Karen pretends to have some interest in large, butt ugly diesel outboards.

Todd Dye wrote in message news:z1XNb.13485
snip
..

Your incessant postings on this topic makes me wonder if you have stake in
another outboard manufacturer?


snip

Please add my little 1999 model 115 FICHT to the list of those owned by happy
owners.

During break in the engine had an annoying habit of dripping oil into the motor
well. This has stopped after approximately 120 hours of use. It slowly
diminished from about 20 hours until it stopped completely.

I like just about all outboards. The newish Merc 115 Opti is interesting and I
guess is one bank of the 225 Opti. Four strokes are, probably, the future of
outboards and as I expect they will have lost weight and improved hole shot
performance by the time I'm in the market I'll probably move on from my FICHT
then.

BTW, amongst it's two stroke brethern my 115 is the quietest, fastest, most
fuel efficient 115 I've seen.

YMMV.

Butch

JDavis1277 wrote:
Please add my little 1999 model 115 FICHT to the list of those owned by happy
owners.

During break in the engine had an annoying habit of dripping oil into the motor
well. This has stopped after approximately 120 hours of use. It slowly
diminished from about 20 hours until it stopped completely.

I like just about all outboards. The newish Merc 115 Opti is interesting and I
guess is one bank of the 225 Opti. Four strokes are, probably, the future of
outboards and as I expect they will have lost weight and improved hole shot
performance by the time I'm in the market I'll probably move on from my FICHT
then.

BTW, amongst it's two stroke brethern my 115 is the quietest, fastest, most
fuel efficient 115 I've seen.

YMMV.

Butch

Thank you to all the Ficht owners who took the trouble to reply.
Obviously I, like you, (& yes like you:-)) am very glad that your motors
have not failed, indeed a good majority of them "didn't" actually fail.

That you are in that majority is good & I wish you no ill.

However the "Ficht" DFI as a concept has failed, OMC bust, Bomb bailed,
etc etc, even the latest owners have chosen to drop the name outright,
given the numbers of failures.

As to what constitutes a failed design??? I guess it's an eye of the
beholder thing & what percentage of failed engines is too many????
likewise. I'd suggest that if GM or Ford had any that were above even a
tiny part of 1% as totally unrepairable save a new block/pistons etc,
that line would wreck the market for all models of their cars etc.
however that's just in the eye of this beholder.

You're happy so to you Ficht were 100% good, equally for the 2 in 5
owners who's engines failed, they're 100% unhappy. The fact your boats
have been greatly devalued because they carry a Ficht is again an
opinion thing.

Again thanks for going to the trouble to support your engines I
honestly appreciate it.

Seeing they're not sold anymore these posts weren't intended to start
any sort of war with you nor the dealers but to, in an unpressured way,
explain the reasons behind our "opinion". The explanations may be
flawed, even fatally so; by posting them it will give anyone the
opportunity to say whatever, just as you have.

Seeing there has been no real challenge on the basic facts, the
important things to have grasped are;

(i) Only fuel vapour burns never the liquid itself.

(ii) Fuels have an autoignition temp. & will self ignite when the vapour
is brought to or in contact with, that temp.

(iii) The flame front must travel to all the charge before the chamber
temp/pressure amalgam exceeds the fuel's autoignition temp. or the burn
is abnormal & unpredicable.

The next thread will move on to mainly petrol engines & the application
of these basics.

Best regards,


K

Hey, I don't think the purchase of a Ficht has devalued my boat. I will
guarantee to you, without a doubt, that it has increased the value of my
boat by double. Guaranteed.

Sure any new car or engine is going to have bugs, but you really seem to
have an axe to grind with this technology. What you have said, I have heard
the opposite.






"K Smith" wrote in message
...
JDavis1277 wrote:
Please add my little 1999 model 115 FICHT to the list of those owned by
happy
owners.

During break in the engine had an annoying habit of dripping oil into
the motor
well. This has stopped after approximately 120 hours of use. It slowly
diminished from about 20 hours until it stopped completely.

I like just about all outboards. The newish Merc 115 Opti is
interesting and I
guess is one bank of the 225 Opti. Four strokes are, probably, the
future of
outboards and as I expect they will have lost weight and improved hole
shot
performance by the time I'm in the market I'll probably move on from my
FICHT
then.

BTW, amongst it's two stroke brethern my 115 is the quietest, fastest,
most
fuel efficient 115 I've seen.

YMMV.

Butch

Thank you to all the Ficht owners who took the trouble to reply.
Obviously I, like you, (& yes like you:-)) am very glad that your motors
have not failed, indeed a good majority of them "didn't" actually fail.

That you are in that majority is good & I wish you no ill.

However the "Ficht" DFI as a concept has failed, OMC bust, Bomb bailed,
etc etc, even the latest owners have chosen to drop the name outright,
given the numbers of failures.

As to what constitutes a failed design??? I guess it's an eye of the
beholder thing & what percentage of failed engines is too many????
likewise. I'd suggest that if GM or Ford had any that were above even a
tiny part of 1% as totally unrepairable save a new block/pistons etc,
that line would wreck the market for all models of their cars etc.
however that's just in the eye of this beholder.

You're happy so to you Ficht were 100% good, equally for the 2 in 5
owners who's engines failed, they're 100% unhappy. The fact your boats
have been greatly devalued because they carry a Ficht is again an
opinion thing.

Again thanks for going to the trouble to support your engines I
honestly appreciate it.

Seeing they're not sold anymore these posts weren't intended to start
any sort of war with you nor the dealers but to, in an unpressured way,
explain the reasons behind our "opinion". The explanations may be
flawed, even fatally so; by posting them it will give anyone the
opportunity to say whatever, just as you have.

Seeing there has been no real challenge on the basic facts, the
important things to have grasped are;

(i) Only fuel vapour burns never the liquid itself.

(ii) Fuels have an autoignition temp. & will self ignite when the vapour
is brought to or in contact with, that temp.

(iii) The flame front must travel to all the charge before the chamber
temp/pressure amalgam exceeds the fuel's autoignition temp. or the burn
is abnormal & unpredicable.

The next thread will move on to mainly petrol engines & the application
of these basics.

Best regards,


K