Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Why is that the case? the optimax injects directly into the cylinder ?
And why does it make it more reliable?

P.S.

one of my theories about ETec vs 4stroke vs optimax is that the Etec
seems to be using slightly (5-15%) gas. Which may be because of its
"nosed" piston which helps efficiency at low rpm but not at high rpm.

Lets not even go into the BRP claims it is more efficient .. which are
measured at idle speed and true... But also at that rpm and fuel use
even 50% more would be irrelelvant.



Matt

Sorry Matt I missed this one.

The Optimaxes are not true DFI (as in, Direct into the combustion
chamber Fuel Injection);

(i) they have a second inlet manifold between the air pump & a large
electronic fuel/air mixture injector (inlet valve).

(ii) The "fuel" is actually injected into this second inlet manifold.
with "normal" fuel injectors from a pretty much normal fuel rail
(slightly higher fuel rail pressure).

(iii) The fuel is therefore better atomised not much different from
normal 4 strokes fuel fuel injection & the same as a 4 stroke's
injection the fuel can get further atomised in a mostly hot (compressed
air) manifold before

(iv) an inlet valve opens & allows the fuel air mixture to flow into the
combustion chamber.

The reasons Optimaxes were better but still unsuccessful as OB engines,
were;

(v) the fuel was better atomised & a better mixture was allowed into the
chamber (though still way too lean), also

(vi) the injectors themselves were not subjected to the rigors of the
combustion chamber although the electronic inlet valve (air fuel mixture
injector) was & just as with Ficht they contributed to the reliability
or lack thereof making them failures from a commercial sense.

If any confirmation were needed after OMC, that low pressure DFI using
lean mixtures up into the mid power range doesn't work, take a look at
the Optimaxes & Ficht type systems. They could not be more different in
their execution of basically the same idea, extremely lean mixtures at
low revs fired directly around the spark plug even just to get ignition
(in ficht like systems they even have to just leave the plug
firing!!:-)) Yet they both suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage, gee they'd be too unreliable even as specialty race engines.

K

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Harry Krause wrote:
K. Smith wrote:

If any confirmation were needed after OMC, that low pressure DFI using
lean mixtures up into the mid power range doesn't work, take a look at
the Optimaxes & Ficht type systems. They could not be more different
in their execution of basically the same idea, extremely lean mixtures
at low revs fired directly around the spark plug even just to get
ignition (in ficht like systems they even have to just leave the plug
firing!!:-)) Yet they both suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage, gee they'd be too unreliable even as specialty race
engines.

K


What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.


AH AH AH the liar Krause is supposed to have me filtered:-)

The net was full of horror stories about Optimax a few years ago even
this NG has sad owners looking for any sort of answers they could get.

Gee even one of your "star" OMC dealers from the deep north told this NG
he knew of warehouses full of blown Optimax powerheads!!!:-) Love it!!!
I really do. What are you now suggesting Krause?? just because you're a
total liar then this particular OMC dealer is also a liar???? Gee how
the liar worm has turned.

The best evidence is the new 4 strokes & the fact Brunswick are not
going any further, the Optimaxes are dead not as dead as ficht & it's
derivatives but dead is dead. Brunswick atr one stage were lodging
copious patents for "improvements" & not one of them has been put
through to production (some were pretty obvious, like the belt driven
pump, the plumbing etc) so they don't want to throw any more good money
after a failed technology either.

Seems there is only one know person here who still does:-)

K

& the Krause lie for today is his Vietnam lie, the one he concocted when
in a fit of jealousy that John was a true patriot & served his country
like a real man, while socialist scum like Krause cowed behind their
lies back in the safety of their unions.


Just to make your day, not only was
I a civilian employee in SE Asia, it was in Vietnam, it was
during the
war against Vietnam, I did see some horrific sights and I was
working at
the time for a U.S. general. Is that straightforward enough for you,
John, or is your amoeba still chasing your synapse

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Harry Krause wrote:

What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.

Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available
for any consumer item? The companies I've worked for held
that data pretty tightly.

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

-rick- wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:


What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.


Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data pretty
tightly.

Even that's charitable, the dealers lie outright.

the only time we ever got a figure was Ficht they "claimed" 1 in 5 but
honestly I think it was much higer than that

K

& the Krause lie for today is his Vietnam lie, the one he concocted when
in a fit of jealousy that John was a true patriot & served his country
like a real man, while socialist scum like Krause cowed behind their
lies back in the safety of their unions.


Just to make your day, not only was
I a civilian employee in SE Asia, it was in Vietnam, it was
during the
war against Vietnam, I did see some horrific sights and I was
working at
the time for a U.S. general. Is that straightforward enough for you,
John, or is your amoeba still chasing your synapse

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Harry Krause wrote:
-rick- wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.


Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data pretty
tightly.



Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with various
products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high failure
rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing. How can you
claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable quantifying?

The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend of
yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask for???
again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing but lying
scum like you???

If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it, don't be
shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into it &
spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as far as I'm
concerned.

If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't help you
further, you'll just have to stay in that unique but sad group of
simpletons who just "believe" things, gee there's one here who actually
posted he gets a certain fuel consumption because he "believes" he will!!!!

K

& the Krause lie for today is his Vietnam lie, the one he concocted when
in a fit of jealousy that John was a true patriot & served his country
like a real man, while socialist scum like Krause cowed behind their
lies back in the safety of their unions.


Just to make your day, not only was
I a civilian employee in SE Asia, it was in Vietnam, it was
during the
war against Vietnam, I did see some horrific sights and I was
working at
the time for a U.S. general. Is that straightforward enough for you,
John, or is your amoeba still chasing your synapse

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Harry Krause wrote:
But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high failure
rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing. How can you
claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable quantifying?

Agreed, my question was orthogonal. I can't find legitimate
failure rate stats for Optimax, Ficht, or ETec, can you?

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Harry Krause wrote:
K. Smith wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
-rick- wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from
reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.

Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data pretty
tightly.


Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with
various products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high
failure rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing. How
can you claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable quantifying?

The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend of
yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask for???
again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing but lying
scum like you???


What I'm stating is that your propaganda is not based upon any
certified, verifiable, enumerated, qualified, or quantified data.



If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it, don't
be shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into it
& spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as far as
I'm concerned.


When I bought my Opti in 1998, I read info from Brunswick which said the
Opti technology was a bridge to help the company meet emission standards
in the short term.


If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't help
you further

I'm not making the claim, you are. You need the help, not me.
Harry,
I can remember a very detailed discussion Karen had with some
engineering types who used to frequent this motley group. I thought
they agreed that there was and should be concern about the lubrication
of Fichts at trolling speed.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 07:19:08 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:
K. Smith wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
-rick- wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from
reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.
Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data pretty
tightly.

Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with
various products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high
failure rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing. How
can you claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable quantifying?
The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend of
yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask for???
again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing but lying
scum like you???

What I'm stating is that your propaganda is not based upon any
certified, verifiable, enumerated, qualified, or quantified data.


If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it, don't
be shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into it
& spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as far as
I'm concerned.

When I bought my Opti in 1998, I read info from Brunswick which said the
Opti technology was a bridge to help the company meet emission standards
in the short term.


If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't help
you further
I'm not making the claim, you are. You need the help, not me.
Harry,
I can remember a very detailed discussion Karen had with some
engineering types who used to frequent this motley group. I thought
they agreed that there was and should be concern about the lubrication
of Fichts at trolling speed.

600+ something hours most at low speed on the ranger and no problems
related to oiling or cylinder wear. i did have a stator problem which
cascaded through the engine, but thats almost unheard of even of other
engines including fichts.

oh, and its an omc ficht.

the problem is that most of the folks, engineers or not, have no clue
about how the system works or doesnt work - mostly doesnt because the
assumptions they make are valuless, uninformed and strictly
speculation - in short, if you cant convince them with brilliance....

its an advanced technology which baffles some who think they know it
all, thus they have to rely on bull**** and bafflement to "make" their
points.

everybody else can buy merc optimaxs and verados and yamaha four
strokes, but they arent going to get the milage i do, the preformance
i do or the reliability i have received.

so im done with this - everybody can do what they want - ill be
laughing all the way to the fishing grounds - or the bank with my
incredibly efficient engines.
Tom,
I am way too stupid to know the truth, except that no one in rec.boats
who owned one, has reported a problem with Ficht or Etec.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 13:54:58 +1100, "K. Smith" wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:
-rick- wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.


Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data pretty
tightly.



Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with various
products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high failure
rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing. How can you
claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable quantifying?

The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend of
yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask for???
again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing but lying
scum like you???

If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it, don't be
shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into it &
spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as far as I'm
concerned.

If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't help you
further, you'll just have to stay in that unique but sad group of
simpletons who just "believe" things, gee there's one here who actually
posted he gets a certain fuel consumption because he "believes" he will!!!!

K

& the Krause lie for today is his Vietnam lie, the one he concocted when
in a fit of jealousy that John was a true patriot & served his country
like a real man, while socialist scum like Krause cowed behind their
lies back in the safety of their unions.


Just to make your day, not only was
I a civilian employee in SE Asia, it was in Vietnam, it was
during the
war against Vietnam, I did see some horrific sights and I was
working at
the time for a U.S. general. Is that straightforward enough for you,
John, or is your amoeba still chasing your synapse

Karen, please stop calling Harry 'lying scum'. It adds nothing to your
otherwise very interesting posts.

Your posts show that you know a lot more about the workings of the engines
than most anyone else hear. That alone adds to the credibility of what
you're saying.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 12:44:45 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 07:19:08 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:
K. Smith wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
-rick- wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from
reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.

Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data pretty
tightly.


Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with
various products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high
failure rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing. How
can you claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable quantifying?

The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend of
yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask for???
again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing but lying
scum like you???


What I'm stating is that your propaganda is not based upon any
certified, verifiable, enumerated, qualified, or quantified data.



If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it, don't
be shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into it
& spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as far as
I'm concerned.


When I bought my Opti in 1998, I read info from Brunswick which said the
Opti technology was a bridge to help the company meet emission standards
in the short term.


If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't help
you further

I'm not making the claim, you are. You need the help, not me.
Harry,
I can remember a very detailed discussion Karen had with some
engineering types who used to frequent this motley group. I thought
they agreed that there was and should be concern about the lubrication
of Fichts at trolling speed.

600+ something hours most at low speed on the ranger and no problems
related to oiling or cylinder wear. i did have a stator problem which
cascaded through the engine, but thats almost unheard of even of other
engines including fichts.

oh, and its an omc ficht.

the problem is that most of the folks, engineers or not, have no clue
about how the system works or doesnt work - mostly doesnt because the
assumptions they make are valuless, uninformed and strictly
speculation - in short, if you cant convince them with brilliance....

its an advanced technology which baffles some who think they know it
all, thus they have to rely on bull**** and bafflement to "make" their
points.

everybody else can buy merc optimaxs and verados and yamaha four
strokes, but they arent going to get the milage i do, the preformance
i do or the reliability i have received.

so im done with this - everybody can do what they want - ill be
laughing all the way to the fishing grounds - or the bank with my
incredibly efficient engines.

Tom, is Karen wrong in her description of how the system works or doesn't?
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 10:11:00 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:

Karen, please stop calling Harry 'lying scum'. It adds nothing to your
otherwise very interesting posts.

Your posts show that you know a lot more about the workings of the engines
than most anyone else hear. That alone adds to the credibility of what
you're saying.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

You've turned yourself into quite the player, John.

Your netcopping hypocrisy is no more appealing than Ms. Smith's
substandard English namecalling.

Harry, I apologize for anything I said to Karen that offended you.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 11:45:41 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 10:11:00 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:

Karen, please stop calling Harry 'lying scum'. It adds nothing to your
otherwise very interesting posts.

