|
quietest outboards, some details.
Looking to power a 17 to 19 shallow V scow bow open boat, ply or alum (I
know it's noisy). I guess that means 4 stroke, 25 to 35 hp. Not going off shore, just rivers and swamps. Want to cruise around with scaring away the scenery or losing friends. Normally canoe, and love quiet watercraft. Thanks. Tom |
quietest outboards, some details.
"Tom Hooper" wrote in message ... Looking to power a 17 to 19 shallow V scow bow open boat, ply or alum (I know it's noisy). I guess that means 4 stroke, 25 to 35 hp. Not going off shore, just rivers and swamps. Want to cruise around with scaring away the scenery or losing friends. Normally canoe, and love quiet watercraft. Thanks. Tom Tom, You might want to check out the Evinrude E-TEC outboards in the 40-50hp class. They are as quiet as a 4 stroke, there is no smoke orof mixing oil, they do not need expensive oil changes and ridiculously priced oil filters. They also do not use rubber timing belts that could bend valves when they break, and are expensive to replace. There are no valves to burn, rust or stick, and they do not need the cost of labor and a gasket for periodic adjustments. They come with a full 3 year warranty that does not lower coverage after 1 year as with some other brands. The E-TEC does not need any dealer service for 3 years or 300 hours in regular use. Some 4 strokes need oil changes every 6 months, plus again for the 10 hr. check. I've run these and am impressed with how quiet they are. They've been produced since last year and are working well. One nice thing is that they do not need a battery to run. They rope start within 1 revolution and the ignition system does not need a battery to run like the 4 strokes do in your horsepower range. If you are interested in clean air, the E-TECs have a lower emission rating and emit fewer total emissions than the same size 4 stroke motor. For more info, go to www.Evinrude.com Bill Grannis service manager |
quietest outboards, some details.
On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 03:40:19 GMT, "Billgran"
wrote: You might want to check out the Evinrude E-TEC outboards in the 40-50hp class. They are as quiet as a 4 stroke, there is no smoke orof mixing oil, ....... snip....... You make many very good points and answered some questions I had been pondering. Are they available in long shaft with a tiller handle? Thanks, Scott W. |
quietest outboards, some details.
"Scott W." wrote in message ... On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 03:40:19 GMT, "Billgran" wrote: You might want to check out the Evinrude E-TEC outboards in the 40-50hp class. They are as quiet as a 4 stroke, there is no smoke orof mixing oil, ...... snip....... You make many very good points and answered some questions I had been pondering. Are they available in long shaft with a tiller handle? Thanks, Scott W. Evinrude has a tiller long shaft 40hp E-TEC available, or you can add the E-TEC tiller arm kit to other models. Bill Grannis service manager |
quietest outboards, some details.
Billgran wrote:
"Scott W." wrote in message ... On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 03:40:19 GMT, "Billgran" wrote: You might want to check out the Evinrude E-TEC outboards in the 40-50hp class. They are as quiet as a 4 stroke, there is no smoke orof mixing oil, ...... snip....... You make many very good points and answered some questions I had been pondering. Are they available in long shaft with a tiller handle? Thanks, Scott W. Evinrude has a tiller long shaft 40hp E-TEC available, or you can add the E-TEC tiller arm kit to other models. Bill Grannis service manager A tiller 40 hp? Is there some sort of steering assist built into it? |
quietest outboards, some details.
Around 7/19/2004 3:55 PM, Harry Krause wrote:
Billgran wrote: Evinrude has a tiller long shaft 40hp E-TEC available, or you can add the E-TEC tiller arm kit to other models. A tiller 40 hp? Is there some sort of steering assist built into it? That's nothin'. Some time ago, I saw two tiller-controlled outboards on the same day that I still hardly believe actually exist: IIRC, a 200 and a 175. One was a jet, but the other was propped. I can't even imagine what it'd be like to try and muscle those beasts into a tight turn. -- ~/Garth - 1966 Glastron V-142 Skiflite: "Blue-Boat" "There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats." -Kenneth Grahame, The Wind in the Willows |
quietest outboards, some details.
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... A tiller 40 hp? Is there some sort of steering assist built into it? Harry, Up north in walleye country there are a lot of V4 tiller rigs in use on the back of 18-20' boats. Bill Grannis service manager |
quietest outboards, some details.
Billgran wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... A tiller 40 hp? Is there some sort of steering assist built into it? Harry, Up north in walleye country there are a lot of V4 tiller rigs in use on the back of 18-20' boats. Bill Grannis service manager Wow....the biggest tiller motor I ever drove was a 25 hp Big Twin in the 1950s, and it was a bear. |
quietest outboards, some details.
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:52:27 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote: A tiller 40 hp? Is there some sort of steering assist built into it? Harry, Up north in walleye country there are a lot of V4 tiller rigs in use on the back of 18-20' boats. Bill Grannis Wow....the biggest tiller motor I ever drove was a 25 hp Big Twin in the 1950s, and it was a bear. Right now I've got a 12.5 ft. Zodiac with a 25 on it. No problems handling that. I'm looking at a 15 footer but want to see what's available for power before buying it. Its rated for 50 hp, but due to the small size and my need for full cargo space, I want a tiller. The E tec 40, 50 and 60 are all the same motor re. bore/stroke/weight, etc. If I'm going to put an E tec on it, I might as well go with the 50 since there's no more weight on the transom than with the 40. A dealer told me yesterday that the 40 is the only one available with a tiller. Is there something he doesn't know? Would you have to buy the full remote kit, plus the add on tiller? Scott W. |
quietest outboards, some details.
K. Smith wrote:
Billgran wrote: "Tom Hooper" wrote in message ... Looking to power a 17 to 19 shallow V scow bow open boat, ply or alum (I know it's noisy). I guess that means 4 stroke, 25 to 35 hp. Not going off shore, just rivers and swamps. Want to cruise around with scaring away the scenery or losing friends. Normally canoe, and love quiet watercraft. Thanks. Tom Tom, You might want to check out the Evinrude E-TEC outboards in the 40-50hp class. They are as quiet as a 4 stroke, there is no smoke orof mixing oil, they do not need expensive oil changes and ridiculously priced oil filters. They also do not use rubber timing belts that could bend valves when they break, and are expensive to replace. There are no valves to burn, rust or stick, and they do not need the cost of labor and a gasket for periodic adjustments. They come with a full 3 year warranty that does not lower coverage after 1 year as with some other brands. The E-TEC does not need any dealer service for 3 years or 300 hours in regular use. Some 4 strokes need oil changes every 6 months, plus again for the 10 hr. check. They also carry the original Ficht design fault forward & will fail just as Ficht did & for the very same reasons. They will be quiet when the powerhead is destroyed by detonation, that much might be correct:-) The wind blew, the crap, flew, and Karen Smith emerged out from under the rock where she was hiding. Karen Smith has *never seen* an Evinrude E-Tec outboard, or, probably, any other modern technology outboard. Period. -- A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush; A vote for Bush is a vote for Apocalypse. |
quietest outboards, some details.
Billgran wrote:
"Tom Hooper" wrote in message ... Looking to power a 17 to 19 shallow V scow bow open boat, ply or alum (I know it's noisy). I guess that means 4 stroke, 25 to 35 hp. Not going off shore, just rivers and swamps. Want to cruise around with scaring away the scenery or losing friends. Normally canoe, and love quiet watercraft. Thanks. Tom Tom, You might want to check out the Evinrude E-TEC outboards in the 40-50hp class. They are as quiet as a 4 stroke, there is no smoke orof mixing oil, they do not need expensive oil changes and ridiculously priced oil filters. They also do not use rubber timing belts that could bend valves when they break, and are expensive to replace. There are no valves to burn, rust or stick, and they do not need the cost of labor and a gasket for periodic adjustments. They come with a full 3 year warranty that does not lower coverage after 1 year as with some other brands. The E-TEC does not need any dealer service for 3 years or 300 hours in regular use. Some 4 strokes need oil changes every 6 months, plus again for the 10 hr. check. They also carry the original Ficht design fault forward & will fail just as Ficht did & for the very same reasons. They will be quiet when the powerhead is destroyed by detonation, that much might be correct:-) Even if you were lucky enough to have one that runs Ok over time, you will still suffer by having the value of your boat destroyed, just as anyone who didn't listen, lost heaps of money in resale if their boat has a Ficht attached. Poor Bill has spammed this same line for years even at the height of the Ficht failures, that brought OMC down he was still spruiking the Co line, sad really sad, he isn't even embarrassed just so long as his dealer has "your" money. K I've run these and am impressed with how quiet they are. They've been produced since last year and are working well. One nice thing is that they do not need a battery to run. They rope start within 1 revolution and the ignition system does not need a battery to run like the 4 strokes do in your horsepower range. If you are interested in clean air, the E-TECs have a lower emission rating and emit fewer total emissions than the same size 4 stroke motor. For more info, go to www.Evinrude.com Bill Grannis service manager |
quietest outboards, some details.
