![]() |
E-Tec warning
Yes the endless "software" upgrades have begun it's exactly like the
Ficht debacle. Anyway don't say you haven't been warned this is aboating NG & this is motors the NG users pay hugely for so .............. # 7/24/05 8:08:00 PM Submitted by Bulletbuoy (69.14.99.177) from MICHIGAN says Lol must be bad more like it As of Friday at the Everstart they had on the Detroit River. The e-tech had 3 blown power heads, one boat's motor caught on fire and blew the cowling 30 feet in the error. Forcing the gentlemen aboard to abandon ship. LOL E tech went over like a fat kid in dodgeball on erie. |
E-Tec warning
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:54:22 +1100, "K. Smith" wrote: Yes the endless "software" upgrades have begun it's exactly like the Ficht debacle. Anyway don't say you haven't been warned this is aboating NG & this is motors the NG users pay hugely for so .............. # 7/24/05 8:08:00 PM Submitted by Bulletbuoy (69.14.99.177) from MICHIGAN says Lol must be bad more like it As of Friday at the Everstart they had on the Detroit River. The e-tech had 3 blown power heads, one boat's motor caught on fire and blew the cowling 30 feet in the error. Forcing the gentlemen aboard to abandon ship. LOL E tech went over like a fat kid in dodgeball on erie. It was Merc Verados. Nice try Karen. Better than nice Tom, it's bloody beautiful!!!:-) the post is clear in what it says, 3 (count 'em three!!) E-Tecs blow at the Everstart (& it seems that was "as of Friday"), what are you saying now, the rest of the boating community are just making this up??? I mean do you go to OMC dealer classes to be able to post this BS??? Even as OMC went into bankruptcy the dealers were still trying that line to make one last sale to the gullible, give it up:-) I'd guess if it wasn't so there would be at least one other person from that tournament saying it wasn't so?? So it's me just making sure people are kept up to date with how the latest Ficht experiment is coming along:-) Yes yes we all know they keep reducing the prices & finding out what the real price is very difficult, but hey that's what they did trying to flog the fichts, gave the dealers a 30% markup in rebates etc, so I suppose that might explain why the dealers will say & do most anything to hook another sucker:-) Given the detonation vibration/abuse fuel leaks are back (remember the coast guard ordered a ficht safety recall over them last time??) might I seriously suggest you wear head protection when you use yours, after all wouldn't want to see you knocked silly by a blown away cowling:-) Fear not Tom, I'll do my best to keep you up to date on developments as the latest consumer funded lean burn at power experiment goes off. Why have Bomb even gotten away from them???? K |
E-Tec warning
Karen,
I can be gone for a year or more from this N/G and come back and you are still talking about the same issues. IMHO, you must have a personal problem with this company or any company for that matter that is trying to do the responsible thing for the environment by trying to reduce the amount of emissions that outboard motors emit. Hey, next we might even be hearing that diesel motors put out less particulate emissions than gasoline motors. Do you have any solutions for the problems they have with these engines or do you just want to "keep the pot stirred". Fredo thinking to self: "When I buy my retirement boat I will make sure it's a S/V with an auxiliary power plant". Then the problem becomes can I sail it by myself or will I just be stuck in the harbor hunched over a keyboard every day. "K. Smith" wrote in message ... Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:54:22 +1100, "K. Smith" wrote: Yes the endless "software" upgrades have begun it's exactly like the Ficht debacle. Anyway don't say you haven't been warned this is aboating NG & this is motors the NG users pay hugely for so .............. # 7/24/05 8:08:00 PM Submitted by Bulletbuoy (69.14.99.177) from MICHIGAN says Lol must be bad more like it As of Friday at the Everstart they had on the Detroit River. The e-tech had 3 blown power heads, one boat's motor caught on fire and blew the cowling 30 feet in the error. Forcing the gentlemen aboard to abandon ship. LOL E tech went over like a fat kid in dodgeball on erie. It was Merc Verados. Nice try Karen. Better than nice Tom, it's bloody beautiful!!!:-) the post is clear in what it says, 3 (count 'em three!!) E-Tecs blow at the Everstart (& it seems that was "as of Friday"), what are you saying now, the rest of the boating community are just making this up??? I mean do you go to OMC dealer classes to be able to post this BS??? Even as OMC went into bankruptcy the dealers were still trying that line to make one last sale to the gullible, give it up:-) I'd guess if it wasn't so there would be at least one other person from that tournament saying it wasn't so?? So it's me just making sure people are kept up to date with how the latest Ficht experiment is coming along:-) Yes yes we all know they keep reducing the prices & finding out what the real price is very difficult, but hey that's what they did trying to flog the fichts, gave the dealers a 30% markup in rebates etc, so I suppose that might explain why the dealers will say & do most anything to hook another sucker:-) Given the detonation vibration/abuse fuel leaks are back (remember the coast guard ordered a ficht safety recall over them last time??) might I seriously suggest you wear head protection when you use yours, after all wouldn't want to see you knocked silly by a blown away cowling:-) Fear not Tom, I'll do my best to keep you up to date on developments as the latest consumer funded lean burn at power experiment goes off. Why have Bomb even gotten away from them???? K |
E-Tec warning
I will buy two engines for my Tolman Skiff this year. Probably a 2
cycle (weight) 75-90 hp primary and a 9 hp kicker. So, what is the story on OMC and the FICHT engines? Any engine reccomendations for either a new or slightly used engine? |
E-Tec warning
maybe the issue is about that. Ficht not ETEc
Manufacturer Identification Code Details for Recall Number 010055T Number: 010055T MIC: Company: BOMBARDIER LTD Company Official: OMC Model Name: EVINRUDE 200 & 225 HP Model Year: 99 & 20 Problem 1: FUEL SYSTEM Problem 2: HIN: Case Open Date: 04/10/2001 Disposition: CLOSED Case Close Date: Units: 9000 Campaign Open Date: 04/04/2001 Boat Type: 0 Campaign Close Date: 08/14/2002 Severity: H Comments: EVINRUDE 200 & 225 HP OUTBOARD ENGINES ARE FUEL INJECTED USING FICHT TECHNOLOGY. BOMBARDIER RECENTLY ACQUIRED OMC AND IS ISSUING A REPAIR KIT WHICH ADDRESSES THE PROBLEM OF FUEL TUBES DISENGAGING FROM THE INJECTOR UNITS RESULTING IN FIRES AND EXPLOSIONS. RECALL LTR SENT 12 APRIL 01 TO MARTINE RENAUD. CLOSED BASED ON CUR REPORT THAT 91% OF AFFECTED UNITS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. ORIGINAL REQUEST TO CLOSE SUBMITTED 4/29/02. ACTION DELAYED UNTIL 8/14/02 DUE TO PERSONNEL CHANGEOVER. |
E-Tec warning
as someone thinking of buying an ETec I appreciate to hear of ANY
suspicous or FICHT like issues ... so if powerheads blow up that IS AN ISSUE ! I have never heard that happen to a Yamaha 4 stroke. Not once so 3 ETecs per day indicates the FICHT curse is still there I also like to see more data and like to know where the original post came from. No source no value. Matt |
E-Tec warning
P.S.