Your posts show that you know a lot more about the workings of the engines
than most anyone else hear. That alone adds to the credibility of what
you're saying.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************
You've turned yourself into quite the player, John.

Your netcopping hypocrisy is no more appealing than Ms. Smith's
substandard English namecalling.

Harry, I apologize for anything I said to Karen that offended you.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

That's right...play the dummy. You must be convincing someone, eh?

Why not take your "disagreement" with Ms. Smith to your a.politics
newsgroup, where only the two of you can read it?

In what way is an apology 'playing the dummy'?

"a.politics" is not 'my' group. Anyone can post there, and anyone can read
the posts made there.

Actually, I wish some folks *would* go there and make their political
posts. I found many of them mentally stimulating and very informative, at
least until they got into the personal attack mode.

I'd like to hear what the 'Dougs', Nobby, etc. have to say about the
election results in Palestine, for example.

....but not here.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 17:29:13 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 09:47:30 -0500, JohnH wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 12:44:45 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 07:19:08 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:
K. Smith wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
-rick- wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from
reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.

Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data pretty
tightly.


Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with
various products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high
failure rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing. How
can you claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable quantifying?

The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend of
yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask for???
again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing but lying
scum like you???


What I'm stating is that your propaganda is not based upon any
certified, verifiable, enumerated, qualified, or quantified data.



If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it, don't
be shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into it
& spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as far as
I'm concerned.


When I bought my Opti in 1998, I read info from Brunswick which said the
Opti technology was a bridge to help the company meet emission standards
in the short term.


If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't help
you further

I'm not making the claim, you are. You need the help, not me.
Harry,
I can remember a very detailed discussion Karen had with some
engineering types who used to frequent this motley group. I thought
they agreed that there was and should be concern about the lubrication
of Fichts at trolling speed.

600+ something hours most at low speed on the ranger and no problems
related to oiling or cylinder wear. i did have a stator problem which
cascaded through the engine, but thats almost unheard of even of other
engines including fichts.

oh, and its an omc ficht.

the problem is that most of the folks, engineers or not, have no clue
about how the system works or doesnt work - mostly doesnt because the
assumptions they make are valuless, uninformed and strictly
speculation - in short, if you cant convince them with brilliance....

its an advanced technology which baffles some who think they know it
all, thus they have to rely on bull**** and bafflement to "make" their
points.

everybody else can buy merc optimaxs and verados and yamaha four
strokes, but they arent going to get the milage i do, the preformance
i do or the reliability i have received.

so im done with this - everybody can do what they want - ill be
laughing all the way to the fishing grounds - or the bank with my
incredibly efficient engines.

Tom, is Karen wrong in her description of how the system works or doesn't?

i said what i said and i am right...

And I'm not arguing that. In fact, I'm not arguing anything, 'cause I know
nothing about them other than what I've read here.

Could it be that the problems mentioned by Karen are with the larger hp
engines and not the 90hp's?
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into it &
spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as far as I'm
concerned.

The problem with the Verado is that the charger and intercooler doesnt
make me feel any better in terms of reliability :(

Matt

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 13:21:04 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 11:45:41 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 10:11:00 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:

Karen, please stop calling Harry 'lying scum'. It adds nothing to your
otherwise very interesting posts.

Your posts show that you know a lot more about the workings of the engines
than most anyone else hear. That alone adds to the credibility of what
you're saying.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************
You've turned yourself into quite the player, John.

Your netcopping hypocrisy is no more appealing than Ms. Smith's
substandard English namecalling.
Harry, I apologize for anything I said to Karen that offended you.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************
That's right...play the dummy. You must be convincing someone, eh?

Why not take your "disagreement" with Ms. Smith to your a.politics
newsgroup, where only the two of you can read it?

In what way is an apology 'playing the dummy'?

"a.politics" is not 'my' group. Anyone can post there, and anyone can read
the posts made there.

Actually, I wish some folks *would* go there and make their political
posts. I found many of them mentally stimulating and very informative, at
least until they got into the personal attack mode.

I'd like to hear what the 'Dougs', Nobby, etc. have to say about the
election results in Palestine, for example.

...but not here.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Everyone has "likes." I'd like you and the rest of the netcoppers to
take your netcopping to alt.netcops.annoyances.

Harry, I'm sorry my asking Karen to stop calling you names was offensive to
you. What more do you want?
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

There is a difference between existing information and to the public
available information.

you are just extending the WMD in Iraq post ....

Matt

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 17:29:13 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:


On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 09:47:30 -0500, JohnH wrote:


On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 12:44:45 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:


On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 07:19:08 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:

K. Smith wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

-rick- wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:


What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from
reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.

Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data pretty
tightly.


Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with
various products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high
failure rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing. How
can you claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable quantifying?

The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend of
yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask for???
again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing but lying
scum like you???


What I'm stating is that your propaganda is not based upon any
certified, verifiable, enumerated, qualified, or quantified data.



If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it, don't
be shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into it
& spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as far as
I'm concerned.


When I bought my Opti in 1998, I read info from Brunswick which said the
Opti technology was a bridge to help the company meet emission standards
in the short term.



If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't help
you further

I'm not making the claim, you are. You need the help, not me.

Harry,
I can remember a very detailed discussion Karen had with some
engineering types who used to frequent this motley group. I thought
they agreed that there was and should be concern about the lubrication
of Fichts at trolling speed.

600+ something hours most at low speed on the ranger and no problems
related to oiling or cylinder wear. i did have a stator problem which
cascaded through the engine, but thats almost unheard of even of other
engines including fichts.

oh, and its an omc ficht.

the problem is that most of the folks, engineers or not, have no clue
about how the system works or doesnt work - mostly doesnt because the
assumptions they make are valuless, uninformed and strictly
speculation - in short, if you cant convince them with brilliance....

its an advanced technology which baffles some who think they know it
all, thus they have to rely on bull**** and bafflement to "make" their
points.

everybody else can buy merc optimaxs and verados and yamaha four
strokes, but they arent going to get the milage i do, the preformance
i do or the reliability i have received.

so im done with this - everybody can do what they want - ill be
laughing all the way to the fishing grounds - or the bank with my
incredibly efficient engines.