On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 21:25:26 +1000, "K. Smith"
wrote: Billgran wrote: "Tom Hooper" wrote in message ... Looking to power a 17 to 19 shallow V scow bow open boat, ply or alum (I know it's noisy). I guess that means 4 stroke, 25 to 35 hp. Not going off shore, just rivers and swamps. Want to cruise around with scaring away the scenery or losing friends. Normally canoe, and love quiet watercraft. Thanks. Tom Tom, You might want to check out the Evinrude E-TEC outboards in the 40-50hp class. They are as quiet as a 4 stroke, there is no smoke orof mixing oil, they do not need expensive oil changes and ridiculously priced oil filters. They also do not use rubber timing belts that could bend valves when they break, and are expensive to replace. There are no valves to burn, rust or stick, and they do not need the cost of labor and a gasket for periodic adjustments. They come with a full 3 year warranty that does not lower coverage after 1 year as with some other brands. The E-TEC does not need any dealer service for 3 years or 300 hours in regular use. Some 4 strokes need oil changes every 6 months, plus again for the 10 hr. check. They also carry the original Ficht design fault forward & will fail just as Ficht did & for the very same reasons. Karen, I don't know what your problem is with FICHT, but the last time I was hanging around here, I saw the rants and was interested in your opinion. However, it would appear that there is more to this than just a good old rant, so allow me to present another side to your apparent vitriol towards FICHT. I have three of these doggies - a 1999 200 and two 2001 225s and nary a problem - mechanical stuff, yes, but nothing that involved the FICHT side of things. One was a busted fuel line which caused some uncomfortable moments in the boat and one stator which failed and honestly could have been my fault. In both cases the problems were fixed quickly, quietly, no fuss, no muss and they didn't have to because these are OMC engines, not Bombardier. With respect to E-TEC, there's a lot of solid engineering time behind E-TEC, there have been some important technical advances and from the engines that I've run, mostly 50/70 hp on Polarkraft aluminum fishing demo boats, I'm impressed. It would appear that the E-TEC produces more shaft horsepower (meaning more horsepower at the prop), theya re extremely quiet (more so than a four stroke in my opinion), quick throttle response and exceptionally clean burning (according to the specs - I don't own a spectrometer). I think Bill can produce the actual figures, but just based on my own seat-of-the-pants former engineer gut feeling, it beats the hell out of anything I've ridden in including some of the bigger competing engines from Merc. I say that because I was privileged to attend a dealer meeting (I am not affliated with any dealer - I just happen to know a couple socially) where some big engine comparison rides were offered - E-TEC is the engine of the future. I'm sure there will be problems along the way once these get into the main consumer stream, but that's true of any engine. I've already heard about some Verado quirks that will make your hair curl, but I can't speak to them directly - this was strictly second hand info. So far, I haven't heard much about the E-TECs other than my first hand experience with them which was around 35 hours with a 40 and about 30 hours with a 70. Just a counter argument - I'm happy with my FICHTs and when I get ready for an engine change on the Contender, which may happen this year, I will be using E-TECS strictly based on the performance of the FICHTs that I have currently installed. I am one happy, contented and very impressed FICHT owner, user and abuser. :) Later, Tom S. Woodstock, CT ----------- "Angling may be said to be so like the mathematics that it can never be fully learnt..." Izaak Walton "The Compleat Angler", 1653 |
quietest outboards, some details.
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 21:25:26 +1000, "K. Smith" wrote: Billgran wrote: "Tom Hooper" wrote in message ... Looking to power a 17 to 19 shallow V scow bow open boat, ply or alum (I know it's noisy). I guess that means 4 stroke, 25 to 35 hp. Not going off shore, just rivers and swamps. Want to cruise around with scaring away the scenery or losing friends. Normally canoe, and love quiet watercraft. Thanks. Tom Tom, You might want to check out the Evinrude E-TEC outboards in the 40-50hp class. They are as quiet as a 4 stroke, there is no smoke orof mixing oil, they do not need expensive oil changes and ridiculously priced oil filters. They also do not use rubber timing belts that could bend valves when they break, and are expensive to replace. There are no valves to burn, rust or stick, and they do not need the cost of labor and a gasket for periodic adjustments. They come with a full 3 year warranty that does not lower coverage after 1 year as with some other brands. The E-TEC does not need any dealer service for 3 years or 300 hours in regular use. Some 4 strokes need oil changes every 6 months, plus again for the 10 hr. check. They also carry the original Ficht design fault forward & will fail just as Ficht did & for the very same reasons. Karen, I don't know what your problem is with FICHT, but the last time I was hanging around here, I saw the rants and was interested in your opinion. However, it would appear that there is more to this than just a good old rant, so allow me to present another side to your apparent vitriol towards FICHT. I have three of these doggies - a 1999 200 and two 2001 225s and nary a problem - mechanical stuff, yes, but nothing that involved the FICHT side of things. One was a busted fuel line which caused some uncomfortable moments in the boat and one stator which failed and honestly could have been my fault. In both cases the problems were fixed quickly, quietly, no fuss, no muss and they didn't have to because these are OMC engines, not Bombardier. With respect to E-TEC, there's a lot of solid engineering time behind E-TEC, there have been some important technical advances and from the engines that I've run, mostly 50/70 hp on Polarkraft aluminum fishing demo boats, I'm impressed. It would appear that the E-TEC produces more shaft horsepower (meaning more horsepower at the prop), theya re extremely quiet (more so than a four stroke in my opinion), quick throttle response and exceptionally clean burning (according to the specs - I don't own a spectrometer). I think Bill can produce the actual figures, but just based on my own seat-of-the-pants former engineer gut feeling, it beats the hell out of anything I've ridden in including some of the bigger competing engines from Merc. I say that because I was privileged to attend a dealer meeting (I am not affliated with any dealer - I just happen to know a couple socially) where some big engine comparison rides were offered - E-TEC is the engine of the future. I'm sure there will be problems along the way once these get into the main consumer stream, but that's true of any engine. I've already heard about some Verado quirks that will make your hair curl, but I can't speak to them directly - this was strictly second hand info. So far, I haven't heard much about the E-TECs other than my first hand experience with them which was around 35 hours with a 40 and about 30 hours with a 70. Just a counter argument - I'm happy with my FICHTs and when I get ready for an engine change on the Contender, which may happen this year, I will be using E-TECS strictly based on the performance of the FICHTs that I have currently installed. I am one happy, contented and very impressed FICHT owner, user and abuser. :) Later, Tom S. Woodstock, CT ----------- "Angling may be said to be so like the mathematics that it can never be fully learnt..." Izaak Walton "The Compleat Angler", 1653 In Karen Smith's mind, Tom, you're a liar and your experience is all a fabrication. I haven't seen A Verado yet...or heard anything about them. And I just learned Yamaha has boosted its F225 to make an F250 available. -- A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush; A vote for Bush is a vote for Apocalypse. |
quietest outboards, some details.
Harry, there was a tiller option for the 40 and 45 HP Merc Thunderbolt 4's too. I've seen a few. -W "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Billgran wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... A tiller 40 hp? Is there some sort of steering assist built into it? Harry, Up north in walleye country there are a lot of V4 tiller rigs in use on the back of 18-20' boats. Bill Grannis service manager Wow....the biggest tiller motor I ever drove was a 25 hp Big Twin in the 1950s, and it was a bear. |
quietest outboards, some details.
