the
fact the oil can sit in a vented tank for season after season,
particularly in cold climates this is lunacy, always has been even pre
dfi, of course if they admit it then their oil usage spruiking line goes
in the bin with the unused oil:-) So gee it's only a small risk & after
all we can blame the customer, or the oil or walmart:-).

Even a 4 stroke nobody would say oil can last years in the sump even if
you don't use the engine, it will absorb moisture.

I'm proud there are no "cites" about the defects in the DFIs, because I
copped endless abuse from you & the dealers when I warned you years in
advance exactly what was going to happen. Of course you defenders all
had vested motives, the dealers?? turns out despite their lies they were
getting up to 30% "rebates" to keep flogging known defective motors &
you?? you work for a union investment fund who was in bed with Soros, so
you helped to rip off not just boaters, but thousands of genuine workers
who were reliant upon their pensions.


Once in there oil subject to heat & moisture

deteriorates into sludge with even the smallest amounts of water.


This from a woman who has never even seen a modern two stroke outboard?

Hmm you wish:-) You post any cite from anywhere that predates mine in
this newsgroup warning they would fail & importantly explaining why.



There is another issue with the dfi 2 strokes & their oil, it's related
to raw oil injected into the crankcase, the oil builds up till excess is
"transferred", it either then gets burnt or goes straight through the
exhaust as raw oil. The system injects very small amounts at idle or
even low revs, however the oil is subject to considerable heat buildup,
unlike 4 strokes oil or even an old tech 2 stroke when it was diluted
with fuel & traveled through the engine relatively quickly. This is why
they've promoted special oils, because the oil can get hot enough to
bake behind the rings & it's all down hill from there.



Ahhh...the manufacturers suggest using special oils to avoid a problem.
How clever of them, eh?

Well it's confirmation that exactly what we warned of from the
beginning is true, just as the latest attempts with "special" alloy in
the pistons?? this is a hoot!!! & now a "sensor" (read knock sensor:-))
to sense "abnormal combustion" the standard euphemism for detonation:-)

Yes they've taken 7 yrs to confirm that they now accept the nature of
the problem, the problem they denied year after year even existed!!!
even as huge Cos went broke on account of it.

Trouble is it still won't work!!! they're trying to treat the symptom
by making the oil higher temp tolerant, the pistons so they won't melt
till a higher temp & the injection so it can try to "adjust" to the
detonation.

However the root cause remains; at power overly lean, poorly atomised
mixtures are unreliable & will lead to an engine failure rate too high
for consumer usage, sure not ever single engine just the odd one here &
there is plenty.

They admitted to 1 in 5 but 1 in 100 is still too high, imagine if 1 in
100 ford engines failed:-). Just to be absolutely sure they get a high
failure rate they've added crazy continuous fire ignition & a marginal
lubrication system.

Seems the big engine manufacturers were right to reject Ficht & orbital
as amateurs, at least merc have seen the light & will be rid of them,
not soon enough but still. As for the latest get rich quick mob using
consumers as engine test dummies?? well you've heard it here first....
again:-)



Harry is a liar & has never actually owned a boat much less an optimax
engine. As for his old "hundreds of hours" lie, when he fabricated that
phantom boat in 98 he claimed here after a few mths use he had 200 hours
on it, it's just more evidence of a total lie.

K


Ms. Smith, I know you're hurting, and hurting badly, but nature does
take its toll, and you'll just have to drop your prices. I don't think
the foreign sailors coming into your home port will cough up the two
bits you used to charge...

Thanks Krause a bit of that sort of abuse certainly confirms your lies,
which you just keep telling.

Now please have yet another go at setting your killfile so you don't
keep answering me, I'm happy with that. If you don't know how to do it
properly just email mail me as above but at tpg com au & I'll gladly
assist .

K