Tom, is Karen wrong in her description of how the system works or doesn't?

i said what i said and i am right...


And I'm not arguing that. In fact, I'm not arguing anything, 'cause I know
nothing about them other than what I've read here.

Could it be that the problems mentioned by Karen are with the larger hp
engines and not the 90hp's?
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Hi John,

Apologies for the Krause comments & sorry to say I call him for what he
is, I think we can just disagree about how each handles him.

As for the E-Tec thing I guess I'm happy to stand on my record, it's all
properly archived unlike those that are scared they'll be held to their
own BS.

You'll find a small group here worked very hard on the DFI thing in
98-99 & well before there were substantial numbers of engines out there
(despite the dealers trying to lie about that also) much less
substantial numbers of failures.

As to how they work?? we had to re-educate the dealers using the patents
(at the time we all know the ficht patent numbers off by heart:-)). The
so-called dealer tech training had been so dumbed down they didn't have
a clue (don't believe me again it's all archived, eventually we got Bill
to disassemble a Ficht injector & clock it up & he was honest enough to
come back & admit he'd been had). I was predicting they wouldn't work
from the start but much more importantly; why.

This E-Tec thing is a re-run, even down to the sad owners trying to talk
up "their" brand. Truth is Tom didn't have the knowhow nor wit to see
that his so called one off failure was not that at all, it was down to
detonation, just like the blown fuel connections, injectors, even the
gearbox failures etc etc .

The fact he came back for more is just a measure of his ego not being
able to come to grips with the first decision to buy engines which had
known design problems. Of itself these things are his life problem but
when he posts totally crazy stuff he is no better than a selling dealer
as far as I'm concerned. I learned the first time round with Ficht
there's no percentage in not saying what needs to be said. I suspect Tom
has bluffed his way through as he does in this NG (use a good primer
before applying gel coat is a recent classic!!!) reliant on the fact
that most people are like you & just too bloody polite to call him, not
me:-) no manners here; nuff nuffs are nuff nuffs & according to Darwin a
second time buyer of Ficht is a good way to ID them:-)

Have you noticed that Tom is not even trying to defend nor sustain his
11gph & 35mph claim???? He's been called & what???, just folded???
Hoping it'll go away???

For the record Matt is dead right about the E-Tec fuel consumption
claims, the only time they use less fuel is when they're in lean mode at
low to medium revs, at normal cruising power they use the same as any
other 2 stroke. Problem is if the pistons/rings got too hot from the
lean mixture, repeat plug firing mode it won't be long before it doesn't
burn any fuel at all:-) I'm guessing Tom will count the miles on the end
of a tow line as evidence of miles covered vs fuel used:-)

He's also posted recently that engines can get certain fuel consumptions
if he believes they can:-) Truly dangerous nuff nuff stuff, he's not
even embarrassed of course but the few fellow travelers with him ???? do
you cringe??? even just a little???? well don't worry I'll actually say
what needs to be said & as the E-Tec failures build in your new season
I'll make sure to keep you up to date. Damn there's enough already isn't
there??? The "excuses" are straight out of the Ficht book:-)

Reggie wanted examples I gave him some, do any good??? There a many more
& as needed I'll feed them out.


K

Krause recent lie of the day for you John

Worst part of the experience was the 15 minute delay. Overall, the CG
was very professional and polite.

Obviously, the Coasties were not aware that you are known to hang out in
rec.boats with the right-wing militia types.

The one time I was "boarded" in Chesapeake Bay was by a beautiful young
resources cop. The single buddy I was with at the time tried to pick her
up for a date.

Later that season, I read where she was shot and killed by some bad guys
on the Bay. I recall "drug smugglers" were suspected. This was eight or
nine years ago, if my fading memory serves. I've had no luck dredging up
a news clipping about the shooting.

This is clearly just another of the Krause lies, so I'll keep a copy for
later.

He just makes this BS up as he goes along, seriously given the rubbish
he posts here by the minute can anyone with a brain (that leaves his
leftie lackies well out of it).

Imagine he wouldn't have gone on & on & on about this made up story??

Forgetting the factual holes in it, like all his lies before it's
designed to perpetuate the lie that he even has a boat.

Anyway just calling the liar as more of you should, he's so full on BS.

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

"K. Smith" wrote in message
...

... eventually we got Bill to disassemble a Ficht injector & clock it up &
he was honest enough to come back & admit he'd been had).


Karen,

"You GOT me to dissassemble a FICHT injector ??????" You must be off your
rocker with that comment.


About the comment on the FICHT patents. Even the engineer Marcus Bell would
email me laughing that Karen from Australia could not even fathom that fuel
circulated thru the injector, even after many "lessons" to you trying to
make you see the light.

You are a looney.

Bill Grannis
service manager

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Billgran wrote:
"K. Smith" wrote in message
...

... eventually we got Bill to disassemble a Ficht injector & clock it up &
he was honest enough to come back & admit he'd been had).


Karen,

"You GOT me to dissassemble a FICHT injector ??????" You must be off your
rocker with that comment.


About the comment on the FICHT patents. Even the engineer Marcus Bell would
email me laughing that Karen from Australia could not even fathom that fuel
circulated thru the injector, even after many "lessons" to you trying to
make you see the light.

You are a looney.

Bill Grannis
service manager



Bill,
As someone who does have detailed knowledge of Ficht with a larger than
average data base, have you found Ficht or Etec to have more than the
average problems? Is there any truth to the problem that some of Ficht
engines had problems related to trolling for extended periods?



--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Reggie Smithers wrote:
Billgran wrote:
"K. Smith" wrote in message
...