the post may be from he http://www.wmi.org/bassfish/bassboar...ors/T84471.htm didnt have time to find it yet Later Matt |
E-Tec warning
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:52:22 +1100, "K. Smith" wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:54:22 +1100, "K. Smith" wrote: Yes the endless "software" upgrades have begun it's exactly like the Ficht debacle. Anyway don't say you haven't been warned this is aboating NG & this is motors the NG users pay hugely for so .............. # 7/24/05 8:08:00 PM Submitted by Bulletbuoy (69.14.99.177) from MICHIGAN says Lol must be bad more like it As of Friday at the Everstart they had on the Detroit River. The e-tech had 3 blown power heads, one boat's motor caught on fire and blew the cowling 30 feet in the error. Forcing the gentlemen aboard to abandon ship. LOL E tech went over like a fat kid in dodgeball on erie. It was Merc Verados. Nice try Karen. Better than nice Tom, it's bloody beautiful!!!:-) the post is clear in what it says, 3 (count 'em three!!) E-Tecs blow at the Everstart (& it seems that was "as of Friday"), what are you saying now, the rest of the boating community are just making this up??? I mean do you go to OMC dealer classes to be able to post this BS??? Even as OMC went into bankruptcy the dealers were still trying that line to make one last sale to the gullible, give it up:-) I fail to see what could possibly be, "bloody beautiful!!!:-)" about some guys wanting to go fishing and having their outboards explode. You have a twisted sense of humor... and that is assuming that the unverified report is true. You are of course correct Gene & certainly I don't think it's funny in any manner, my comment was not intended as glee that 3 E-Tecs having failed & if it looked that way I do apologise. This latest attempt at the ficht is no laughing matter & apologies to all again. I take it then you agree the poster is talking about 3 very publicly failed E-Tecs?? & not Merc Verados as Tom was attempting to spin it??? Since this was posted 7/24/2005, you should be able to tell us how many more blew up and why. Also, tell us more about your source. Is it true that s/he now posts under the alias "punklikestosmilelikeadoughnut"? Is it true?? I have no idea although I'd suggest that given the date & the event were given if it wasn't true then we might have heard to the contrary. 24 July isn't all that long ago, well OK it's many upgrades by ficht standards. I'd guess if it wasn't so there would be at least one other person from that tournament saying it wasn't so?? Excellent logic. If one person says it, then it must be true! Well one person gave some easily checkable details & given that there is a gaggle of ex OMC dealers always trying to spruik up the market for these things I'd suggest it's more than likely right. Remember even at it's worst "only" 1 in 5 fichts failed & given the owners are usually embarrassed enough over their own stupidity for buying a known defective product, the dealers do all they can to cover it up & certainly the suppliers do all they can to hush it up the fact we get any reports at all is because people at public events like this tell us??? I mean Bill a dealer in all year round boating Florida, was claiming there were very few ficht failures right up till OMC went under; then with the other dealers he ran away. Indeed when asked about the evidence given by failed ficht powerheads he claimed he'd never even seen a failed ficht!!!:-) Ah dealers ya gotta given credit for neck. Personally, I'd like to see the initial report and then credible evidence that backs up the initial allegation. thus far, I see no credible evidence that this ever happened... primarily because your cited poster seems to be the only person aware of this occurrence. I would too Gene but given the stakes involved & the ego of most owners that is not likely, indeed that's how Ficht was sold as long as it was by a huge cover up & BS spruiked from dealers, had they not run out of money they'd still be flogging them. The owners are basically so embarrassed by their own stupidity that they will swallow almost any BS because since about say mid 99 nobody could have bought a ficht & not been aware there were at least possible problems. So it's me just making sure people are kept up to date with how the latest Ficht experiment is coming along:-) Yes yes we all know they keep reducing the prices & finding out what the real price is very difficult, but hey that's what they did trying to flog the fichts, gave the dealers a 30% markup in rebates etc, so I suppose that might explain why the dealers will say & do most anything to hook another sucker:-) You have proof of this the E-Techs? I'll never have proof acceptable to some here but there are many reports exactly like this, I've posted a few already & will give you the rest as & when I think they're needed, i.e. if I feel the spruikers of this failed & still very risky technology are attempting to mislead people into paying money on their sayso, the least I can do is give "my" opinion (which has been spot on since early 99 re ficht:-)) & then give some examples of what's available regards "claimed" failures. Everyone needs to make their own minds up as far as I'm concerned, however the claims about it being the oil's fault then endless "upgrades", fuel leaks, rough spots around the mode change (this is probably detonation by the way) etc etc are all too familiar. Given the detonation vibration/abuse fuel leaks are back (remember the coast guard ordered a ficht safety recall over them last time??) might I seriously suggest you wear head protection when you use yours, after all wouldn't want to see you knocked silly by a blown away cowling:-) http://www.uscgboating.org/recalls/recalls_database.htm I couldn't find these new E-Tech safety recalls regarding fuel leaks caused by vibration in the above database, can you? I did say it was a ficht recall Gene, although if that's the extent of your rejoinder then great:-) The fichts lost injectors & plumbing off the engines because of detonation, not that any dealer will ever tell you that, now E-Tec has claimed improvements to how all this & the heads are fastened, well all that does is try to make the engine strong enough to survive the detonation, not solve the issue. Again as with ficht we have fuel leaks in the E-Tecs??? after all it seems Yamaha can contain a rail pressure of up to 800psi?? Fear not Tom, I'll do my best to keep you up to date on developments as the latest consumer funded lean burn at power experiment goes off. Why have Bomb even gotten away from them???? Again, there is nothing wrong with lean burn as long as it is lean enough. I don't support after-the-sale customer support of the R&D/Engineering effort, but your supporting evidence of your strong prejudices just doesn't carry any weight. Everything is wrong with lean burn but you don't really want to discuss that, you just want to infer it's OK; when no other engine manufacturers worldwide are using it at the specific power outputs used here (Please note the "at the specific power outputs" Gene) As for carrying weight?? I agree my views never have here Gene even back when ficht first came out, even when people were putting bill boards up about failed fichts in Texas, even after OMC went into a table drain, even when the dealers on mass ran away. I suspect they never will with you or many in the NG but it's all archived & I rely upon my record regarding this & will happily go on saying what I say & like ficht I'm confident I'll be vindicated ...... again. What I am a little ****ed at is in some forums people are now starting to use my material outright rather than build upon it, but hey :-) K K |