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 21:25:26 +1000, "K. Smith" wrote: Billgran wrote: "Tom Hooper" wrote in message ... Looking to power a 17 to 19 shallow V scow bow open boat, ply or alum (I know it's noisy). I guess that means 4 stroke, 25 to 35 hp. Not going off shore, just rivers and swamps. Want to cruise around with scaring away the scenery or losing friends. Normally canoe, and love quiet watercraft. Thanks. Tom Tom, You might want to check out the Evinrude E-TEC outboards in the 40-50hp class. They are as quiet as a 4 stroke, there is no smoke orof mixing oil, they do not need expensive oil changes and ridiculously priced oil filters. They also do not use rubber timing belts that could bend valves when they break, and are expensive to replace. There are no valves to burn, rust or stick, and they do not need the cost of labor and a gasket for periodic adjustments. They come with a full 3 year warranty that does not lower coverage after 1 year as with some other brands. The E-TEC does not need any dealer service for 3 years or 300 hours in regular use. Some 4 strokes need oil changes every 6 months, plus again for the 10 hr. check. They also carry the original Ficht design fault forward & will fail just as Ficht did & for the very same reasons. Karen, I don't know what your problem is with FICHT, but the last time I was hanging around here, I saw the rants and was interested in your opinion. However, it would appear that there is more to this than just a good old rant, so allow me to present another side to your apparent vitriol towards FICHT. Always pleased & thanks. I have three of these doggies - a 1999 200 and two 2001 225s and nary a problem - mechanical stuff, yes, but nothing that involved the FICHT side of things. One was a busted fuel line which caused some uncomfortable moments in the boat and one stator which failed and honestly could have been my fault. In both cases the problems were fixed quickly, quietly, no fuss, no muss and they didn't have to because these are OMC engines, not Bombardier. So I'm glad for you indeed you are amongst the majority of Ficht owners who are happy. OMC itself claimed 4 outta 5 were OK so you are in that 80% of engines which have survived & again I'm glad for you. With respect to E-TEC, there's a lot of solid engineering time behind E-TEC, there have been some important technical advances No there hasn't Tom, don't fall for BS, they have used higher melting point alloy in the pistons (why?? is the real question), a different entry for the oil injection, (again missing the real question) & the rest is just more of the same, tinkering at the margins hoping against hope that this time it might work, trouble is it can't. and from the engines that I've run, mostly 50/70 hp on Polarkraft aluminum fishing demo boats, I'm impressed. It would appear that the E-TEC produces more shaft horsepower (meaning more horsepower at the prop) Which is even more scary, it's at higher specific outputs (HP/ltr) that they're at even more risk of detonation damage, caused by the piston heat buildup when they've been running at their lean mode. , theya re extremely quiet (more so than a four stroke in my opinion), This is not a big issue & OMCs have always been quieter than others, but so what?? I have 65-80HP diesel OBs that have very low exhaust noise (NB I'm only talking exhaust) it's certainly not worth risking an engine nor you boat's resale over. quick throttle response Tom this is magazine dreamers stuff, 2 strokes are ..... well 2 strokes:-) and exceptionally clean burning (according to the specs - I don't own a spectrometer). This has been their claims yet so what all the engines claim to meet 2006 so that's it as far as you the user are concerned, you have no clue or even means of finding out. I think Bill can produce the actual figures, but just based on my own seat-of-the-pants former engineer gut feeling, it beats the hell out of anything I've ridden in including some of the bigger competing engines from Merc. I say that because I was privileged to attend a dealer meeting (I am not affliated with any dealer - I just happen to know a couple socially) where some big engine comparison rides were offered - E-TEC is the engine of the future. E tec is Ficht DFI injection renamed probably because they realised the public would never fall for the same old Ficht lies a 3rd time. It's a dead end technology & was even before OMC got it from the Germans who had been hawking it around the motor industry for years & the "real" engine builders all politely said no thanks. Pity they didn't just tell them that lean mixtures are dangerous to engine longevity. I'm sure there will be problems along the way once these get into the main consumer stream, but that's true of any engine. Gee it seems if "ANY" of the others had a failure rate or 1 in 5 we would have heard about it, the only others to come close were Opti & surprise surprise they had the same 2 stroke lean mixture crap, as with ficht the same hawked around for years & all the big engine makers just laughed; as they should. I've already heard about some Verado quirks that will make your hair curl, but I can't speak to them directly - this was strictly second hand info. Yes yes we understand you OMC dealers never want to say too much but nod nod wink wink:-) give it up!!!! you even tried to say Merc Optis were "as bad" as Ficht at one stage, anything to make a sale hey?? So far, I haven't heard much about the E-TECs other than my first hand experience with them which was around 35 hours with a 40 and about 30 hours with a 70. This "I know of one that didn't fail" testimonial; crap is just that crap, it's the quiet owner who has his boating ruined by a design fault & worse a known design fault that is the real issue, & yes they're in a minority but if so what. Can you image if one in 5 GMs fsailed??? there would be a huge govt mandated recall as I say there should be this time with E tec, because this time you can't argue it's the EPA's or anyone elses' fault. Just a counter argument - I'm happy with my FICHTs and when I get ready for an engine change on the Contender, which may happen this year, I will be using E-TECS strictly based on the performance of the FICHTs that I have currently installed. From your "friend" the E-tec dealer??? Come on Tom even if your engines haven't failed your boat resale is shot, so this is some expensive friend you have, unless it's your imaginary marketing friend??? I am one happy, contented and very impressed FICHT owner, user and abuser. :) Later, Don't leave it too late, they don't go for long:-) K Tom S. Woodstock, CT ----------- "Angling may be said to be so like the mathematics that it can never be fully learnt..." Izaak Walton "The Compleat Angler", 1653 |
quietest outboards, some details.
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 18:35:03 +1000, "K. Smith"
wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 21:25:26 +1000, "K. Smith" wrote: Billgran wrote: "Tom Hooper" wrote in message ... Looking to power a 17 to 19 shallow V scow bow open boat, ply or alum ~~ snippity do da ~~ E tec is Ficht DFI injection renamed probably because they realised the public would never fall for the same old Ficht lies a 3rd time. It's a dead end technology & was even before OMC got it from the Germans who had been hawking it around the motor industry for years & the "real" engine builders all politely said no thanks. Pity they didn't just tell them that lean mixtures are dangerous to engine longevity. Well, here's the thing of it - the '99 I have has over 600 hours on it and the twin 225s have about 800 - both relatively hard use - seems to work for me and I'm just some schumck with a couple of boats. I'm sure there will be problems along the way once these get into the main consumer stream, but that's true of any engine. Gee it seems if "ANY" of the others had a failure rate or 1 in 5 we would have heard about it, the only others to come close were Opti & surprise surprise they had the same 2 stroke lean mixture crap, as with ficht the same hawked around for years & all the big engine makers just laughed; as they should. You mentioned that the last time and I've been looking around - I can't seem to find this 1 in 5 failure rate documented anywhere. Can you provide me a reference to this that I can look at? I know that the failure rate for the midrange (100-150) engines was high, but 1 in 5? I'm not sure of that. I've already heard about some Verado quirks that will make your hair curl, but I can't speak to them directly - this was strictly second hand info. Yes yes we understand you OMC dealers never want to say too much but nod nod wink wink:-) give it up!!!! you even tried to say Merc Optis were "as bad" as Ficht at one stage, anything to make a sale hey?? Um....I'm not a OMC or Bombardier dealer. In fact, I don't know any Bombarbier "dealers" per se other than the local guy who handles Yamaha/Mercury and is a Bombardier servicing dealer. He services my engines. The other guy I know sells Ferritti Group yachts like Bertrams and such and sells packaged inflatables that may or may not have Bombardier engine on them. I'm just a user and I'm trying to understand this apparent problem you have with FICHT - that's it. So far, I haven't heard much about the E-TECs other than my first hand experience with them which was around 35 hours with a 40 and about 30 hours with a 70. This "I know of one that didn't fail" testimonial; crap is just that crap, it's the quiet owner who has his boating ruined by a design fault & worse a known design fault that is the real issue, & yes they're in a minority but if so what. Can you image if one in 5 GMs fsailed??? there would be a huge govt mandated recall as I say there should be this time with E tec, because this time you can't argue it's the EPA's or anyone elses' fault. Show me - give me a reference about this one-in-five fail rate. Even with the mid-range engine problems they had, I don't believe it was 1 in 5. Just a counter argument - I'm happy with my FICHTs and when I get ready for an engine change on the Contender, which may happen this year, I will be using E-TECS strictly based on the performance of the FICHTs that I have currently installed. From your "friend" the E-tec dealer??? Come on Tom even if your engines haven't failed your boat resale is shot, so this is some expensive friend you have, unless it's your imaginary marketing friend??? Excuse me - you know nothing about me, my life, my friends, social or business - just as I don't know anything about you other than what you put here on this screen. You can't accuse me of anything other than defending my choice of power. I am one happy, contented and very impressed FICHT owner, user and abuser. :) Don't leave it too late, they don't go for long:-) 600+ on the '99 200 and just under 800 on the '01 225 twins and still going strong. I have the 200C Ranger up for sale and have a current offer, with a deposit and everything, just under what I originally paid for it and minus the electronics package I put on it. I'm just waiting for my new 2300 Bay Ranger to be delivered in September. And that boat is going to have a FICHT on it - 225 in fact. As to the Contender, I wouldn't sell it on a bet because I love the boat. However, I have it looked over by a public adjuster with marine experience every year for total replacement cost and you know what? If the boat sank tomorrow, it's "true" value is 12% below what I paid for it - not bad for a two year old boat that is used on a regular basis. And that's without the electronics and equipment package which is insured on a seperate policy. So much for the diiminished resale argument. However, to give you some outs, this is only my experience with the FICHT. I have talked to other FICHT owners and they seem content with their engines. Small sample to be sure, but these are folks in my circle who are fairly knowledgable with a lot of experience with outboards. If you have reference to actual facts - as in actual numbers, types of failures, recalls, etc - I would appreciate seeing them. Always open to seeing and evaluating all the evidence. Later, Tom |
quietest outboards, some details.