... eventually we got Bill to disassemble a Ficht injector & clock
it up & he was honest enough to come back & admit he'd been had).

Karen,

"You GOT me to dissassemble a FICHT injector ??????" You must be
off your rocker with that comment.


About the comment on the FICHT patents. Even the engineer Marcus
Bell would email me laughing that Karen from Australia could not even
fathom that fuel circulated thru the injector, even after many
"lessons" to you trying to make you see the light.

You are a looney.

Bill Grannis
service manager



Bill,
As someone who does have detailed knowledge of Ficht with a larger
than average data base, have you found Ficht or Etec to have more than
the average problems? Is there any truth to the problem that some of
Ficht engines had problems related to trolling for extended periods?




Trying to drum up some support for Ms. Smith?

No I am not. I really have no bone to pick on any engine, and own a
I/O. Bill is very knowledgeable, based upon practical hands on
experience. His opinion would be very valuable for anyone considering a
2 stroke vs a 4 stroke. It is silly for people to take a strong stance
on a position, without some data to help form an opinion.

I am curious though, why did you think my open ended question was a
support for Ms. Smith?





--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Reggie Smithers wrote:
Billgran wrote:
"K. Smith" wrote in message
...

... eventually we got Bill to disassemble a Ficht injector & clock
it up & he was honest enough to come back & admit he'd been had).

Karen,

"You GOT me to dissassemble a FICHT injector ??????" You must be
off your rocker with that comment.


About the comment on the FICHT patents. Even the engineer Marcus
Bell would email me laughing that Karen from Australia could not even
fathom that fuel circulated thru the injector, even after many
"lessons" to you trying to make you see the light.

You are a looney.

Bill Grannis
service manager



Bill,
As someone who does have detailed knowledge of Ficht with a larger
than average data base, have you found Ficht or Etec to have more than
the average problems? Is there any truth to the problem that some of
Ficht engines had problems related to trolling for extended periods?




Trying to drum up some support for Ms. Smith?

Here are some interesting link with commentary from some people
experience in Ficht.

http://www.outboardrepairs.com/ficht/

http://www.outboardmotor.biz/FICHT/

As I said, I have no reason to support or bash Ficht or Ms. Smith.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Reggie,

Interesting links.

On the com link the latest issue was in 2002. I read all of them. On the
biz link I only randomly checked a hand full. Of those the latest was 2003
but there may well be more recent issues posted.

There were some serious early isues posted but most of the later ones were
related to common easy to solve problems encountered by all brands.

BTW, if you give any value to posts from the K of Oz you need to relook your
sucker index :=). Do a google on her FICHT/ETEC postings and read them all.
Then repeat the process for Bill Grannis. Perhaps if she did not flat out
lie about what Bill Grannis says about the engines she would be a little bit
credible, IMO.

FWIW, this FICHT owner user for the past seven years is perfectly happy. If
I buy another boat it will be Etec powered based upon my considerable FICHT
experience and satisfaction.

YMMV.

Butch
"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
. ..
Harry Krause wrote:
Reggie Smithers wrote:
Billgran wrote:
"K. Smith" wrote in message
...

... eventually we got Bill to disassemble a Ficht injector & clock it
up & he was honest enough to come back & admit he'd been had).

Karen,

"You GOT me to dissassemble a FICHT injector ??????" You must be off
your rocker with that comment.


About the comment on the FICHT patents. Even the engineer Marcus Bell
would email me laughing that Karen from Australia could not even fathom
that fuel circulated thru the injector, even after many "lessons" to
you trying to make you see the light.

You are a looney.

Bill Grannis
service manager



Bill,
As someone who does have detailed knowledge of Ficht with a larger than
average data base, have you found Ficht or Etec to have more than the
average problems? Is there any truth to the problem that some of Ficht
engines had problems related to trolling for extended periods?




Trying to drum up some support for Ms. Smith?

Here are some interesting link with commentary from some people experience
in Ficht.

http://www.outboardrepairs.com/ficht/

http://www.outboardmotor.biz/FICHT/

As I said, I have no reason to support or bash Ficht or Ms. Smith.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Butch Davis wrote:
Reggie,

Interesting links.

On the com link the latest issue was in 2002. I read all of them. On the
biz link I only randomly checked a hand full. Of those the latest was 2003
but there may well be more recent issues posted.

There were some serious early isues posted but most of the later ones were
related to common easy to solve problems encountered by all brands.

BTW, if you give any value to posts from the K of Oz you need to relook your
sucker index :=). Do a google on her FICHT/ETEC postings and read them all.
Then repeat the process for Bill Grannis. Perhaps if she did not flat out
lie about what Bill Grannis says about the engines she would be a little bit
credible, IMO.

FWIW, this FICHT owner user for the past seven years is perfectly happy. If
I buy another boat it will be Etec powered based upon my considerable FICHT
experience and satisfaction.

YMMV.

Butch
"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
. ..
Harry Krause wrote:
Reggie Smithers wrote:
Billgran wrote:
"K. Smith" wrote in message
...

... eventually we got Bill to disassemble a Ficht injector & clock it
up & he was honest enough to come back & admit he'd been had).
Karen,

"You GOT me to dissassemble a FICHT injector ??????" You must be off
your rocker with that comment.


About the comment on the FICHT patents. Even the engineer Marcus Bell
would email me laughing that Karen from Australia could not even fathom
that fuel circulated thru the injector, even after many "lessons" to
you trying to make you see the light.

You are a looney.

Bill Grannis
service manager



Bill,
As someone who does have detailed knowledge of Ficht with a larger than
average data base, have you found Ficht or Etec to have more than the
average problems? Is there any truth to the problem that some of Ficht
engines had problems related to trolling for extended periods?