E-Tec warning
|
E-Tec warning
FREDO wrote:
Karen, I can be gone for a year or more from this N/G and come back and you are still talking about the same issues. Glad you're back anyway Fredo. IMHO, you must have a personal problem with this company or any company for that matter that is trying to do the responsible thing for the environment by trying to reduce the amount of emissions that outboard motors emit. I have a problem with it you're right & so I detail exactly what it is & nobody has yet even tried to challenge the technical issues, just abuse me which doesn't bother me even a little. Hey, next we might even be hearing that diesel motors put out less particulate emissions than gasoline motors. No not at all diesels a dirty things even with the new low sulphur fuel & much better atomisation, so there we agree on at least one thing. As for me I'd always have a diesel powered boat & never ever allow a diesel engine to operate in my boat:-) Do you have any solutions for the problems they have with these engines or do you just want to "keep the pot stirred". NO if I did I'd refer you to them at the USPTO but neither do they (again check the USPTO) the latest attempt has centred on making the structure strong enough to survive the heat buildup from lean poorly atomised fuel & then the "sometimes" detonation. The oiling is still a worry also. Fredo thinking to self: "When I buy my retirement boat I will make sure it's a S/V with an auxiliary power plant". Then the problem becomes can I sail it by myself or will I just be stuck in the harbor hunched over a keyboard every day. Maybe try both Fredo, if you get fun & a mix of mental & physical exercise from both??? K "K. Smith" wrote in message ... Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:54:22 +1100, "K. Smith" wrote: Yes the endless "software" upgrades have begun it's exactly like the Ficht debacle. Anyway don't say you haven't been warned this is aboating NG & this is motors the NG users pay hugely for so .............. # 7/24/05 8:08:00 PM Submitted by Bulletbuoy (69.14.99.177) from MICHIGAN says Lol must be bad more like it As of Friday at the Everstart they had on the Detroit River. The e-tech had 3 blown power heads, one boat's motor caught on fire and blew the cowling 30 feet in the error. Forcing the gentlemen aboard to abandon ship. LOL E tech went over like a fat kid in dodgeball on erie. It was Merc Verados. Nice try Karen. Better than nice Tom, it's bloody beautiful!!!:-) the post is clear in what it says, 3 (count 'em three!!) E-Tecs blow at the Everstart (& it seems that was "as of Friday"), what are you saying now, the rest of the boating community are just making this up??? I mean do you go to OMC dealer classes to be able to post this BS??? Even as OMC went into bankruptcy the dealers were still trying that line to make one last sale to the gullible, give it up:-) I'd guess if it wasn't so there would be at least one other person from that tournament saying it wasn't so?? So it's me just making sure people are kept up to date with how the latest Ficht experiment is coming along:-) Yes yes we all know they keep reducing the prices & finding out what the real price is very difficult, but hey that's what they did trying to flog the fichts, gave the dealers a 30% markup in rebates etc, so I suppose that might explain why the dealers will say & do most anything to hook another sucker:-) Given the detonation vibration/abuse fuel leaks are back (remember the coast guard ordered a ficht safety recall over them last time??) might I seriously suggest you wear head protection when you use yours, after all wouldn't want to see you knocked silly by a blown away cowling:-) Fear not Tom, I'll do my best to keep you up to date on developments as the latest consumer funded lean burn at power experiment goes off. Why have Bomb even gotten away from them???? K |
E-Tec warning
On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 12:27:43 GMT, Gene Kearns
wrote: On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 16:46:43 +1100, "K. Smith" wrote: No. There really is no point in discussing your set opinions. What I am a little ****ed at is in some forums people are now starting to use my material outright rather than build upon it, but hey :-) K Good point. What you post on Usenet belongs to you. Check out some of the TOS of these web based forums... what you post becomes the property of the forum owner! Ever wonder why Peggie (had to) quit posting in them? Good morning Gene, and Happy New Year. Looks like the group is pretty quiet this AM. Too much partying maybe? -- John H. "Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it." Rene Descartes |
E-Tec warning
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 16:46:43 +1100, "K. Smith" wrote: No. There really is no point in discussing your set opinions. What I am a little ****ed at is in some forums people are now starting to use my material outright rather than build upon it, but hey :-) K Good point. What you post on Usenet belongs to you. Check out some of the TOS of these web based forums... what you post becomes the property of the forum owner! Ever wonder why Peggie (had to) quit posting in them? I didn't realise that thanks Gene. I've looked at the "forums" several times but try as they do, they still seem to come across sanitised. I know this place is a bit wild & woolly at times however at least everyone says what they say pretty much without censorship or commercial concerns. K |
E-Tec warning
In article , "K. Smith"
wrote: wrote: [material deleted] I also like to see more data and like to know where the original post came from. Here the reference to "the original post" is to a comment that three Evinrude E-TEC motors had blown up at a fishing tournament held in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005 [Karen replies] These are a few just for you: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/003712.html Thanks for citing my website as a part of your effort to discredit the E-TEC, but I am afraid the article you cited contains not one word of any problems with the E-TEC motor at a fishing tournament in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005. As a matter of fact, all the articles in the cited thread were posted about a week before the fishing tournament held in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005. I don't see how they corroborate the initial claim about all of these engines blowing up. I am local to that area and have not heard anything about it. |
E-Tec warning
In article ,