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 18:35:03 +1000, "K. Smith" wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 21:25:26 +1000, "K. Smith" wrote: Billgran wrote: "Tom Hooper" wrote in message ... Looking to power a 17 to 19 shallow V scow bow open boat, ply or alum ~~ snippity do da ~~ E tec is Ficht DFI injection renamed probably because they realised the public would never fall for the same old Ficht lies a 3rd time. It's a dead end technology & was even before OMC got it from the Germans who had been hawking it around the motor industry for years & the "real" engine builders all politely said no thanks. Pity they didn't just tell them that lean mixtures are dangerous to engine longevity. Well, here's the thing of it - the '99 I have has over 600 hours on it and the twin 225s have about 800 - both relatively hard use - seems to work for me and I'm just some schumck with a couple of boats. I'm sure there will be problems along the way once these get into the main consumer stream, but that's true of any engine. Gee it seems if "ANY" of the others had a failure rate or 1 in 5 we would have heard about it, the only others to come close were Opti & surprise surprise they had the same 2 stroke lean mixture crap, as with ficht the same hawked around for years & all the big engine makers just laughed; as they should. You mentioned that the last time and I've been looking around - I can't seem to find this 1 in 5 failure rate documented anywhere. Can you provide me a reference to this that I can look at? I know that the failure rate for the midrange (100-150) engines was high, but 1 in 5? I'm not sure of that. I've already heard about some Verado quirks that will make your hair curl, but I can't speak to them directly - this was strictly second hand info. Yes yes we understand you OMC dealers never want to say too much but nod nod wink wink:-) give it up!!!! you even tried to say Merc Optis were "as bad" as Ficht at one stage, anything to make a sale hey?? Um....I'm not a OMC or Bombardier dealer. In fact, I don't know any Bombarbier "dealers" per se other than the local guy who handles Yamaha/Mercury and is a Bombardier servicing dealer. He services my engines. The other guy I know sells Ferritti Group yachts like Bertrams and such and sells packaged inflatables that may or may not have Bombardier engine on them. I'm just a user and I'm trying to understand this apparent problem you have with FICHT - that's it. So far, I haven't heard much about the E-TECs other than my first hand experience with them which was around 35 hours with a 40 and about 30 hours with a 70. This "I know of one that didn't fail" testimonial; crap is just that crap, it's the quiet owner who has his boating ruined by a design fault & worse a known design fault that is the real issue, & yes they're in a minority but if so what. Can you image if one in 5 GMs fsailed??? there would be a huge govt mandated recall as I say there should be this time with E tec, because this time you can't argue it's the EPA's or anyone elses' fault. Show me - give me a reference about this one-in-five fail rate. Even with the mid-range engine problems they had, I don't believe it was 1 in 5. Just a counter argument - I'm happy with my FICHTs and when I get ready for an engine change on the Contender, which may happen this year, I will be using E-TECS strictly based on the performance of the FICHTs that I have currently installed. From your "friend" the E-tec dealer??? Come on Tom even if your engines haven't failed your boat resale is shot, so this is some expensive friend you have, unless it's your imaginary marketing friend??? Excuse me - you know nothing about me, my life, my friends, social or business - just as I don't know anything about you other than what you put here on this screen. You can't accuse me of anything other than defending my choice of power. I am one happy, contented and very impressed FICHT owner, user and abuser. :) Don't leave it too late, they don't go for long:-) 600+ on the '99 200 and just under 800 on the '01 225 twins and still going strong. I have the 200C Ranger up for sale and have a current offer, with a deposit and everything, just under what I originally paid for it and minus the electronics package I put on it. I'm just waiting for my new 2300 Bay Ranger to be delivered in September. And that boat is going to have a FICHT on it - 225 in fact. As to the Contender, I wouldn't sell it on a bet because I love the boat. However, I have it looked over by a public adjuster with marine experience every year for total replacement cost and you know what? If the boat sank tomorrow, it's "true" value is 12% below what I paid for it - not bad for a two year old boat that is used on a regular basis. And that's without the electronics and equipment package which is insured on a seperate policy. So much for the diiminished resale argument. However, to give you some outs, this is only my experience with the FICHT. I have talked to other FICHT owners and they seem content with their engines. Small sample to be sure, but these are folks in my circle who are fairly knowledgable with a lot of experience with outboards. If you have reference to actual facts - as in actual numbers, types of failures, recalls, etc - I would appreciate seeing them. Always open to seeing and evaluating all the evidence. Later, Tom You're arguing with a junk-yard dog here, Tom. She's not worth the trouble. -- A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush; A vote for Bush is a vote for Apocalypse. |
quietest outboards, some details.
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 08:33:21 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote: You're arguing with a junk-yard dog here, Tom. She's not worth the trouble. I'm always willing to give anyone their shots - I just demand a certain level of civility and common sense. If it's a 20% failure rate, then I want to know (1) how the data was developed (2) was it all related to FICHT or were there other mechanical/electrical problems (3) what evidence is there available that E-TEC is just FICHT under a different guise? In short, prove it. I have a lot of money sunk into boats and I spendt a lot of time researching potential power sources for my repower. The problems with OMC are not relevant to Bombardier and E-TEC - if Karen has evidence contrary to that, then I want to see it. It's is certainly contrary to what I have learned about the technology. Just trying to be a gentleman about it. :) Later, Tom |
quietest outboards, some details.
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 08:33:21 -0400, Harry Krause wrote: You're arguing with a junk-yard dog here, Tom. She's not worth the trouble. I'm always willing to give anyone their shots - I just demand a certain level of civility and common sense. If it's a 20% failure rate, then I want to know (1) how the data was developed (2) was it all related to FICHT or were there other mechanical/electrical problems (3) what evidence is there available that E-TEC is just FICHT under a different guise? In short, prove it. My recollection is that there is no such data. The number came about as a result of an off the cuff remark by a an executive of a company that formerly owned OMC (Evinrude and Johnson) manufacturing, and it applied to a particular model in a particular model year. In other words, it was a quick, unqualified statement by someone who might have known, but never released any data one way or the other. Ms. Smith took this statement as a mantra, and has regurgitated it about a million times since. She has no data, she has never even seen the insides of any of these engines. For some time, Ms. Smith claimed to be "the manufacturer" of a diesel outboard motor line. That's bull****. All she manufactures is innuendo. I have a lot of money sunk into boats and I spendt a lot of time researching potential power sources for my repower. The problems with OMC are not relevant to Bombardier and E-TEC - if Karen has evidence contrary to that, then I want to see it. It's is certainly contrary to what I have learned about the technology. Just trying to be a gentleman about it. :) If you get down with Karen Smith, she'll cover you with manure, or at least try to do so. Later, Tom -- A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush; A vote for Bush is a vote for Apocalypse. |
Why Ficht & 2 stroke OBs have thankfully gone forever /quietest outboards,some details.