Trying to drum up some support for Ms. Smith?
Here are some interesting link with commentary from some people experience
in Ficht.

http://www.outboardrepairs.com/ficht/

http://www.outboardmotor.biz/FICHT/

As I said, I have no reason to support or bash Ficht or Ms. Smith.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************


Butch,
I do question most of Karen's posts, but instead of making it personal,
it makes much more sense to stick to the facts. You have always been a
knowledgeable contributor and so has Bill Grannis. It makes more sense
to place a higher value on actually data, than theoretical
extrapolations. Since Karen has taken a break from rec.boats, it makes
sense to make sure any new readers in rec.boats hear from others besides
Karen.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 07:19:08 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:

K. Smith wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

-rick- wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:


What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from
reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.

Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data pretty
tightly.


Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with
various products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high
failure rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing. How
can you claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable quantifying?

The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend of
yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask for???
again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing but lying
scum like you???


What I'm stating is that your propaganda is not based upon any
certified, verifiable, enumerated, qualified, or quantified data.



If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it, don't
be shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into it
& spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as far as
I'm concerned.


When I bought my Opti in 1998, I read info from Brunswick which said the
Opti technology was a bridge to help the company meet emission standards
in the short term.



If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't help
you further

I'm not making the claim, you are. You need the help, not me.

Harry,
I can remember a very detailed discussion Karen had with some
engineering types who used to frequent this motley group. I thought
they agreed that there was and should be concern about the lubrication
of Fichts at trolling speed.


600+ something hours most at low speed on the ranger and no problems
related to oiling or cylinder wear. i did have a stator problem which
cascaded through the engine, but thats almost unheard of even of other
engines including fichts.

oh, and its an omc ficht.

the problem is that most of the folks, engineers or not, have no clue
about how the system works or doesnt work - mostly doesnt because the
assumptions they make are valuless, uninformed and strictly
speculation - in short, if you cant convince them with brilliance....

its an advanced technology which baffles some who think they know it
all, thus they have to rely on bull**** and bafflement to "make" their
points.

everybody else can buy merc optimaxs and verados and yamaha four
strokes, but they arent going to get the milage i do, the preformance
i do or the reliability i have received.

so im done with this - everybody can do what they want - ill be
laughing all the way to the fishing grounds - or the bank with my
incredibly efficient engines.

I'm sorry to provide a contradictory data point, courtesy of the folks
at Bass and Walleye Boats. In the 12/2005 issue they had the 200HP DFI
shootout where they compared the Optimax, HPDI, and Etec on identical
bass boats. In Optimum Fuel Economy, the Etec was last at 4.4 mpg,
compared to 5.5 on the HPDI and 5.8 for the Optimax. At WOT it was 3.7
for the etec, 4.2 for the merc, and 4.1 for the yamaha.

Top speeds were almost identical.

0-30 hole shot was 8.2 for the etec, 7.6 for the Optimax, and 6.7 for
the HPDI.

And list price was highest for the etec.

Note, the hulls were weighed and made to be exactly the same.

All setups were done by the bass cat factory folks

Here is a quote "After all the emissions and mileage hype from
Evinrude, we expected the E-Tec HO tr really put a hurtin' on the other
two when it came to the fuel fillup. Yet that was not the case at all."

--
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
strategies or opinions.”

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Del Cecchi wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 07:19:08 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:

K. Smith wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

-rick- wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:


What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from
reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.
Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data pretty
tightly.

Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with
various products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high
failure rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing. How
can you claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable quantifying?
The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend of
yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask for???
again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing but lying
scum like you???

What I'm stating is that your propaganda is not based upon any
certified, verifiable, enumerated, qualified, or quantified data.



If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it, don't
be shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into it
& spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as far as
I'm concerned.

When I bought my Opti in 1998, I read info from Brunswick which said the
Opti technology was a bridge to help the company meet emission standards
in the short term.



If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't help
you further
I'm not making the claim, you are. You need the help, not me.
Harry,
I can remember a very detailed discussion Karen had with some
engineering types who used to frequent this motley group. I thought
they agreed that there was and should be concern about the lubrication
of Fichts at trolling speed.

600+ something hours most at low speed on the ranger and no problems
related to oiling or cylinder wear. i did have a stator problem which
cascaded through the engine, but thats almost unheard of even of other
engines including fichts.

oh, and its an omc ficht.

the problem is that most of the folks, engineers or not, have no clue
about how the system works or doesnt work - mostly doesnt because the
assumptions they make are valuless, uninformed and strictly
speculation - in short, if you cant convince them with brilliance....

its an advanced technology which baffles some who think they know it
all, thus they have to rely on bull**** and bafflement to "make" their
points.

everybody else can buy merc optimaxs and verados and yamaha four
strokes, but they arent going to get the milage i do, the preformance
i do or the reliability i have received.

so im done with this - everybody can do what they want - ill be
laughing all the way to the fishing grounds - or the bank with my
incredibly efficient engines.

I'm sorry to provide a contradictory data point, courtesy of the folks
at Bass and Walleye Boats. In the 12/2005 issue they had the 200HP DFI
shootout where they compared the Optimax, HPDI, and Etec on identical
bass boats. In Optimum Fuel Economy, the Etec was last at 4.4 mpg,
compared to 5.5 on the HPDI and 5.8 for the Optimax. At WOT it was 3.7
for the etec, 4.2 for the merc, and 4.1 for the yamaha.

Top speeds were almost identical.

0-30 hole shot was 8.2 for the etec, 7.6 for the Optimax, and 6.7 for
the HPDI.

And list price was highest for the etec.

Note, the hulls were weighed and made to be exactly the same.

All setups were done by the bass cat factory folks

Here is a quote "After all the emissions and mileage hype from
Evinrude, we expected the E-Tec HO tr really put a hurtin' on the other
two when it came to the fuel fillup. Yet that was not the case at all."



Now you've gone and done it. You've given "Ms. Smith" something new to
distort and misquote for the next 10 years. You referred to your report
as a contradictory datapoint, which it certainly is. But there's nothing
in that data to predict the same sort of results with those engines on
an entirely different type of boat, or, in fact, when used in pairs.