Harry Krause wrote: James Hebert wrote: In article , "K. Smith" wrote: wrote: [material deleted] I also like to see more data and like to know where the original post came from. Here the reference to "the original post" is to a comment that three Evinrude E-TEC motors had blown up at a fishing tournament held in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005 [Karen replies] These are a few just for you: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/003712.html Thanks for citing my website as a part of your effort to discredit the E-TEC, but I am afraid the article you cited contains not one word of any problems with the E-TEC motor at a fishing tournament in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005. As a matter of fact, all the articles in the cited thread were posted about a week before the fishing tournament held in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005. I don't see how they corroborate the initial claim about all of these engines blowing up. I am local to that area and have not heard anything about it. Aussie rules? I do wonder about the Australian origin of Karen's E-TEC criticism. The principal competitor to E-TEC in the direct-injection business is Orbital, an Australian company whose products are licensed to Mercury for their OptiMax. Do we hear these same concerns about OptiMax? Also, now that the Bombardier manufacturing facility in Wisconsin where the E-TEC injector is made has been sold to a company owned in part by Orbital, will this criticism let up? Here are the details of that recently announced bit of business, from an article I posted some time ago on CONTINUOUSWAVE.COM. ------------- MORE NEWS ON BRP SALE OF DELAVAN by Jim Hebert CONTINUOUSWAVE.COM 11-14-2005 It seemed to come as a surprise, but the announcement of the sale of Bombardier's facility in Delavan, Wisconsin, to Synerject was foreshadowed one year in advance. On November 10, 2004 the intention to sell the Delavan plant was announced by Bombardier in Quebec. To the very same day a year later, word came that the plant in east-central Wisconsin which manufactures the fuel injectors and electronic engine controllers for Evinrude and Johnson outboard motors was sold. The announcement came in the form of a press release from Australia's ORBITAL. The actual buyer will be Synerject, a U.S.-based 50:50 joint venture between Orbital and Siemens VDO Automotive. Synerject is the non-vehicle marketing and manufacturing arm for Siemens VDO fuel injectors and the Orbtial Combustion Process (OCP) controls. The firm is the supplier of the air-assisted direct injection hardware used in the Mercury OptiMax two-stroke outboards. It will now take over the manufacture of Bombardier's E-TEC fuel injectors. However, BRP will retain the intellectual property rights to their patented designs. Rod Houston, CEO of Synerject, explained the rationale behind the purchase. The Delavan plant, he said, "is complementary to Synerject's core business of manufacturing and supplying engine management modules for the non-automotive market." He expects the acquisition to "bring a significant increase in revenue and make a material contribution to Synerject's growth." When asked about the E-TEC fuel injector, he made clear that "the transaction involves only assets relating to the manufacture of the fuel injectors and engine management modules. There'll be no transfer of intellectual property rights for E-TEC to Synerject. Synerject continues to have the exclusive rights to the OCP system and this continues to be a key focus of Synerject." It is expected that long-term contracts will assure BRP of a steady supply of the E-TEC injectors, a prime component of their new line of outboard motors. Sales of E-TEC engines are showing strong growth. Roche Lambert recently sent very enthusiastic notices to the Bombardier outboard dealer network highlighting impressive sales figures and growth figures over 200-percent from a year ago. Synerject foresees strong growth in their non-vehicular markets, particular in components and controllers for motorcycles, which are expected to show very strong sales growth in developing Asia markets like China and India. The sale makes strange bedfellows of Mercury and Evinrude. The prime components of their two-stroke engine fuel injection systems will now be manufactured by a common supplier, although using completely different technologies. For the approximately 60 employees at the Delavan plant, the notice of a buyer is probably very welcome after a year of suspense. ------------------- |
E-Tec warning
thousands & thousands of people taken in. Remember the huge deep
pocketed & technically savvy corp Bombardier got out of this very early on (wonder why???). You're now dealing with another corp entity, I have no idea as to it's structure but if you are going to buy you should. Excuse my ignorance but isnt ETec/Evinrude still owned by BRP ? I thought thats Bomardier Recreational Products = Bombardier? Whats the deal here? Matt |
E-Tec warning
K. Smith wrote: Yes the endless "software" upgrades have begun it's exactly like the Ficht debacle. Anyway don't say you haven't been warned this is aboating NG & this is motors the NG users pay hugely for so .............. # 7/24/05 8:08:00 PM Submitted by Bulletbuoy (69.14.99.177) from MICHIGAN says Lol must be bad more like it As of Friday at the Everstart they had on the Detroit River. The e-tech had 3 blown power heads, one boat's motor caught on fire and blew the cowling 30 feet in the error. Forcing the gentlemen aboard to abandon ship. LOL E tech went over like a fat kid in dodgeball on erie. I am starting to wonder how true the post is (not Karens but Bulletboys). After all, these are the FIRST and ONLY blown ETecs I have heard of ... And the fact that 3 motors kabooom at one tournament can IMO only have one or more of the following reasons the likelyhood of which I cant assess due to a lack of data: - ETecs are worse than FICHTs - The story is not true - There is a lot of ETecs with a manufacturing defect and the 3 are part of that - Whoever set up those 3 motors made a mistake with all 3 - Extreme coincidence If FICHTS kabooomed at a rate of 1 in 5, how much kaboooms are known of ETecs and what is the estimated percentage of kabooomed ETecs of ETecs built? Matt P.S. To add a few comments for clarifications and avoid arguments (how do I know ? ;) - I think DFI motors are the best marine outboard motors out there (as long as they hold up) - I OWN a 2 stroke DFI motor - I am neutral in the DFI sucks or rules discussion - For personal reasons I like to know of anything, esp problems around DFI (esp. ETec and Optimax) - I believe Karen has a substantial knowledge about combustion motors - I think Karens theories about DFI motors are true. But may not impact the motors life as much as anticipated |
E-Tec warning
|
E-Tec warning
James Hebert wrote:
In article , "K. Smith" wrote: wrote: [material deleted] I also like to see more data and like to know where the original post came from. Here the reference to "the original post" is to a comment that three Evinrude E-TEC motors had blown up at a fishing tournament held in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005 [Karen replies] These are a few just for you: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/003712.html Thanks for citing my website as a part of your effort to discredit the E-TEC, but I am afraid the article you cited contains not one word of any problems with the E-TEC motor at a fishing tournament in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005. As a matter of fact, all the articles in the cited thread were posted about a week before the fishing tournament held in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005. I don't see how they corroborate the initial claim about all of these engines blowing up. I am local to that area and have not heard anything about it. You see James this is the problem with forums such as yours, in this case you nopt onloy feel compelled to support your site you also support the latest DFI experiment called E-Tec? You even try to claim another forums posts "must" be wrong because you say so:-) I did not say "your" forum mentioned blown E-Tecs although the poster had asked for more data & where the original (blown E-tecs) post came from, but his request wasn't limited to just that, it's patently clear from the links where the information came from. Of course you'd never allow that:-). I had derided the latest "upgrades" your site conveniently gave material on them & clearly unbeknown to you much mo-) People can read James even though you'd prefer they just accepted