Billgran wrote:
"del cecchi" wrote in message
...

"Billgran" wrote in message
m...

"Del Cecchi" wrote in message
...

wrote:


The suzuki 4stroke 140 is 410lb, the Evinrude 135/150 is 419lb

(4 cyl. motor vs. a V6)



The suzuke 200/225 is 580lb while the Evinrude is 524lb




...and how much does the Yamaha F225, Honda 225, and the Merc Verado

225

weigh compared to the Evinrude V6?

Bill Grannis
service manager


Now Bill, I was just refuting your generalization that the Bombardier
motors were lighter than 4 strokes. And I don't have the motor guide
out of bass and walleye boats handy.

The Yamaha 115 and merc version also aren't much heavier than my 115
carb'd two stroke as I recall.

And why should I want a V6 Evinrude instead of a 4cyl Suzuki? What's
the big deal with the V6? Cars used them (4 stroke of course) because
they reused much of the tooling and parts for the V8s that already
existed. And apparently 2 stroke inline 4s have issues leading to
bizarre solutions like the 2+2 on my Merc. But the 4 in my accord is
just peachy, as is the one in my CB750.

So, what is superior about the Evinrude 135/150 as compared to the
Suzuki ?

Ok looked up the yamaha. The 200/225/250 are 580-590 lb. The 150 is
466 lb.

So looks like maybe 50 lb over the Evinrude. Is 50 lb a big deal?

What is the relative selling price?

If I was shopping I would buy a 4 stroke at this point in time.

del cecchi



Del,

My "gerneralization" on wieght was meant for engines with the same number
of cylinders, mostly the popular 200hp range and higher. The midrange motors
70-175 are a mix of 3,4, and 6 cylinders and can't be compared that way.

What year CB750? I had a CB750 K2 that I rode for 27 years, even when I had
Harleys, too. Sold all kinds of parts, hop-up stuff, repair kits, etc. on
Ebay last summer. I couldn't believe the prices the people paid and the
interest in those old bikes.

Your other post mentioned information dribbling out about DFI motors, all
that is open knowledge in boating magazines, Internet forums, Industtry
publications, Industry news sources, etc. Ask away if you have any specific
questions, you know my credentials and credibilty after all these years.

Bill Grannis
service manager



It is a 1976, been sitting for a few years now. My retirement project :-)

I heard a lot of rumors that the early 150's didn't do so well, on this
group and on the Bass Fishing board at wmi.org or whatever it is. But
the magazines I read, like Bass and Walleye Boats (which I really like),
just pretended it wasn't happening. And the folks I talked to at the
boat show..... they just gave me blank looks.

Maybe Industry Publications or other specialized areas had some
information, but I didn't see it. And I've been reading rec.boats
starting in 96 or 97 when I was shopping for my Lund.

So here is a blunt question: If one bought an early Ficht 150, what was
the likelyhood that one would have had major problems with the
powerhead? I have heard the big blocks were better, what is the
comparable number for them? And what had the rate dropped to by the
time of the OMC bankruptcy?

I am, just to satisfy my curiousity, trying to understand whether indeed
2 strokes are barely feasable and direct injected two strokes have
fundamental problems that doom any attempt to make them work reliably,
or whether quality problems, whether isolated or pervasive, caused the
appearance of a flaw.

I heard stories of sooting. I heard stories of poor quality assurance
when switching supplies for parts. But I certainly wasn't in the story
flow. So what is your opinion as to the root cause of the problems?

del

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 08:17:23 -0600, Del Cecchi
wrote:

~~ mucho snippage ~~

So here is a blunt question: If one bought an early Ficht 150, what was
the likelyhood that one would have had major problems with the
powerhead? I have heard the big blocks were better, what is the
comparable number for them? And what had the rate dropped to by the
time of the OMC bankruptcy?

I am, just to satisfy my curiousity, trying to understand whether indeed
2 strokes are barely feasable and direct injected two strokes have
fundamental problems that doom any attempt to make them work reliably,
or whether quality problems, whether isolated or pervasive, caused the
appearance of a flaw.