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
snipped E tec is Ficht DFI injection renamed probably because they realised the public would never fall for the same old Ficht lies a 3rd time. It's a dead end technology & was even before OMC got it from the Germans who had been hawking it around the motor industry for years & the "real" engine builders all politely said no thanks. Pity they didn't just tell them that lean mixtures are dangerous to engine longevity. Well, here's the thing of it - the '99 I have has over 600 hours on it and the twin 225s have about 800 - both relatively hard use - seems to work for me and I'm just some schumck with a couple of boats. Tom, I don't doubt for a minute yours have been OK, but that doesn't mean anything as to whether the technology is a success or not, given it brought a US icon Co from the very beginning of OBs to an end, chucked 7000 out of work & lost 1.3 Bil of union pension money I think even your 600 hrs won't undo the reality of an untested, design fault being put to the public for them to pay for the testing. snipped You mentioned that the last time and I've been looking around - I can't seem to find this 1 in 5 failure rate documented anywhere. Can you provide me a reference to this that I can look at? I know that the failure rate for the midrange (100-150) engines was high, but 1 in 5? I'm not sure of that. The head boss of OMC made the statement when they were trying to spruik that everything had been fixed in 99, alas it sucked a few more punters in & the failure rates were never mentioned again, you'd think they would have said hey we halved them!!! it's "only" 1 in 10 now :-) They didn't because it can't work, if it had a snowball's chance the big engine people, even just one of them, would have been serious about it, none were & their engineers were proven totally correct as we have:-). snipped I'm just a user and I'm trying to understand this apparent problem you have with FICHT - that's it. The "problem" is that to get a port transferred 2 stroke through the EPA they have to: (i) Run very lean mixtures at low to mid revs so lean that in normal premises they wouldn't even reliably ignite. (ii) To even get ignition of such lean mixtures they use 2 tactics (a) Multiple firing of the plug (proof that the mixture is extremely lean) & (b) They very low pressure (read poor atomisation = detonation) Direct inject the fuel "almost" (NB they were so dumb in the early models there was no "almost"!!!) at the plug so it might ignite, they pretend this is a "stratified" charge, but like all previous attempts to reliably maintain a stratified charge it doesn't stratify as intended often enough not to be reliable. (iii) Lean mixtures so long as they can actually be ignited, are a known source of chamber temp buildup, (the flame front is slow because the fuel is not evenly spread throughout the charge) even the dealer socalled mechanics know that if a carbed engine gets a partially blocked jet that cyl will run lean, get hot, once hot enough the charge will auto ignite (petrol auto ignites if in contact with anything over about 250C, not very hot, yes Tom??) & self sustaining detonation will set in making more heat more detonation, more heat etc etc etc, bang. (iv) There was some confusion at first because the typical failure set was when the boat was at power, however this was because the low to med. speed mixtures are so lean in Ficht (& opti) that there isn't enough fuel to even support detonation!!!, in normal premises a Ficht would stop save they repeatedly fire the plugs (no wonder they're expensive & still have a short life:-)) (v) The answer is that although they can't support detonation at low revs they can still build heat in the chamber, particularly the piston/rings, so when the user spools up & suddenly delivers a full normal "rich" mixture there are parts of the chamber well above 250C & a cyl or two lapse into uncontrollable detonation; the powerhead is wrecked in seconds. (vi) If you doubt that lean mixture heat buildup is the problem you should consider they're own desperate telling actions (a) Same engines, same production, same parts, same power outputs carbed vs DFI: the carbed engines are still plodding on, dirty EPA wise but reliable, the very same engines fitted with DFI kaboom. (b) You need a "special" dealer only ripoff price high temp oil for the DFI engines, why??? is there really a temp problem??? how?? where from?? after all it's the same as the carbed or EFI engine?? (c) Given the importance of precise spark timing & the effort all the manufacturers go to get it just right, how is it that it suddenly doesn't matter a hoot in the DFI??? I mean they just leave the plug firing away till some lean bit of mixture finally catches, but even then they leave it firing!!!! This is very telling as to the lean stratified fairytale Tom. Again keep asking why the carbed same engine same factory same parts, same HP/ltr etc etc geee it only needs one flash, that's one flash of the plug, to ignite the charge. (d) The best so far??? is that the new E-tecs are trying to say they are "better" because they use higher melting point alloy in the pistons!!! What an unbelievable admission, what confirmation that whoever signs the cheques (do they even still use cheques??) is being fed BS by probably the original pack of OMC BS'rs. Long long before standard garden variety aluminium is even looking hot (melts over 600C!!!) the engine is in terminal detonation, because as soon as the piston (or anything else in there) gets above 250C the game is over. Yes the wrecked powerheads have melted pistons etc but that's the outcome of uncontrollable detonation not the cause. Damn just how bloody stupid are these people?? & can the cheque signer even breath unassisted??? So far, I haven't heard much about the E-TECs other than my first hand experience with them which was around 35 hours with a 40 and about 30 hours with a 70. That's alot of hours Tom:-), those of us who really do boat will confirm, hmmm bit of a worry don't go all Harry on us:-) Sounds like you're trying the sell!! sell!! sell!!! This "I know of one that didn't fail" testimonial; crap is just that crap, it's the quiet owner who has his boating ruined by a design fault & worse a known design fault that is the real issue, & yes they're in a minority but if so what. Can you image if one in 5 GMs failed??? there would be a huge govt mandated recall as I say there should be this time with E tec, because this time you can't argue it's the EPA's or anyone elses' fault. Show me - give me a reference about this one-in-five fail rate. Even with the mid-range engine problems they had, I don't believe it was 1 in 5. It was straight from the head of OMC & confirmed by the NG OMC dealers of the time, not that they tell or could even recognise the truth:-) snipped 600+ on the '99 200 and just under 800 on the '01 225 twins and still going strong. Not really relevant Tom sorry, 2 stroke OBs are gone & good riddance. Buy more at your own risk it's your money & now you are aware of the risk I have no trouble. I have the 200C Ranger up for sale and have a current offer, with a deposit and everything, just under what I originally paid for it and minus the electronics package I put on it. I'm just waiting for my new 2300 Bay Ranger to be delivered in September. And that boat is going to have a FICHT on it - 225 in fact. Yes yes you're the usual seller, claiming this & that, in general any boat with a Ficht or it's derivatives is & will always be devalued, for good reason. As to the Contender, I wouldn't sell it on a bet because I love the boat. However, I have it looked over by a public adjuster with marine experience every year for total replacement cost and you know what? If the boat sank tomorrow, it's "true" value is 12% below what I paid for it - not bad for a two year old boat that is used on a regular basis. And that's without the electronics and equipment package which is insured on a seperate policy. Dear dear dear just keep paying those premiums based on that value then Tom, wow you really are a dealers dream!!! So much for the diiminished resale argument. Yep so much it's sad. However, to give you some outs, this is only my experience with the FICHT. I have talked to other FICHT owners and they seem content with their engines. Small sample to be sure, but these are folks in my circle who are fairly knowledgable with a lot of experience with outboards. Honestly Tom where do you find them?? around here the only boats left with Ficht on them are usually in the hands of dealers, telling the usual lies to try & unload them. There were lots of people taken in in the early times & they were pretty common, but seriously given the claimed numbers sold, where the hell did they all go?? you rarely see a Ficht powered boat these days, is it the same there??? Where does the picture go when you turn off the telly?? If you have reference to actual facts - as in actual numbers, types of failures, recalls, etc - I would appreciate seeing them. OMC were never going to help with that, they just kept changing endless blown powerheads & hoping the govt wouldn't make them do a full recall, offering the dealers a 30% markup if they just kept selling defective engines & dealers being what they are were only too happy to do that:-) till they ran out of money; well till the union pension funds ran out that is:-) Always open to seeing and evaluating all the evidence. There's plenty above to discuss, I look forward to it & thanks. You are pushing it uphill with a piece of string though Tom, Yamaha have all but given up on the DFI 2 strokes, Merc most certainly have, a few smaller Japanese are left but in general terms the real manufacturers have voted with their feet, or legs:-) whatever:-) K Later, Tom |
Why Ficht & 2 stroke OBs have thankfully gone forever /quietestoutboards, some details.
K. Smith wrote:
You are pushing it uphill with a piece of string though Tom, Yamaha have all but given up on the DFI 2 strokes, Merc most certainly have, a few smaller Japanese are left but in general terms the real manufacturers have voted with their feet, or legs:-) whatever:-) Utter bull****. -- A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush; A vote for Bush is a vote for Apocalypse. |
quietest outboards, some details.
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 08:39:49 -0400, "Gene Kearns"
wrote: On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 03:40:19 GMT, "Billgran" wrote: Tom, You might want to check out the Evinrude E-TEC outboards in the 40-50hp class. They are as quiet as a 4 stroke, there is no smoke orof mixing oil, they do not need expensive oil changes and ridiculously priced oil filters. They also do not use rubber timing belts that could bend valves when they break, and are expensive to replace. There are no valves to burn, rust or stick, and they do not need the cost of labor and a gasket for periodic adjustments. They come with a full 3 year warranty that does not lower coverage after 1 year as with some other brands. The E-TEC does not need any dealer service for 3 years or 300 hours in regular use. Some 4 strokes need oil changes every 6 months, plus again for the 10 hr. check. I've run these and am impressed with how quiet they are. They've been produced since last year and are working well. One nice thing is that they do not need a battery to run. They rope start within 1 revolution and the ignition system does not need a battery to run like the 4 strokes do in your horsepower range. If you are interested in clean air, the E-TECs have a lower emission rating and emit fewer total emissions than the same size 4 stroke motor. I'm a bit confused. My 4-stroke Suzuki's don't need "expensive oil changes" any more than my car.... and even if they did, it would be more than offset by not having to buy 2-stroke oil. Suzuki filters aren't that expensive... and even if they were, I can use automotive filters. I don't have any rubber timing belts. I have a six year warranty. These 4-strokes weigh less than the 2-strokes they replaced. At idle, they are so quiet, you have to check the pee hole or tach to see if they have cut off.... I was over at Blue Fin manufacturing plant in Bristol, RI last week and was surprized at how quiet the Suzuki 4 strokes are. I like the four stroke technology, but I'm kind of anal when it comes to brand loyalty. Bombardier has been very good to me and I plan on repaying that by purchasing two new E-TEC engines from them this fall. I think each technology has it's good points and bad points. So far, I really haven't seen or heard anything negative about any of the new technologies except second hand nonsense which I ignore. I seem to hear more first hand bad mouthing Yamaha than other brands and that is mostly "I brought my boat into the shop last month and they said they are waiting on parts from Yamaha". I will say this - I was mightly impressed with the Honda four strokes. I had a little incident on a charter trip in the St. Lawrence Seaway a couple of weeks ago and those little USCG inflatable looking boats boats run twin 225 Hondas - I was standing in the back of the boat talking to the crew on the run back to the dock and could carry on a normal conversation without straining to hear or talk. Very cool. Later, Tom |
quietest outboards, some details.