your views without any review at all. Welcome to an open forum:-) If you had decided to actually find out about this technology you would already know why I say Ficht failed outright & to a lesser but still unacceptable extent Optimax. You're correct I am an Ozzy & was well familiar with Orbital long before Brunswick came into it. They'd been trying to flog it for years prior as had Ficht but none of the real engine people had taken it up & so far still haven't??? or do you say otherwise?? Over some years I've explained in detail why & exactly how the DFIs including Orbital Optimax would fail & sadly for many boaters, OMC employees & unionists' pensions I was right. Of course as you promote & boot lick the suppliers you don't wish to even acknowledge these facts. You should read a truly "open" forum like here, then you'd know that the OMC dealers were well aware of the defective nature of the Fichts & continued to push them because they were getting up to 30% agg of rebates & other sundry kickbacks on them. It was all well documented & discussed here as the bankruptcy court dealt with OMC & the dealers trying to get themselves onto the list of creditors for their so called rebates:-) A 101 so that even you may get a rubimentary understanding; (i) The only way it seems a crankcase transferred 2 stroke can viably get through the EPA rules is by running extremely lean mixtures at low to medium revs. In the early days OMC dealers were claiming 40-1 mixtures but once the failures started all hard technical material was withdrawn. (ii) The Ficht style injector is nothing more than an impact pressure pulse. There is no actual rail circulating fuel at any really high pressure compared to say the Yamaha's up to 800 psi. Now the new owners talk about injection pressures they're actually talking about the peak pulse of pressure, after that each following shock wave is progressively lower. Drop a stone into a full bucket of water. If you can search Deja news/google groups you'll find where years ago I posted the pressure graph that accompanied one of the early patent applications for Ficht. (iii) The suggestion is that a combination of a very lean mixture, very poor fuel atomisation caused by too low an injection pressure, prolonged repeated firing of the spark plug & maintaining that mode of operation up to reasonable levels of specific power might "sometimes" lead to excessive heat buildup in the piston. (iv) Here I originally suggested that this would lead to enough heat building in the piston to cause potentially disastrous detonation & indeed given the premises when they first came out, felt the failure rate would be huge much higher than the later claimed 1 in 5, indeed it was OMCs 1 in 5 claim that got me wondering how 4 out of 5 survived:-) (v) The answer seems to be that when in lean mode there just isn't enough fuel present to sustain detonation. This is a phenomenon well known & understood in aero engines since the 1930s (& they never try to run anything like a mixture of 40-1 if they did the engine just stops, you can't in the normal sense ignite such a mixture). By repeatedly firing the plug while the injector sprays fuel past (not at) it they can get an ignition. In the early days OMC had the dealers telling people it was like putting a match to a can of WD40 while you held the button down:-) WD40 is mostly kero & like most jet engines that also run on kero you can get a continuous ignition but don't try it with petrol:-) (iv) The submission was & remains that in "some" circumstances (say a large boat with a high top speed & therefore high prop pitch, being used for long periods at the upper end of the lean burn mode?), it's then that piston heat might become extreme. This possibility I say is admitted by the latest fixes special high melting point alloy in the pistons & special high temp oil why?? if there aren't any piston temp issues??? (v) If & it's an "if" one of the pistons gets even a little hot (say any point on it or the rings being over 250C) certainly then the situation has the potential for pre ignition once the mixture is quickly returned to "normal". i.e.the suggestion is that as the engine changes from lean burn mode to full mixture & a single firing of the plug, the sudden influx of fuel might get pre ignited by a possibly overly hot piston & then the heat/extreme pressure combination might send the particular cylinder into full detonation. (vi) It's also suggested the oiling is a part of the problem & also maybe a part of the proof of what I have said, because again excess oil possibly gets baked behind the rings? & then possibly more heat? possibly more pre-ignition? possibly more detonation is a risk? The proof part is that they have greatly reduced the quantum of oil available in all the so called DFI 2 strokes but again why?? & why the special super expensive dealer only hight temp oils?? again it's suggested this is support for the position put when Ficht was new. So James if you've read this & even partly got a handle on it, now go & re read the link I posted to your site, do you see the issue with the so called "upgrades"??? also ask yourself why do different boats, different props etc seem to experience the "roughness" at different engine speeds??? Given that the spruikers will not give any real technical material & the dealers certainly have none, then I'm happy to use your site's material in support of my position. So again just for clarity: I didn't allege your site said there were blown up E-Tecs because you clearly would have none of that:-) But I did note the OMC Ficht like "upgrades" were back & I was happy to link to you showing the symptoms as these engine get to or near the mode change point & the mixture is reverting back to normal, maybe just maybe on a very hot piston???? No need to thank me for publicising your site for you indeed I'm glad to & hope to again. K |
E-Tec warning
"K. Smith" wrote A 101 so that even you may get a
rubimentary understanding; (i) The only way it seems a crankcase transferred 2 stroke can viably get through the EPA rules is by running extremely lean mixtures at low to medium revs. In the early days OMC dealers were claiming 40-1 mixtures but once the failures started all hard technical material was withdrawn. Mixture has nothing to do with meeting the EPA requirements in any direct sense. The problem with the conventional ported two stroke outboard is emissions of unburned hydrocarbons. Since the incoming fuel/air charge is used to displace the exhauste gases. Approx. 15% of the fuel/air mix passes in thru the intake port and out thru the exhaust port without the benefit of having been in the cylinder during a combustion phase. Hence ways to significantly reduce the amount of unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust a) seperate the airflow/scavenging from the fuel. b) switch to a four stroke process where the piston scavenges the cylinder. c) post burn the unburnt fuel in a catalytic converter. |
E-Tec warning
J Merrill wrote:
"K. Smith" wrote A 101 so that even you may get a rubimentary understanding; (i) The only way it seems a crankcase transferred 2 stroke can viably get through the EPA rules is by running extremely lean mixtures at low to medium revs. In the early days OMC dealers were claiming 40-1 mixtures but once the failures started all hard technical material was withdrawn. Mixture has nothing to do with meeting the EPA requirements in any direct sense. The problem with the conventional ported two stroke outboard is emissions of unburned hydrocarbons. Since the incoming fuel/air charge is used to displace the exhauste gases. Approx. 15% of the fuel/air mix passes in thru the intake port and out thru the exhaust port without the benefit of having been in the cylinder during a combustion phase. Hence ways to significantly reduce the amount of unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust a) seperate the airflow/scavenging from the fuel. b) switch to a four stroke process where the piston scavenges the cylinder. c) post burn the unburnt fuel in a catalytic converter. Yes I agree with all you say, but I did say "viable" in the sense that by the time you make a crankcase transferred engine clean it's as complex heavy & expensive as a proper 4 stroke would have been in the first place:-) The Optimaxes are a classic as far as mechanical complexity being used to claim success with a "simple" 2 stroke. K |
E-Tec warning
In article , "K. Smith"
wrote: James Hebert wrote: In article , "K. Smith" wrote: wrote: [material deleted] I also like to see more data and like to know where the original post came from. Here the reference to "the original post" is to a comment that three Evinrude E-TEC motors had blown up at a fishing tournament held in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005 [Karen replies] These are a few just for you: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/003712.html Thanks for citing my website as a part of your effort to discredit the E-TEC, but I am afraid the article you cited contains not one word of any problems with the E-TEC motor at a fishing tournament in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005. As a matter of fact, all the articles in the cited thread were posted about a week before the fishing tournament held in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005. I don't see how they corroborate the initial claim about all of these engines blowing up. I am local to that area and have not heard anything about it. You see James this is the problem with forums such as yours, in this case you nopt onloy feel compelled to support your site you also support the latest DFI experiment called E-Tec? You even try to claim another forums posts "must" be wrong because you say so:-) There are many articles on my website which present information on the E-TEC. Some report problems and their resolution. Others report no problems. The content is not managed to present only one side or the other. Participants report how _their_ E-TEC motors are working. That's all. The point I was making is that the article you cited contained no mention of the incident at a Detroit River/Lake Erie fishing tournament. I think it was misleading to cite the article you mentioned in connection with the fishing tournament motors. I did not say "your" forum mentioned blown E-Tecs although the poster had asked for more data & where the original (blown E-tecs) post came from, but his request wasn't limited to just that, it's patently clear from the links where the information came from. Of course you'd never allow that:-). I had derided the latest "upgrades" your site conveniently gave material on them & clearly unbeknown to you much mo-) People can read James even though you'd prefer they just accepted your views without any review at all. Welcome to an open forum:-) Because I actually do look over the articles that we carry on the website, I often give some scrutiny to authors who appear suddenly with tales of horror about their engines. Here is a good example of one of these supposed E-TEC horror stories: An article was submitted for publication in which the author claimed he had purchased an E-TEC motor which subsequently failed after very short use. This motor was allegedly replaced, and the replacement failed even faster. This author claimed to be from Ontario. A check of the web server's logs showed the article had been posted from a computer in southern Europe. The email address provided was bogus. Messages to the author's mail exchanger were all refused with "unknown recipient" replies. Based on simple checking like this, I refused to publish this horror story of E-TEC motors blowing up. There was very little evidence that this was a legitimate report. Further, the fellow writing all of this never showed up again nor contacted me to complain about it being removed. By my guess, this same fellow having this same sort of sport by inventing these tales of blown up motors also posted to another on-line forums. His article was carried for a few days, but after requests for more information, such a serial numbers and a dealer name, went unanswered, the game was up and that article wase also removed by the administrator of that other moderated forums. I am afraid these days it is a simple matter for people to anonymously submit total falsehoods and have them widely circulated. Perhaps this is the case here, with the "open" nature of USENET. You're citing a incident in which you report three E-TEC motors have failed, yet you are 12,000 miles away from where it happened. I live about 25 miles away from where it happened and have never heard a word of it. I spent a few minutes searching using GOOGLE and I could not find any mention of an E-TEC engine failing at that fishing tournament, except for the single report you have cited. My preference is very strong for first-hand accounts of events where very new and very expensive engines blow up. There is a lot of dock talk and stories of friends of a friend, and so on, but a real first-hand account is much more reliable. So rather than you (fourth-hand) citing some anonymous fellow (third-hand) reporting on something he heard (second-hand) about what happened to an angler at fishing tournament (first-hand), the story would be much more compelling if we could just hear it right from the guy who owned the motor. The problem is that these first-hand accounts seem to be much harder to come by than recitation of second- or third-hand information. Next thing you know we'll have someone citing this thread (fifth-hand) to prove that three E-TEC motors blew up. If you had decided to actually find out about this technology you would already know why I say Ficht failed outright & to a lesser but still unacceptable extent Optimax. You're correct I am an Ozzy & was well familiar with Orbital long before Brunswick came into it. They'd been trying to flog it for years prior as had Ficht but none of the real engine people had taken it up & so far still haven't??? or do you say otherwise?? Brunswick does seem to be perhaps on the verge of giving up on the OptiMax. They have spent a significant amount of money ("millions") giving customers replacement power heads for all the OptiMax engines that blew up in the field. But that water over the dam, I think the real reason Brunswick is moving away from OptiMax is to push Verado. If they had not developed Verado (and spent all that money doing it), they would probably be content with OptiMax. They do seem to have worked the bugs out of the OptiMax--at least they don't have to give away so many free replacement power heads. By the way, a good measure of how many warranty failures there are for an engine is the availability of "factory refurbished" engines. In the case of OptiMax there were droves of them for sale from Mercury. That should have said something. Over some years I've explained in detail why & exactly how the DFIs including Orbital Optimax would fail & sadly for many boaters, OMC employees & unionists' pensions I was right. Of course as you promote & boot lick the suppliers you don't wish to even acknowledge these facts. You should read a truly "open" forum like here, then you'd know that the OMC dealers were well aware of the defective nature of the Fichts & continued