I heard stories of sooting. I heard stories of poor quality assurance
when switching supplies for parts. But I certainly wasn't in the story
flow. So what is your opinion as to the root cause of the problems?

I can answer a couple of these questions for you.

It was the early 150 FICHTs that had the major problems. And those
were corrected eventually. And if you have an early 150 FICHT that
is running, the likely circumstance is that it's been upgraded and is
ok.

With respect to DI engines - anything you hear about them being
fundamentally flawed by a certain individual on this newsgroup or by
competitive dealers is strictly personal opinion and unfounded in the
real world. DI is the way to go with two strokes. I am also
impressed by the E-TEC engines - my new boat will have E-TECS.

I currently own three FICHTs and with one exception, have never had
any major problems and those problems that I did have weren't much
different that any new engine would have - easily and quickly
correctable. That one exception was related to the electronics
(something that almost never happens even on other type engines - a
stator failure which cascaded into the computer) and not the power
head.

As to soot - use a good grade gas, make sure you use stabilizer and
use the FICHT oil instead of a industry standard brand. Haven't had
any soot problems yet. I did have on one, but I was using el cheapo
gas on the way to the launch. Switched over and no more problem.

I know several shell fish types (clammers) who have FICHTS with
incredible amounts of hours on them and they are running just fine
thank you very much. :)

I am a barely technically literate very satisfied FICHT owner - Bill
can give you the heavy duty technical stuff.

Trying to keep the barbarians from giving you a false impression. :)

Later,

Tom

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 08:17:23 -0600, Del Cecchi
wrote:

~~ mucho snippage ~~


So here is a blunt question: If one bought an early Ficht 150, what was
the likelyhood that one would have had major problems with the
powerhead? I have heard the big blocks were better, what is the
comparable number for them? And what had the rate dropped to by the
time of the OMC bankruptcy?

I am, just to satisfy my curiousity, trying to understand whether indeed
2 strokes are barely feasable and direct injected two strokes have
fundamental problems that doom any attempt to make them work reliably,
or whether quality problems, whether isolated or pervasive, caused the
appearance of a flaw.

I heard stories of sooting. I heard stories of poor quality assurance
when switching supplies for parts. But I certainly wasn't in the story
flow. So what is your opinion as to the root cause of the problems?


I can answer a couple of these questions for you.

It was the early 150 FICHTs that had the major problems. And those
were corrected eventually. And if you have an early 150 FICHT that
is running, the likely circumstance is that it's been upgraded and is
ok.

Alice in wonderland stuff!!! It's become a religion for those who have
a boat worth nothing because they're unfortunate enough to have a Ficht
on the back, sorta like hostages making friends with the kidnappers, in
this case you are helping lying dealers talk the BS up so they can rip
more unsuspecting people off with their latest consumer funded experiments.


With respect to DI engines - anything you hear about them being
fundamentally flawed by a certain individual on this newsgroup or by
competitive dealers is strictly personal opinion and unfounded in the
real world. DI is the way to go with two strokes. I am also
impressed by the E-TEC engines - my new boat will have E-TECS.


Well I guess you can say that Tom so I guess as a rejoinder I'm
entitled to say we told you Ficht & Optimax would fail & we were right
except unlike all the other hangers on we told you up front pre the
failures in 98-99 & we even explained why in long tedious detail:-)

Before the subject OMC dealer chokes on his latest glossy E-Tec
marketing brochu-) I have to immediately acknowledge I "personally"
make no claim for myself, that this was a collaborative effort the major
players being my blokes, Marcus & Dell. We all disagreed & even had
"spirited" disputes but in the end ......... we all agreed as Alice said
curiouser & curiouser:-)

You need to find just one single verifiable document Tom that predates
ours & then you can criticise but till then I say we have the runs on
the board, here we say hit for 6, I think you'd say slam dunk???:-).
With E-Tec we'll get even more & again well ahead of time:-) This mad
attempt to make an engine piston strong enough just to live through
detonation??? A giggle of huge proportions!!!