You guys can say what you want and speculate all day. Bottom line is my old
Johnson has ran like a champ for YEARS and still does. It has no computer, it has no oil injection. It is simple and relaible, in most cases I can fix it on the water. It works. Thats the way it should be on the water. The LAST thing I would want on Lake Erie is some hi tech, computerized POS breaking down on me in a storm. The old Johnson has towed in more than a few of these new outboards. ;) |
quietest outboards, some details.
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 08:59:21 -0400, "Gene Kearns"
wrote: On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:28:39 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Gee it seems if "ANY" of the others had a failure rate or 1 in 5 we would have heard about it, the only others to come close were Opti & surprise surprise they had the same 2 stroke lean mixture crap, as with ficht the same hawked around for years & all the big engine makers just laughed; as they should. You mentioned that the last time and I've been looking around - I can't seem to find this 1 in 5 failure rate documented anywhere. Can you provide me a reference to this that I can look at? I know that the failure rate for the midrange (100-150) engines was high, but 1 in 5? I'm not sure of that. There was a high failure rate in some HP models. It was nearly a bankrupting issue for the company and their customer service suffered commensurately. K's irrational passion in this matter is a mystery and probably pathological. It is fueled by an antiquated understanding of operating engines lean-of-peak. Although well documented as workable for decades, she deems operating an engine in this manner idiotic. Amusingly, the champion she uses for citations in this matter, Textron Lycoming, has pretty much recanted their immediately previous position on this matter in Special Service Publication #700..... returning to their original position that lean-of-peak operation is desirable The make-or-break point in this matter is engine management. Where there exists adequate engine management "FICHT Technology" (as if it were really unique) is a workable process. Where there was an effective lapse in engine management, there were engine failures. Net result is that if you have a person or computer making sure that fuel-air mixtures are appropriate and that no detonation occurs, it is a viable technology. I restate my opinion - FICHT has been a good technology for me and while I've had my whoopsies, it's been no more so than other brands I've owned over the years and in fact, one major incident could very easily been my fault - I can't be sure. If it not a good technology for others, fine. Hey, Karen has her opiinion - let her have it. Doesn't bother me one way or the other. On another subject, the world of Usenet has become more and more polarized and irrational. It started in the late 90's after the Net became widely available and just has accellerated in the past few years. Unfortuate really. It used to be a lot more fun. Later, Tom |
quietest outboards, some details.
|
quietest outboards, some details.
Sadly, low tech can no longer be bought. Sooner or later, if you
continue boating, you'll be faced with the same choice(s) Thank God I am in fresh water :) My little '63 Evinrude is still kicking strong. My Big Johnson is nothing short of wonderful. I suspect they will both out live me. I looked under the cowl of a big new Yamaha that quit last weekend trying to lend a hand and was mortified. Thats insane! "Wait here, let me run and pick up $60,000.00 worth of diagnostic equipment and $7000 worth of special tools and I'll be right back" :) I suggested they invest in some good oars. |
quietest outboards, some details.
Yeah, and I've pulled in plenty of powerboats of all vintages under sail.=:p
"CCred68046" wrote in message ... You guys can say what you want and speculate all day. Bottom line is my old Johnson has ran like a champ for YEARS and still does. It has no computer, it has no oil injection. It is simple and relaible, in most cases I can fix it on the water. It works. Thats the way it should be on the water. The LAST thing I would want on Lake Erie is some hi tech, computerized POS breaking down on me in a storm. The old Johnson has towed in more than a few of these new outboards. ;) |
quietest outboards, some details.
|
quietest outboards, some details.
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:28:39 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Gee it seems if "ANY" of the others had a failure rate or 1 in 5 we would have heard about it, the only others to come close were Opti & surprise surprise they had the same 2 stroke lean mixture crap, as with ficht the same hawked around for years & all the big engine makers just laughed; as they should. You mentioned that the last time and I've been looking around - I can't seem to find this 1 in 5 failure rate documented anywhere. Can you provide me a reference to this that I can look at? I know that the failure rate for the midrange (100-150) engines was high, but 1 in 5? I'm not sure of that. There was a high failure rate in some HP models. It was nearly a bankrupting issue for the company and their customer service suffered commensurately. K's irrational passion in this matter is a mystery and probably pathological. It is fueled by an antiquated understanding of operating engines lean-of-peak. Although well documented as workable for decades, she deems operating an engine in this manner idiotic. Amusingly, the champion she uses for citations in this matter, Textron Lycoming, has pretty much recanted their immediately previous position on this matter in Special Service Publication #700..... returning to their original position that lean-of-peak operation is desirable The make-or-break point in this matter is engine management. Where there exists adequate engine management "FICHT Technology" (as if it were really unique) is a workable process. Where there was an effective lapse in engine management, there were engine failures. Net result is that if you have a person or computer making sure that fuel-air mixtures are appropriate and that no detonation occurs, it is a viable technology. But that's it Gene they don't detonate when lean because there isn't enough fuel there. You repeated claim to be a pilot so I'm surprised you're not well across how this goes, as you lean the exhaust temp will actually drop because there isn't much fuel there, however the piston will continue to heat up, as you richen & increase power there are rules which forbid you to just go to full rich, you're supposed to do it incrementally so the chamber's temp (piston/rings) can be brought back to normal temps before there's full fuel there to support detonation. Assuming you really are a pilot as claimed then this is all common knowledge to you yes??? Now compare how Ficht do it, they run so lean it won't even ignite they keep firing the plug, them once the chamber is good & hot they suddenly over seconds give it full mixture & a big increase in power??? What's surprising is that as many survive as they do. K |
quietest outboards, some details.