to push them because they were getting up to 30% agg of rebates & other sundry kickbacks on them. It was all well documented & discussed here as the bankruptcy court dealt with OMC & the dealers trying to get themselves onto the list of creditors for their so called rebates:-) [the usual story on two-stroke DFI's inevitable doom deleted] So James if you've read this & even partly got a handle on it, now go & re read the link I posted to your site, do you see the issue with the so called "upgrades"??? also ask yourself why do different boats, different props etc seem to experience the "roughness" at different engine speeds??? Given that the spruikers will not give any real technical material & the dealers certainly have none, then I'm happy to use your site's material in support of my position. I have read your analysis many times. It does seem to have some sound reasoning, but I find that it applies to just about all two-strokes. In particular, I find most all outboards are running quite rough in the 1,500 to 2,500 RPM range. None of them seem to delight in pushing a boat around at that speed, as it is often a speed where the boat is not on plane and the engine is really struggling. The nature of each boat and the propeller chosen makes for different ranges where these rough problems are more pronounced. Generally I find the best wisdom to be: if the engine runs very rough at a certain speed, don't run it at that speed. It is probably trying to tell you something. One thing that modern engine controllers have done is to provide the manufacturer and his designers with more information about the speeds at which the customers actually run their engines. This feedback is often used to make tweaks in the engine firmware to work out problems. I do not find the notion that software embedded in an engine's controller might have to be upgraded to be proof of something being intrinsically wrong with the entire engine design and combustion process. On the contrary, I think that having the ability to easily upgrade the software is something of a plus. If there are refinements in the software which make the old engine run better, why not take advantage of them? So again just for clarity: I didn't allege your site said there were blown up E-Tecs because you clearly would have none of that:-) Actually, there are several long threads which discuss problems with E-TEC motors which resulted in the power head being replaced under warranty after a fairly short time, but the one you cited was not one of them. So, you see, there are both sides of the story available. But I did note the OMC Ficht like "upgrades" were back & I was happy to link to you showing the symptoms as these engine get to or near the mode change point & the mixture is reverting back to normal, maybe just maybe on a very hot piston???? So far I would not characterize these firmware updates as being "Ficht-like". I believe that to fix problems with Ficht engines more was required than just new firmware. From what I have learned, there have been almost no mechanical changes in the E-TEC, although there was a batch of motors which seemed to have gotten out of the factory with a water cooling passage that needed to be drilled out--a bit of sloppy manufacturing, yes, but not evidence of the inevitable doom of E-TEC. No need to thank me for publicising your site for you indeed I'm glad to & hope to again. K |
E-Tec warning
James Hebert wrote:
In article , "K. Smith" wrote: James Hebert wrote: In article , "K. Smith" wrote: wrote: [material deleted] I also like to see more data and like to know where the original post came from. Here the reference to "the original post" is to a comment that three Evinrude E-TEC motors had blown up at a fishing tournament held in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005 [Karen replies] These are a few just for you: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/003712.html Thanks for citing my website as a part of your effort to discredit the E-TEC, but I am afraid the article you cited contains not one word of any problems with the E-TEC motor at a fishing tournament in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005. As a matter of fact, all the articles in the cited thread were posted about a week before the fishing tournament held in Lake Erie around July 24, 2005. I don't see how they corroborate the initial claim about all of these engines blowing up. I am local to that area and have not heard anything about it. You see James this is the problem with forums such as yours, in this case you nopt onloy feel compelled to support your site you also support the latest DFI experiment called E-Tec? You even try to claim another forums posts "must" be wrong because you say so:-) There are many articles on my website which present information on the E-TEC. Some report problems and their resolution. Others report no problems. The content is not managed to present only one side or the other. Participants report how _their_ E-TEC motors are working. That's all. The point I was making is that the article you cited contained no mention of the incident at a Detroit River/Lake Erie fishing tournament. I think it was misleading to cite the article you mentioned in connection with the fishing tournament motors. I did not say "your" forum mentioned blown E-Tecs although the poster had asked for more data & where the original (blown E-tecs) post came from, but his request wasn't limited to just that, it's patently clear from the links where the information came from. Of course you'd never allow that:-). I had derided the latest "upgrades" your site conveniently gave material on them & clearly unbeknown to you much mo-) People can read James even though you'd prefer they just accepted your views without any review at all. Welcome to an open forum:-) Because I actually do look over the articles that we carry on the website, I often give some scrutiny to authors who appear suddenly with tales of horror about their engines. Here is a good example of one of these supposed E-TEC horror stories: An article was submitted for publication in which the author claimed he had purchased an E-TEC motor which subsequently failed after very short use. This motor was allegedly replaced, and the replacement failed even faster. This author claimed to be from Ontario. A check of the web server's logs showed the article had been posted from a computer in southern Europe. The email address provided was bogus. Messages to the author's mail exchanger were all refused with "unknown recipient" replies. Based on simple checking like this, I refused to publish this horror story of E-TEC motors blowing up. There was very little evidence that this was a legitimate report. Further, the fellow writing all of this never showed up again nor contacted me to complain about it being removed. By my guess, this same fellow having this same sort of sport by inventing these tales of blown up motors also posted to another on-line forums. His article was carried for a few days, but after requests for more information, such a serial numbers and a dealer name, went unanswered, the game was up and that article wase also removed by the administrator of that other moderated forums. I am afraid these days it is a simple matter for people to anonymously submit total falsehoods and have them widely circulated. Perhaps this is the case here, with the "open" nature of USENET. You're citing a incident in which you report three E-TEC motors have failed, yet you are 12,000 miles away from where it happened. I live about 25 miles away from where it happened and have never heard a word of it. I spent a few