I currently own three FICHTs and with one exception, have never had
any major problems and those problems that I did have weren't much
different that any new engine would have - easily and quickly
correctable. That one exception was related to the electronics
(something that almost never happens even on other type engines - a
stator failure which cascaded into the computer) and not the power
head.



You have no clue what the "major" problem was all you know is what the
dealer chose to tell you or what he parrots from "tech training". But
hey why are you even happy??? you did worse than the head of OMC
admitted???? he only admitted a failure rate of 1 in 5, you sadly got 1
in 3:-)

Gee the major spruiker of Ficht in this NG is a Florida dealer (you
know Tom sun & sand, all year season???) he painted himself as knowing
all there was to know about Ficht & when we immediately saw that Ficht
"couldn't" work because of poor atomisation, lean mixtures at power &
multiple spark firing, he of course personally abused me as only a
spammer can when their sell sell sell line is challenged.

Eventually we showed him how it worked by displaying the Ficht patents
to him then & only then we finally got him to actually measure inside a
Ficht injector because he'd been "taught" at tech training that the
Ficht injector was a solenoid driven piston in a bore!!!:-) huge lie!!!
He actually didn't even know how it worked!!! Even after he found it had
to operate as we had advised that didn't stop him, he continued with the
sell sell sell spam even as people who had fallen for it were suffering
the consequences.

So when the Fichts really started to fail, just as we had "pre"
predicted!! guess what this spammer claimed he'd "never" even seen a
failed Ficht!!! at this time people were putting ani Ficht billboard up
in Texas:-)

Worse much worse in my view, when OMC went under, taking 1.3Bil that's
Bil Tom of union retirees money becasue hey OMC were fully unionised so
the funds just gave them other eople's money!!! (a whole seperate
scandal), 7000 workers got chucked but clearly still not the right
ones:-) & endless boaters were left hanging with faulty motors &
worthless boats, then just like all the other spamming NG OMC dealers he
ran away!!!! & didn't even respond to specific pleas for help from
people who had been conned into buying them.

As to soot - use a good grade gas, make sure you use stabilizer and
use the FICHT oil instead of a industry standard brand. Haven't had
any soot problems yet. I did have on one, but I was using el cheapo
gas on the way to the launch. Switched over and no more problem.

You are being dealer conned; the so called "soot" buildup is because
the lean mixtures make excessive heat which bakes the tiny amounts of oil.

They've blamed every thing & everyone but the truth is it's the poor
atomisation, being too lean at power, unreliable actual ignition timing
when lean & the very risky oiling. It never was the pistons supplier's
fault, gee wake up Tom, the same pistons worked OK in the carbed
versions of the very same engine indeed most still do, the oil?? give it
up this is BS & then the fuel?? what a hoot:-), every other IC engine in
the biggest using country of IC engines runs fine on something we call
petrol, if Ficht can't then they shouldn't be selling them, oops forgot
the laws of physics saw to it they don't, just as they will with E-tec.



I know several shell fish types (clammers) who have FICHTS with
incredible amounts of hours on them and they are running just fine
thank you very much. :)

So what??? 1 in 5 failed!!!!! well in your case 1 in 3 :-) 4 out of 5
is not good enough!!! 95 out of 100 is still not good enough imagine if
5% of Fords engines failed????

Considering they charge more than the price of a medium sized car, you
know Tom, with wheels, tyres. brakes, auto trans, seats, windscreen
wipers, crash testing, etc etc yet these idiots are trying to rip you
off with a an unglorified lawn mower engine hooked to a problematic
right angle drive???


I am a barely technically literate very satisfied FICHT owner - Bill
can give you the heavy duty technical stuff.

Partly right:-) & a classic target to start sleeping with the
kidnappers, hope you don't start robbing banks with them Tom.