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:21:18 +1000, "K. Smith" wrote: Gene Kearns wrote: On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:28:39 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Gee it seems if "ANY" of the others had a failure rate or 1 in 5 we would have heard about it, the only others to come close were Opti & surprise surprise they had the same 2 stroke lean mixture crap, as with ficht the same hawked around for years & all the big engine makers just laughed; as they should. You mentioned that the last time and I've been looking around - I can't seem to find this 1 in 5 failure rate documented anywhere. Can you provide me a reference to this that I can look at? I know that the failure rate for the midrange (100-150) engines was high, but 1 in 5? I'm not sure of that. There was a high failure rate in some HP models. It was nearly a bankrupting issue for the company and their customer service suffered commensurately. Net result is that if you have a person or computer making sure that fuel-air mixtures are appropriate and that no detonation occurs, it is a viable technology. But that's it Gene they don't detonate when lean because there isn't enough fuel there. Isn't that the whole point? No the "point" is that pockets of fuel remain unignited by the flame front (end gases), long enough to be auto ignited as soon as the temp/pressure combination goes above 250C, in most premises, planes cars etc this would be detonation itself, in the early days we indeed submitted that was the problem. As I said the thing was few of them seemed to be failing while still in lean mode, it appeared they were failing after the lean burn mode ended & the engine spooled up. The reason this was happening is because the mixture is so extremely lean in the low rev range, much leaner than any car or aero engine has ever tried, remember they need multiple continuous firing of the plug just to get ignition!!! in a plane it would have gone rough at even slightly lean & at the 40-1 mixtures claimed by OMC an aero engine would stop outright. So they've sort of over ridden a natural safety by continuous firing of the plug. We say there just isn't enough fuel there to cause detonation damage in lean mode, but the chamber temp continues to rise from a combination of the lean mixtures slow flame front & the pressure spikes caused by the auto ignition of the end gases. When we talk chamber temp it probably means piston/rings only really the rest is well cooled but again remember an aero engine has the piston oil spray cooled & only see half the number of firings for a given revs & even in turbo full takeoff mode has a much lower specific output HP/ltr than the Fichts You repeated claim to be a pilot so I'm surprised you're not well across how this goes, as you lean the exhaust temp will actually drop because there isn't much fuel there, however the piston will continue to heat up, That is a ridiculously false statement, unless there is detonation. EGT is about the same at 50 deg lean and 50 deg rich. Cylinder head temperature is much cooler at 50 deg lean than 50 rich..... read the data, it is on the Textron Lycoming website. The chamber temp or cyl head temp if you like will drop, but EGT is as good an indicator however the same rationale applies. as you richen & increase power there are rules which forbid you to just go to full rich, you're supposed to do it incrementally so the chamber's temp (piston/rings) can be brought back to normal temps before there's full fuel there to support detonation. You need to do a bit more reading. Moving a mixture from lean of peak to rich of peak goes through a higher temperature regime at peak.... that is what peak is all about. OK we agree on this, as you increase the mixture & power up the chamber gets hotter from where is had been operating, no matter what & if it has been operating at or near the max allowed then it will go over, in other words save you very slowly richen the mix over time (minutes not seconds) then the chamber temp "has" to rise as the power & mixture are increased. No rapid changes should be made from lean to rich or vice versa..... Again we agree on this?? to suddenly go from a lean running to full rich as power is increased is not allowed?? Gee that's exactly what Ficht & Opti try to do every time a usr powers up after a long run in lean mode!!!. but it has nothing to do with the piston being hotter at a point when the engine is producing less power.... We clearly disagree on this. I've read the references as you have I'll put a few links in case anyone else would like to have a look & as always a technical discussion would be great; http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main...ngEngines.html http://66.102.7.104/custom?q=cache:i...hl=en&ie=UTF-8 http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main...erLeaning.html that isn't even logical and certainly doesn't follow the laws of physics. Always a good line, but if it's all that obvious you'll post the reasons, remember all the time we are talking a chamber temp not going above 400F which is very cool given the 2 strokes piston is completely uncooled & see a firing on each & every stroke. Assuming you really are a pilot as claimed then this is all common knowledge to you yes??? If you doubt it, the verification is on the FAA's website.... it also shows my Aircraft Mechanic's License and Inspection Authorization... as asked before, where are your credentials? Now compare how Ficht do it, they run so lean it won't even ignite they keep firing the plug, them once the chamber is good & hot they suddenly over seconds give it full mixture & a big increase in power??? What's surprising is that as many survive as they do. The fact that they *do* work, are commercially available and in use today, have a loyal following, and do sell.... should be an ample indicator to a reasonable person that they are wrong about seeing perpetually faulty technology.... why, again, don't you get it? They don't ALL fail just as not all pilots who over lean die, but enough in both categories fail to make it not a commercial thing. At least with the aero engines there's an element of self inflicted result, with ficht the owner has no input, he's either lucky or not. PS. Do a google on "lean burn engines" and you will find that there are dozens of companies manufacturing engines and/or controls for engines to maximize the use of "lean burn." Time to throw away that old engine text and enter the 21st century. Read the articles closely Gene they are using lean at idle, overrun & light throttle high speed cruise, never ever at power, the only ones we can find are our discussions subjects. A big OB on a heavy boat, propped to achieve a high top speed, will be making significant HP (in HP/ltr terms) to plough the boat along nose high in say a no wake zone & doing this in the upper end of the Ficht's lean burn mode. With a totally uncooled piston then subjected to a sudden power up & full rich mixture??? Unless I've misunderstood you above this "must" result in an increase in chamber temp??? it's a lottery with very good odds if you want to go gambling, 4 out of 5 are winners but damn, the tickets are very expensive. I've never said this is easy nor obvious Gene, gee if it was we wouldn't have spent months & thousands of words in the early ficht days trying to warn people:-) everybody would be doing it:-) we tend to specialise in the difficult:-) but it's true & yes you will have to stop, read & then think but at the end you'll see that 7000 chucked unemployed, 1.3 bil of pensioners money, nobody has admitted how much Bomb lost but it would be heaps & endless hurt boaters always trumps a few brand loyal lucky users who are in the main dealer groupies or lying dealers. K |
quietest outboards, some details.
"K. Smith" wrote in message ... but at the end you'll see that 7000 chucked unemployed, 1.3 bil of pensioners money, You might want to read up about George Soros (who plundered OMC) and how he "changed" the OMC pension system before bankrupting the company, just prior to being indicted by the French government for messing around with their banking system. Now is using his own money to influence the US election. He gets around. |
quietest outboards, some details.
"K. Smith" wrote in message ... Lean mixtures at power make unreliable engines ... At what rated power setting are you talking about? 50%, 75% Bill Grannis service manager .. |
quietest outboards, some details.
Billgran wrote:
"K. Smith" wrote in message ... but at the end you'll see that 7000 chucked unemployed, 1.3 bil of pensioners money, You might want to read up about George Soros (who plundered OMC) and how he "changed" the OMC pension system before bankrupting the company, just prior to being indicted by the French government for messing around with their banking system. Now is using his own money to influence the US election. He gets around. Is that it Bill?? that's your technical rejoinder?? hmm Soros (apologies got his name wrong earlier) is in cahoots with the union pension funds, it was their money he tried to prop (little pun there) OMC up with, but the money regardless of it's source was spent trying to make Ficht work & despite 1.3 bil it didn't. Bomb have some proper engineers (aircraft, 2 stroke rotax etc) who actually understand this stuff & must have had a pup when they actually looked at what Bomb had brought home from the fire sale this time:-) at any price it was a disaster & they rightly chucked it so they could stem the bleeding. Lean mixtures at power make unreliable engines all the big manufacturers know it, any mixtures not properly atomised will lead to unreliability, again look at all the big manufacturers & the trouble they go to to get proper atomisation "before" the charge is in the chamber, add lean mixtures & poor atomisation together & it seems a failure rate of 1 in 5 can result. Your well polished VRO style of keep saying "it's all fixed now" but then you don't give any details, seeing it was your head of camp that gave the 1 in 5 number it now falls on you who wants to again market this crap, you have to explain exactly what caused the 1 in 5 & what has been done to fix it & what is the expected failure rate now, 1 in 10?? still way too high. In the past you've blamed all & everything; oil, piston manufacturer, the tooth fairy but never ever confronted the reality that during the whole Ficht debacle you were merrily selling the carbed OMC OBs, same power, same basic components, yet they were about as reliable as any prior OMC engine fitted with VRO. It wasn't the oil, it wasn't the pistons, Soros didn't have any technical say, it was always the Ficht DFI, the low injection pressures (it never was hundreds of PSI that was a lie but even if true it was never going to be enough) which gave poor atomisation which meant pockets of the charge were too rich & others too lean = detonation under power, the design trying to fudge it past the EPA with super lean mixtures (your mob claimed 40-1!!! & your claimed fuel savings at low speed when calculated out confirm!!! despite you trying to recant when you finally realised what an admisssion it was) it all means any real power in HP/ltr terms when lean will lead to detonation & it does. Blaming soros!!!:-) what for being conned by a bunch of union grease monkey amateurs???:-) I do like it though you're inventive with the dealer excuses & spam, pity you can't turn that to the engines:-) K |
quietest outboards, some details.