minutes searching using GOOGLE and I could not find any mention of an E-TEC engine failing at that fishing tournament, except for the single report you have cited. My preference is very strong for first-hand accounts of events where very new and very expensive engines blow up. There is a lot of dock talk and stories of friends of a friend, and so on, but a real first-hand account is much more reliable. So rather than you (fourth-hand) citing some anonymous fellow (third-hand) reporting on something he heard (second-hand) about what happened to an angler at fishing tournament (first-hand), the story would be much more compelling if we could just hear it right from the guy who owned the motor. The problem is that these first-hand accounts seem to be much harder to come by than recitation of second- or third-hand information. Next thing you know we'll have someone citing this thread (fifth-hand) to prove that three E-TEC motors blew up. If you had decided to actually find out about this technology you would already know why I say Ficht failed outright & to a lesser but still unacceptable extent Optimax. You're correct I am an Ozzy & was well familiar with Orbital long before Brunswick came into it. They'd been trying to flog it for years prior as had Ficht but none of the real engine people had taken it up & so far still haven't??? or do you say otherwise?? Brunswick does seem to be perhaps on the verge of giving up on the OptiMax. They have spent a significant amount of money ("millions") giving customers replacement power heads for all the OptiMax engines that blew up in the field. But that water over the dam, I think the real reason Brunswick is moving away from OptiMax is to push Verado. If they had not developed Verado (and spent all that money doing it), they would probably be content with OptiMax. They do seem to have worked the bugs out of the OptiMax--at least they don't have to give away so many free replacement power heads. By the way, a good measure of how many warranty failures there are for an engine is the availability of "factory refurbished" engines. In the case of OptiMax there were droves of them for sale from Mercury. That should have said something. Over some years I've explained in detail why & exactly how the DFIs including Orbital Optimax would fail & sadly for many boaters, OMC employees & unionists' pensions I was right. Of course as you promote & boot lick the suppliers you don't wish to even acknowledge these facts. You should read a truly "open" forum like here, then you'd know that the OMC dealers were well aware of the defective nature of the Fichts & continued to push them because they were getting up to 30% agg of rebates & other sundry kickbacks on them. It was all well documented & discussed here as the bankruptcy court dealt with OMC & the dealers trying to get themselves onto the list of creditors for their so called rebates:-) [the usual story on two-stroke DFI's inevitable doom deleted] So James if you've read this & even partly got a handle on it, now go & re read the link I posted to your site, do you see the issue with the so called "upgrades"??? also ask yourself why do different boats, different props etc seem to experience the "roughness" at different engine speeds??? Given that the spruikers will not give any real technical material & the dealers certainly have none, then I'm happy to use your site's material in support of my position. I have read your analysis many times. It does seem to have some sound reasoning, but I find that it applies to just about all two-strokes. In particular, I find most all outboards are running quite rough in the 1,500 to 2,500 RPM range. None of them seem to delight in pushing a boat around at that speed, as it is often a speed where the boat is not on plane and the engine is really struggling. The nature of each boat and the propeller chosen makes for different ranges where these rough problems are more pronounced. Generally I find the best wisdom to be: if the engine runs very rough at a certain speed, don't run it at that speed. It is probably trying to tell you something. One thing that modern engine controllers have done is to provide the manufacturer and his designers with more information about the speeds at which the customers actually run their engines. This feedback is often used to make tweaks in the engine firmware to work out problems. I do not find the notion that software embedded in an engine's controller might have to be upgraded to be proof of something being intrinsically wrong with the entire engine design and combustion process. On the contrary, I think that having the ability to easily upgrade the software is something of a plus. If there are refinements in the software which make the old engine run better, why not take advantage of them? So again just for clarity: I didn't allege your site said there were blown up E-Tecs because you clearly would have none of that:-) Actually, there are several long threads which discuss problems with E-TEC motors which resulted in the power head being replaced under warranty after a fairly short time, but the one you cited was not one of them. So, you see, there are both sides of the story available. But I did note the OMC Ficht like "upgrades" were back & I was happy to link to you showing the symptoms as these engine get to or near the mode change point & the mixture is reverting back to normal, maybe just maybe on a very hot piston???? So far I would not characterize these firmware updates as being "Ficht-like". I believe that to fix problems with Ficht engines more was required than just new firmware. From what I have learned, there have been almost no mechanical changes in the E-TEC, although there was a batch of motors which seemed to have gotten out of the factory with a water cooling passage that needed to be drilled out--a bit of sloppy manufacturing, yes, but not evidence of the inevitable doom of E-TEC. No need to thank me for publicising your site for you indeed I'm glad to & hope to again. K Firstly thanks for the reasoned reply James, & although I didn't agree with your view on my posting of a link to your page in the premises I'm happy to apologise if it upset you & do so unreservedly. I'll be much clearer if I link to your pages in the future. I agree Optimax is dead & again we probably disagree over the reasons, however so long as they don't ruin more boaters enjoyment off into the future who cares why they're going. As for the E-Tec stuff I think we just plain disagree but not as much as I expected actually, it seems you are like most boaters happy to accept an old tech carbed 2 stroke OB will fail if a cyl is fed a lean mixture?? my position remains that the very same thing dealers have made millions upon millions fixing & happily explaining the cause as "gone lean at power" is the reason the Fichts & I say E-tecs are at risk. I'll be brave to suggest that the dealers or boat manufacturers packaging them are being given more than generous (read 30% & over as the ficht dealers demanded & mostly got) rebates etc to do so. So as with Ficht we'll never truly know the situation because there's no more dangerous a place to get than between a dealer/boat packager & a dollar:-) As with Ficht I'll make my detailed predictions & give the reasons for same then we'll see how it all goes. Given the higher temp pistons, the treated bores, the special oil, the better fastenings etc etc I honestly don't think as many E-Tecs will fail but enough that the technology is doomed, just as all previous attempts at lean burn engines have been. All the best K |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com