Trying to keep the barbarians from giving you a false impression. :)

Trying to keep the actual same people who spammed Ficht from doing it
all over again:-)


Later,

Tom


K

Krause's lie of the day is a bit of a double header sorry, but so
many lies so little time:-)

Whenever his total lack of any real boating knowledge looks like
uncovering him as the sad little liar he is, he posts some crazy list of
boats he claims are his base, here are just a few of his claims, he has
tried to sustain these lies & as each one is shown to be a fabrication
he just invents a new one, the latest is the "Parker".

Don't feel conned nor stupid if you've been taken in by him, he
make exactly the same lies up in the jet ski NGs when he used to pollute
them with his crap, can you believe it he claimed to be a jet skier!!!!!
(responsible & caring in the socialist way of course:-))

This idiot has never owned a boat & never will he is totally devoid
of any boating experience nor knowledge, other than what he picks up in
this NG & the occasional paid charter fishing trip.



Here are some:



Hatteras 43' sportfish
Swan 41' racing/cruising sloop
Morgan 33
O'Day 30
Cruisers, Inc., Mackinac 22
Century Coronado
Bill Luders 16, as sweet a sailboat as ever caught a breeze.
Century 19' wood lapstrake with side wheel steering
Cruisers, Inc. 18' and 16' wood lapstrakes
Wolverines. Molded plywood. Gorgeous. Several. 14,15,17 footers
with various
Evinrudes
Lighting class sailboat
Botved Coronet with twin 50 hp Evinrudes. Interesting boat.
Aristocraft (a piece of junk...13', fast, held together with spit)
Alcort Sunfish
Ancarrow Marine Aquiflyer. 22' footer with two Caddy Crusaders.
Guaranteed 60 mph. In the late 1950's.
Skimmar brand skiff
Arkansas Traveler fiberglass bowrider (I think it was a bowrider)
Dyer Dhow
Su-Mark round bilge runabout, fiberglass
Penn Yan runabouts. Wood.
Old Town wood and canvas canoe
Old Town sailing canoe...different than above canoe




I own the following boats:


a 36' "lobster" style boat
a 19' center console fishing boat
an 11' inflatable dinghy
1/2 of a canoe


Those are the types of boats I currently own. I'm also in the market for
some interesting kind of lightweight flatbottomed skiff, similar to the
old Skimmar, for the "new" 51-year-old 10 hp outboard I recently bought.


One of the boats is kept on dry land within a half mile of Chesapeake
Bay. One is kept at a private covered boat dock in a little creek off
Chesapeake Bay. One is kept in the backyard of a friend who lives much
closer to the Shenandoah River than I do. And one is kept next to the
36-footer."

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:43:41 +1100, "K. Smith"
wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 08:17:23 -0600, Del Cecchi
wrote:

~~ snippage ~~
Trying to keep the barbarians from giving you a false impression. :)

Trying to keep the actual same people who spammed Ficht from doing it
all over again:-)

Karen, I've said this before and I'll say it again.

I have great appreciation for any opinion you would care to share on
other matters pertaining to boats and engines. You have knowledge to
impart and when you want to, you share good information.

In this area you are nothing more than a loud voice making lots of
noise and no sense. My experience and the experience of others is in
direct contradiction to your constant yammering on the subject of
FICHT and I suspect that it's something personal, not professional.

I just wish you'd knock it off - it's not convincing to anybody who
owns a FICHT and it's only making you look foolish.

All the best.

Live long and prosper,

Tom

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:43:41 +1100, "K. Smith"
wrote:


Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 08:17:23 -0600, Del Cecchi
wrote:


~~ snippage ~~

Trying to keep the barbarians from giving you a false impression. :)

Trying to keep the actual same people who spammed Ficht from doing it
all over again:-)


Karen, I've said this before and I'll say it again.

I have great appreciation for any opinion you would care to share on
other matters pertaining to boats and engines. You have knowledge to
impart and when you want to, you share good information.