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 10:48:27 +1000, "K. Smith" wrote: We clearly disagree on this. I've read the references as you have I'll put a few links in case anyone else would like to have a look & as always a technical discussion would be great; http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main...ngEngines.html http://66.102.7.104/custom?q=cache:i...hl=en&ie=UTF-8 http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main...erLeaning.html ......and if there is anybody that really cares, here is a more recent service publication that essentially refutes the "Lycoming Flyer Reprints" era publications.... The Lycoming Flyer was a sorta annual chatty newsletter published from 1964 until 1980 with four issues published since, in 1991 and 1992. http://www.lycoming.textron.com/supp...ps/SSP700A.pdf With this latter service publication, Lycoming has returned to their original position, that lean of peak is fine as long as the engine is "managed." Bear in mind that this technology doesn't compare well with the discussion at hand. Getting off the "flame Fitch" bandwagon, lean burn technology requires vigilant human intervention or computer control. Modern Lycoming aeronautical reciprocating engine technology employs neither. A modern lean burn engine is computer controlled and water cooled. A new Lycoming aircraft engine is 1930's technology: -is air cooled -has fixed timing, regardless of RPM, load, etc. -has a manually variable mixture setting (the pilot can screw up fuel management royally) -has a true throttle and not a demand lever as employed by computer controlled technology -may be "lugged" or overstressed by improper propeller setting -is carbureted (updraft, possibly side draft) or fuel injected using a mechanical metering device -burns a boutique grade of fuel -redlines at 2700 RPM and, at that speed, is considered a high performance engine. K, if you'd like to debate Lycoming aircraft engines, I'd be happy to in a forum more applicable and appropriate. I don't know what you know about Lycoming, but I live within driving distance of the Lycoming Corporate Headquarters and have been through the Lycoming factory school and toured the manufacturing and assembly plant on more than one occasion. Wrench in hand, I touch at least one Lycoming engine every day. Knowing what I know about these engines, I know that comparing them to modern lean burn outboard engines is truly comparing apples and oranges. Using this data as a basis for argument mere perpetuates a flawed, demonstrably inaccurate, and unproductive argument. Please enter the 21st Century.... So now you say big super lazy Lycomings can't run lean what at output/ltr about the same as a 60s VW beetle, yet you want to support these Ficht idiots who try to do it in 2 strokes no less with absolutely no piston cooling whatsoever!!! plus outputs up over 70Hp/ltr. I've joined the 21st century Gene as did the 7000 chucked from OMC during the biggest ever consumer recreational spending spree. I don't have to say it doesn't work because that's beyond doubt now, I do have to maintain what we've been telling the NG since early 98 the exact reasons "why" it wouldn't work then & now why it actually didn't work. Just for the record one of the links I gave you was to the same "experts are everywhere" page. Be aware Gene the reason liar Harry supported Ficht was that his mob were funding it!!! the union pension funds & the dealers saw me as detracting from sales when all they were really interested in was ripping recreational boaters off, which they did & to some extent deserve what they got. K |
quietest outboards, some details.
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 12:54:27 +1000, "K. Smith" wrote: Be aware Gene the reason liar Harry supported Ficht was that his mob were funding it!!! the union pension funds & the dealers saw me as detracting from sales when all they were really interested in was ripping recreational boaters off, which they did & to some extent deserve what they got. (1) What the hell has Harry got to do with this and (2) are you adhering to some bizarre conspiracy theory between you and the dealers and pension funds holder(s)? If I check with a local Ficht dealer, will they know you by name? The local Union? ??? "the union pension funds & the dealers saw me as detracting from sales "??? You're kidding, right? I hope..... Ms. Smith obviously is mentally unbalanced, but this is not news. I've never had a relationship with Evinrude or Johnson or OMC or its successors. My father had a long relationship with OMC as a dealer, but that ended in the mid-1960s, when he dumped Evinrude for Mercury. As an adult, I've never even owned an Evinrude or Johnson outboard. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that one or more of the labor unions whose members once worked for OMC owned stock in the company. Nothing unusual about that. It's your call, Gene, but I'd be wary of "engaging" Ms. Smith in anything other that a dismissive way. She's a mentally unbalanced pit viper. -- "There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again." -George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002 |
quietest outboards, some details.
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 12:54:27 +1000, "K. Smith" wrote: So now you say big super lazy Lycomings can't run lean what at output/ltr about the same as a 60s VW beetle, yet you want to support these Ficht idiots who try to do it in 2 strokes no less with absolutely no piston cooling whatsoever!!! plus outputs up over 70Hp/ltr. You obviously still don't get it. Lycomings aren't super lazy.... they are developing a LOT of horsepower per cubic inch per RPM.... and they have nothing in common with VW engines other than the method of cooling. You keep agreeing with me Gene!!! but like most mechanics you just can't look past what you've been told. As I said you'll need to read, understand then actually think to get this. The aeros "are" big lazy engines & it's their lack of revs, (read less heat, less firings per minute, less everything ala VW beetle) that I'm pointing out to you even they, with direct air cooling, oil cooling & oil cooled pistons have difficulty running even very very slightly lean (when compared to the 40-1 mix claimed by Ficht) so why couldn't you at least consider running a 2 stroke lean at power then suddenly increasing power to max & full rich to be an issue?? I guess if you saw it in a dreamer's magazine you'd be OK:-) Come on Gene you can do this!!! for once stop being a runner with the herd, actually try to be the intellect you always hoped & pretended you would be, I'll even guide you over the bumpy bits:-) I've joined the 21st century Gene as did the 7000 chucked from OMC during the biggest ever consumer recreational spending spree. There have been thousands of jobs lost in the United States and exported to countries, such as yours, because people are willing to work for pennies on the dollar. You can *expect* jobs and companies to follow the 2nd and 3rd world economies since it reduces overhead and improves the profit margin. Nobody "moved" the OMC nor Bomb jobs to 3rd world countries Gene, helped along by the unions those jobs no longer exist!!! your union can bleat all it likes they have gone forever because even during the biggest recreational spend of all time Ficht managed to bankrupt one of the biggest recreational manufacturers; who couldn't survive even though they were charging more for a glorified chainsaw motor than most others charge for a medium sized car, you know Gene wheels, design/crash testing, airbags, seats even:-) I've already posted that Ficht was a technology that single handedly nearly bankrupted the company and was foisted on the boating public before it was finished. Not an unusual ploy, and one used by many companies used to screw the consumer and to pass development costs directly to early purchasers of the product. Not moral, perhaps, but as many believe, business is business. What part of...... not ready.... nearly bankrupted...... screw the consumer..... did you not understand? The part where you keep saying it works & even can work. I don't have to say it doesn't work because that's beyond doubt now, I do have to maintain what we've been telling the NG since early 98 the exact reasons "why" it wouldn't work then & now why it actually didn't work. Then Ficht technology has failed and is no longer for sale. Right? Even one successful engine disproves your theory..... ever heard of one? Oh, first, ever had any classes at University on logic? 4 out of 5 don't fail according to their own figures that isn't a successful technology in any manner, even if 9 out of 10 survive it still fails. Be aware Gene the reason liar Harry supported Ficht was that his mob were funding it!!! the union pension funds & the dealers saw me as detracting from sales when all they were really interested in was ripping recreational boaters off, which they did & to some extent deserve what they got. (1) What the hell has Harry got to do with this and (2) are you adhering to some bizarre conspiracy theory between you and the dealers and pension funds holder(s)? If I check with a local Ficht dealer, will they know you by name? The local Union? Depends on who you check with :-) I'm merely pointing out that you & the dealers are doing it all over again the same mindless claims & trust in what you've been "told", that it's all fixed now, it isn't because nobody has even admitted nor it seems understood what the original problem is. I can assure you Gene if anyone could actually run engines lean enough to matter economy & EPAwise at power & have them remain reliable the big people, GM, Ford, Daimler, Bosch would be there in a flash, instead we get this constant stream of idiots burning gullible investors futures; all the while making claims as if it's all easy & obvious (read the articles even Lycoming have the same idiots making claims about the aero engines), when it's not easy it's very tricky stuff. It's the same with burning fuel in a chamber for rockets, it looks simple but ..... when you ignite a very volatile fuel in a closed chamber to create a significant pressure rise in that chamber you have to keep many balls in the air at once. It won't work this time despite the name change:-) because they're still running extremely lean at low revs & the engine can see in "some" circumstances significant load while still in lean mode. Till they admit this is the root cause of the debacle & then explain just how they've dealt with it, then it's a dead end technology. ??? "the union pension funds & the dealers saw me as detracting from sales "??? You're kidding, right? I hope..... Well the dealers here including Bill called me some choice names, went completely crazy at one stage, because I was saying don't buy this it will fail & yes Gene before it had actually failed. If you have references that predate late 97 early 98 I'd love to see them. K |
quietest outboards, some details.
"K. Smith" wrote in message ... Billgran wrote: "K. Smith" wrote in message ... but at the end you'll see that 7000 chucked unemployed, 1.3 bil of pensioners money, You might want to read up about George Soros (who plundered OMC) and how he "changed" the OMC pension system before bankrupting the company, just prior to being indicted by the French government for messing around with their banking system. Now is using his own money to influence the US election. He gets around. Is that it Bill?? that's your technical rejoinder?? hmm Soros (apologies got his name wrong earlier) is in cahoots with the union pension funds, it was their money he tried to prop (little pun there) OMC up with, but the money regardless of it's source was spent trying to make Ficht work & despite 1.3 bil it didn't. Soros, Harry's buddy, didn't get conned by anyone, and it wasn't trying to prop up anyone. He made his first bundle attacking the brit pound. Maybe he is short the dollar and that is why he wants bush out? He tried to take cost out by outsourcing to the lowest bidder is my guess. You can get parts cheap if they don't have to work. del |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:15 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com