Dale provided the only facts in this discussion so far .. so lets
attack him to teach him a lesson!!! [sarcasm]... If those facts work
in favour of Ms. Smith .. then so be it ... We dont have anything to
hide, right?

Matt

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

sorry .. must say: "Del"

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

D'oh. I'm neither attacking Del nor disagreeing with him. He provided
some precise information. It's just unfortunate Ms. Smith will misuse it.

I am glad :)

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Del Cecchi wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 07:19:08 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:

K. Smith wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

-rick- wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:


What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your
claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by
some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from
reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through
a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.
Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for
any consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data
pretty tightly.

Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with
various products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high
failure rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing.
How can you claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable
quantifying?
The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend
of yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask
for??? again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing
but lying scum like you???

What I'm stating is that your propaganda is not based upon any
certified, verifiable, enumerated, qualified, or quantified data.



If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it,
don't be shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into
it & spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as
far as I'm concerned.

When I bought my Opti in 1998, I read info from Brunswick which
said the Opti technology was a bridge to help the company meet
emission standards in the short term.



If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't
help you further
I'm not making the claim, you are. You need the help, not me.
Harry,
I can remember a very detailed discussion Karen had with some
engineering types who used to frequent this motley group. I thought
they agreed that there was and should be concern about the
lubrication of Fichts at trolling speed.

600+ something hours most at low speed on the ranger and no problems
related to oiling or cylinder wear. i did have a stator problem which
cascaded through the engine, but thats almost unheard of even of other
engines including fichts.

oh, and its an omc ficht.

the problem is that most of the folks, engineers or not, have no clue
about how the system works or doesnt work - mostly doesnt because the
assumptions they make are valuless, uninformed and strictly
speculation - in short, if you cant convince them with brilliance....

its an advanced technology which baffles some who think they know it
all, thus they have to rely on bull**** and bafflement to "make" their
points.

everybody else can buy merc optimaxs and verados and yamaha four
strokes, but they arent going to get the milage i do, the preformance
i do or the reliability i have received.

so im done with this - everybody can do what they want - ill be
laughing all the way to the fishing grounds - or the bank with my
incredibly efficient engines.

I'm sorry to provide a contradictory data point, courtesy of the folks
at Bass and Walleye Boats. In the 12/2005 issue they had the 200HP
DFI shootout where they compared the Optimax, HPDI, and Etec on
identical bass boats. In Optimum Fuel Economy, the Etec was last at
4.4 mpg, compared to 5.5 on the HPDI and 5.8 for the Optimax. At WOT
it was 3.7 for the etec, 4.2 for the merc, and 4.1 for the yamaha.

Top speeds were almost identical.

0-30 hole shot was 8.2 for the etec, 7.6 for the Optimax, and 6.7 for
the HPDI.

And list price was highest for the etec.

Note, the hulls were weighed and made to be exactly the same.

All setups were done by the bass cat factory folks

Here is a quote "After all the emissions and mileage hype from
Evinrude, we expected the E-Tec HO tr really put a hurtin' on the
other two when it came to the fuel fillup. Yet that was not the case
at all."



Now you've gone and done it. You've given "Ms. Smith" something new to
distort and misquote for the next 10 years. You referred to your report
as a contradictory datapoint, which it certainly is. But there's nothing
in that data to predict the same sort of results with those engines on
an entirely different type of boat, or, in fact, when used in pairs.

Extrapolation only takes you so far in life.

Harry,
You are correct, but the info Del provided would make me look for more
info and data points if I was in the market for a OB or two.

All things being equal, a simple engine is better than complex engine.

That said, I can't remember anyone who visited rec.boats having a
service problem with Ficht or Etec. So while it appears they did have
some problems initially they must have coveted the initial problem under
warranty or we would have seem some upset consumers posting in rec.boats.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 13:15:54 -0600, Del Cecchi
wrote:


I'm sorry to provide a contradictory data point, courtesy of the folks
at Bass and Walleye Boats. In the 12/2005 issue they had the 200HP DFI
shootout where they compared the Optimax, HPDI, and Etec on identical
bass boats. In Optimum Fuel Economy, the Etec was last at 4.4 mpg,
compared to 5.5 on the HPDI and 5.8 for the Optimax. At WOT it was 3.7
for the etec, 4.2 for the merc, and 4.1 for the yamaha.


bull....

You don't believe the Bass and Walleye boats test? Have you read it?
Why do you not believe it? Perhaps Bill Grannis would comment on their
credibility.

--
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
strategies or opinions.”

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
...


Bill,
As someone who does have detailed knowledge of Ficht with a larger than
average data base, have you found Ficht or Etec to have more than the
average problems? Is there any truth to the problem that some of Ficht
engines had problems related to trolling for extended periods?




Reggie,

About 8 years ago, in FICHT's 2nd year of production, the 1998 models of the
150 and 175hp had problems. I did not see these with my customers as we
setup the boats and ran them for an hour before delivering them. We did the
intital breakin and double checked for the correct prop. I did see problem
motors from other dealers that sent their customers to the dealership for
which I work. The '98 and '99 150-175 series had factory teams going around
the country installing upgrade kits and redesigned cylinder heads. In some
applications, the motors were troublesome, they were the ones with the 25"
shaft. The boat magazines wrote many articles on the problems and what the
factory was doing for fixes. At the same time in 1999, the 90-115 V4 FICHTS
and the 200-225 V6 FICHTS did NOT have the problems or bad reputation of the
150-175 hp versions. In 2000 the FICHT was redesigned and called FICHT Ram,
and that system is still being produced today. The 2000 and later FICHTS are
really good motors, that got even better when Bombardier took over the 2002
and later production.

There are months of reading about these if you want to spend your time
using Google, Yahoo, boating forums, etc. The problematic 150-175 motors
cast the bad name on all FICHTS and with misinformation that goes around the
Internet and the ignorance of the motors by some folks, 8 years later FICHT
has a bad connotation, something like Bayliner still having their stigma.