In this area you are nothing more than a loud voice making lots of
noise and no sense. My experience and the experience of others is in
direct contradiction to your constant yammering on the subject of
FICHT and I suspect that it's something personal, not professional.

Gee Tom "your experience" is 1 in 3 failed, OMC finally admitted as a
marketing strategy for their latest fix no less:-) that only 1 in 5
failed:-)

So I'd prefer the experience of those I respect along with, the 7000
who got chucked out of work, the 1.3 bil union pensions lost, the loss
of a US icon Co. About the only good to coime of it was a few of the
lying dealers took a bath:-)


I just wish you'd knock it off - it's not convincing to anybody who
owns a FICHT and it's only making you look foolish.

Yes the old dealer line doing "me" a favour by stopping me criticising
faulty products being marketed to the public for testing.

It's all been tried before so I won't "knock it off" & again with E-Tec
remember where , when, the detail of & from who you heard it first:-)


All the best.

Live long and prosper,

Tom

Same to you, but don't get conned again or you'll never see any boat
value again:-)

K

Krause's lie of the day is a bit of a double header sorry, but so
many lies so little time:-)

Whenever his total lack of any real boating knowledge looks like
uncovering him as the sad little liar he is, he posts some crazy list of
boats he claims are his base, here are just a few of his claims, he has
tried to sustain these lies & as each one is shown to be a fabrication
he just invents a new one, the latest is the "Parker".

Don't feel conned nor stupid if you've been taken in by him, he
make exactly the same lies up in the jet ski NGs when he used to pollute
them with his crap, can you believe it he claimed to be a jet skier!!!!!
(responsible & caring in the socialist way of course:-))

This idiot has never owned a boat & never will he is totally devoid
of any boating experience nor knowledge, other than what he picks up in
this NG & the occasional paid charter fishing trip.



Here are some:



Hatteras 43' sportfish
Swan 41' racing/cruising sloop
Morgan 33
O'Day 30
Cruisers, Inc., Mackinac 22
Century Coronado
Bill Luders 16, as sweet a sailboat as ever caught a breeze.
Century 19' wood lapstrake with side wheel steering
Cruisers, Inc. 18' and 16' wood lapstrakes
Wolverines. Molded plywood. Gorgeous. Several. 14,15,17 footers
with various
Evinrudes
Lighting class sailboat
Botved Coronet with twin 50 hp Evinrudes. Interesting boat.
Aristocraft (a piece of junk...13', fast, held together with spit)
Alcort Sunfish
Ancarrow Marine Aquiflyer. 22' footer with two Caddy Crusaders.
Guaranteed 60 mph. In the late 1950's.
Skimmar brand skiff
Arkansas Traveler fiberglass bowrider (I think it was a bowrider)
Dyer Dhow
Su-Mark round bilge runabout, fiberglass
Penn Yan runabouts. Wood.
Old Town wood and canvas canoe
Old Town sailing canoe...different than above canoe




I own the following boats:


a 36' "lobster" style boat
a 19' center console fishing boat
an 11' inflatable dinghy
1/2 of a canoe


Those are the types of boats I currently own. I'm also in the market for
some interesting kind of lightweight flatbottomed skiff, similar to the
old Skimmar, for the "new" 51-year-old 10 hp outboard I recently bought.


One of the boats is kept on dry land within a half mile of Chesapeake
Bay. One is kept at a private covered boat dock in a little creek off
Chesapeake Bay. One is kept in the backyard of a friend who lives much
closer to the Shenandoah River than I do. And one is kept next to the
36-footer."

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 17:03:50 +1100, "K. Smith"
wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:43:41 +1100, "K. Smith"
wrote:


Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 08:17:23 -0600, Del Cecchi
wrote:


~~ snippage ~~

Trying to keep the barbarians from giving you a false impression. :)

Trying to keep the actual same people who spammed Ficht from doing it
all over again:-)


Karen, I've said this before and I'll say it again.

I have great appreciation for any opinion you would care to share on
other matters pertaining to boats and engines. You have knowledge to
impart and when you want to, you share good information.

