Gene Kearns wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:21:29 +1100, K Smith
wrote:


This NG has been the only place, anywhere that has been shown to have
correctly predicted Ficht would fail & explain why....


Tripe Mercifully Snipped

Oh, geeze, not these half-applicable OCR scans from a IC Engine
textbook again....

All right, all ready, we know you *hate* Ficht.... we got it Karen.
Now, get over it and move on.....



Gee thanks Gene so on topic isn't enough hey??

Anyway I note you have no challenge to the material so far??? Thanks
good to know you're keeping an eye on it for me:-)

K

K Smith wrote in message ...
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:21:29 +1100, K Smith
wrote:


This NG has been the only place, anywhere that has been shown to have
correctly predicted Ficht would fail & explain why....


Tripe Mercifully Snipped

Oh, geeze, not these half-applicable OCR scans from a IC Engine
textbook again....

All right, all ready, we know you *hate* Ficht.... we got it Karen.
Now, get over it and move on.....



Gee thanks Gene so on topic isn't enough hey??

Anyway I note you have no challenge to the material so far??? Thanks
good to know you're keeping an eye on it for me:-)

K


My guess after reading several of your posts here is that no one wants
to challenge you, not because you know what you are talking about, but
because you may be an off-balance psychotic. You sure come across as
one.

Regardless of her questionable state of balance. ....

Just like the B1 bomber is so "unflyable" that it needs a computer to help
fly it, likewise DFI is so "unworkable" that it needs computerized precision
to help run it.

Yes the B1 *does* fly, and the DFI's *do* work. But both of them are quite
"unnatural". DFI got off to a rough start. Both OMC and Mercury had a lot
of "teething problems" with those critters.

I'm *almost* comfortable that they have them pretty well sorted out now.
But, were I to buy a DFI I'd go with Mercury over OMC. IMHO Mercury had a
bit less trouble with the early Opimax than OMC did with the FICHT

All that said, I'll give up my Mercury Tower of Power when they pry it from
my cold dead hands.

-W

"Mad Dog Dave" wrote in message

My guess after reading several of your posts here is that no one wants
to challenge you, not because you know what you are talking about, but
because you may be an off-balance psychotic. You sure come across as
one.

K Smith wrote:

Anyway I note you have no challenge to the material so far???

All you have done, aside from reinforcing the local
consensus that you are an obsessed loon, is to state a bunch
of internal combustion engine truisms. You have posted
nothing new, controversial, or not well understood by nearly
everyone who has a passing association with the art. What
you posted is the foundation of the technology and contains
nothing peculiar to any manufacturer.

Your troll has worked, you got some attention, you stirred
up some bored people, myself included, but other than that
you have failed to make a single statement to support or
dispute any manufacturer's claims or technology.

Only you know why you started this thread, it has no
foundation in fact as a reasonable and reasoned statement on
the validity of the Ficht technology. It is a very
enlightening illustration of an altered mental state, which
few here will deny, and adds nothing to the debate which
seems to have passed with the improvements made since you
suffered your initial insult.

Let it go, get over it. Speaking for myself at least, I
could care less what you think about Ficht and even less
about what you think about any other poster.

If any single poster on this group could be discribed as
irrelevant, it is you. And that is a fact by any definition.

Rick