In this area you are nothing more than a loud voice making lots of
noise and no sense. My experience and the experience of others is in
direct contradiction to your constant yammering on the subject of
FICHT and I suspect that it's something personal, not professional.

Gee Tom "your experience" is 1 in 3 failed, OMC finally admitted as a
marketing strategy for their latest fix no less:-) that only 1 in 5
failed:-)

One in three failed yes. However it was not a mechanical failure - it
was an electrical failure. You yourself admitted, along with Bill,
that a stator failure is almost unheard of in any outboard engine. The
Bombardier engineers were so interested in it, they paid for the parts
and labor so they could get their hands on the stator and computer to
try and understand what happened. Which they didn't have to do
because it was an OMC engine.

The resulting voltage cascade took out the computer which I would
have expected to have happened - no manufacturer takes the proper
precautions in protecting onboard computers from huge cascade failures
like this. So it was strictly a one-off - very rare, very unusual.

You couldn't be more wrong and the unfortunate thing is that anything
you have to say worthwhile is severely diminished.

Sad really.

Later,

Tom

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 17:03:50 +1100, "K. Smith"
wrote:

One in three failed yes. However it was not a mechanical failure




Where did you get the figure 1 in 3 failed?

It was David Jones the then president of OMC that told a news conference
that 1 in 5 1998 25" shaft FICHTS had problems. I reported that quote here
on the newsgroup back then.

Bill Grannis
service manager

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 17:03:50 +1100, "K. Smith"
wrote:


Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:43:41 +1100, "K. Smith"
wrote:



Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 08:17:23 -0600, Del Cecchi
wrote:


~~ snippage ~~


Trying to keep the barbarians from giving you a false impression. :)

Trying to keep the actual same people who spammed Ficht from doing it
all over again:-)


Karen, I've said this before and I'll say it again.

I have great appreciation for any opinion you would care to share on
other matters pertaining to boats and engines. You have knowledge to
impart and when you want to, you share good information.

In this area you are nothing more than a loud voice making lots of
noise and no sense. My experience and the experience of others is in
direct contradiction to your constant yammering on the subject of
FICHT and I suspect that it's something personal, not professional.

Gee Tom "your experience" is 1 in 3 failed, OMC finally admitted as a
marketing strategy for their latest fix no less:-) that only 1 in 5
failed:-)


One in three failed yes. However it was not a mechanical failure - it
was an electrical failure. You yourself admitted, along with Bill,
that a stator failure is almost unheard of in any outboard engine. The
Bombardier engineers were so interested in it, they paid for the parts
and labor so they could get their hands on the stator and computer to
try and understand what happened. Which they didn't have to do
because it was an OMC engine.

The resulting voltage cascade took out the computer which I would
have expected to have happened - no manufacturer takes the proper
precautions in protecting onboard computers from huge cascade failures
like this. So it was strictly a one-off - very rare, very unusual.

You couldn't be more wrong and the unfortunate thing is that anything
you have to say worthwhile is severely diminished.

Fascinating stuff Tom:-) So you confirm in your "experience" 1 in 3
Ficht failed???

Yes yes Tom I've heard it all before you like what I say so long as you
agree with it, are you absolutely sure you're not an OMC dealer???
possibly in a previous life???

Anyway if I upset you too much then just stop supporting Bill's spam &
I'll have no cause to correct you:-) Or if that's too much for a Koala
to bear try killfiling me, don't ask Krause how to do it though:-) he
claims he has me killed yet answers in 10 minutes; hey maybe that just
expedites msgs???

Anyway so far nobody, not you, not spam man Bill, not Humpty Dumpty
have actually challenged the technical merit of what I say, so I can
only assume on that front it's all tickety boo but you & spam Bill are
just trying to keep it quiet as long as you can. You to save what little
boat value is left & Bill?? well so he can sell more :-)


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.

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. 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.

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.

TO OMC'S CREDIT, 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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.