Do your research and be sure to check the credentials of anyone when you
read their posts. Almost every "nay-sayer" has never owned, worked on, been
around, or even has a grasp of the engine.

About the E-TECs, they are super motors and are proving themselves on crab
boats, commercial fishing boats, law enforcement, SeaTow, etc. We have
almost no warranty problems and much fewer problems than we do with
Yamaha's.

Bill Grannis
service manager

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Billgran wrote:
"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
...
Bill,
As someone who does have detailed knowledge of Ficht with a larger than
average data base, have you found Ficht or Etec to have more than the
average problems? Is there any truth to the problem that some of Ficht
engines had problems related to trolling for extended periods?




Reggie,

About 8 years ago, in FICHT's 2nd year of production, the 1998 models of the
150 and 175hp had problems. I did not see these with my customers as we
setup the boats and ran them for an hour before delivering them. We did the
intital breakin and double checked for the correct prop. I did see problem
motors from other dealers that sent their customers to the dealership for
which I work. The '98 and '99 150-175 series had factory teams going around
the country installing upgrade kits and redesigned cylinder heads. In some
applications, the motors were troublesome, they were the ones with the 25"
shaft. The boat magazines wrote many articles on the problems and what the
factory was doing for fixes. At the same time in 1999, the 90-115 V4 FICHTS
and the 200-225 V6 FICHTS did NOT have the problems or bad reputation of the
150-175 hp versions. In 2000 the FICHT was redesigned and called FICHT Ram,
and that system is still being produced today. The 2000 and later FICHTS are
really good motors, that got even better when Bombardier took over the 2002
and later production.

There are months of reading about these if you want to spend your time
using Google, Yahoo, boating forums, etc. The problematic 150-175 motors
cast the bad name on all FICHTS and with misinformation that goes around the
Internet and the ignorance of the motors by some folks, 8 years later FICHT
has a bad connotation, something like Bayliner still having their stigma.

Do your research and be sure to check the credentials of anyone when you
read their posts. Almost every "nay-sayer" has never owned, worked on, been
around, or even has a grasp of the engine.

About the E-TECs, they are super motors and are proving themselves on crab
boats, commercial fishing boats, law enforcement, SeaTow, etc. We have
almost no warranty problems and much fewer problems than we do with
Yamaha's.

Bill Grannis
service manager



Bill,
Thanks for the detailed information.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Tom,

You asked about my FICHT. It is a 115 OMC motor. Hangs on a 16 Whaler
Dauntless.

Butch
"Billgran" wrote in message
...

"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
...


Bill,
As someone who does have detailed knowledge of Ficht with a larger than
average data base, have you found Ficht or Etec to have more than the
average problems? Is there any truth to the problem that some of Ficht
engines had problems related to trolling for extended periods?




Reggie,

About 8 years ago, in FICHT's 2nd year of production, the 1998 models of
the 150 and 175hp had problems. I did not see these with my customers as
we setup the boats and ran them for an hour before delivering them. We did
the intital breakin and double checked for the correct prop. I did see
problem motors from other dealers that sent their customers to the
dealership for which I work. The '98 and '99 150-175 series had factory
teams going around the country installing upgrade kits and redesigned
cylinder heads. In some applications, the motors were troublesome, they
were the ones with the 25" shaft. The boat magazines wrote many articles
on the problems and what the factory was doing for fixes. At the same time
in 1999, the 90-115 V4 FICHTS and the 200-225 V6 FICHTS did NOT have the
problems or bad reputation of the 150-175 hp versions. In 2000 the FICHT
was redesigned and called FICHT Ram, and that system is still being
produced today. The 2000 and later FICHTS are really good motors, that got
even better when Bombardier took over the 2002 and later production.

There are months of reading about these if you want to spend your time
using Google, Yahoo, boating forums, etc. The problematic 150-175 motors
cast the bad name on all FICHTS and with misinformation that goes around
the Internet and the ignorance of the motors by some folks, 8 years later
FICHT has a bad connotation, something like Bayliner still having their
stigma.

Do your research and be sure to check the credentials of anyone when you
read their posts. Almost every "nay-sayer" has never owned, worked on,
been around, or even has a grasp of the engine.

About the E-TECs, they are super motors and are proving themselves on crab
boats, commercial fishing boats, law enforcement, SeaTow, etc. We have
almost no warranty problems and much fewer problems than we do with
Yamaha's.

Bill Grannis
service manager

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Billgran wrote:
"K. Smith" wrote in message
...


... eventually we got Bill to disassemble a Ficht injector & clock it up &
he was honest enough to come back & admit he'd been had).



Karen,

"You GOT me to dissassemble a FICHT injector ??????" You must be off your
rocker with that comment.


About the comment on the FICHT patents. Even the engineer Marcus Bell would
email me laughing that Karen from Australia could not even fathom that fuel
circulated thru the injector, even after many "lessons" to you trying to
make you see the light.

You are a looney.

Bill Grannis
service manager



Too late Bill you need to do some searching just as I posted the
supporting evidence that confirmed you ran away when OMC rolled into the
ditch which you had also denied here, you're not related to Krause are
you??? I mean you stuff even goes beyond a dealer!!!!

As for your Marcus claims I'm Ok with that it was a fair dinkum debate &
we were serious (glad you can't see some of the stuff I said about him
behind his back:-), but I still love him). Remember Marcus was on your
side & as it turned out he was also wrong about it???? I mean look what
happened when you deceived enough people to use them!!!! Unlike you he
at least had the brains & good grace to see & discuss the other side. At
that stage the Fichts were falling like flies, so he had not much
choice:-) By the time the rot was full on he'd departed I'd suggest
because you & the other dealer bully boys were doing as much as you
could to shut the open discussion down. (still sad about that) No doubt
you'll re-run that again but as then I'll just say what I say till it
happens again.


As I said I'm more than happy to stand on my record, these days of
course everybody comes out with how & why the DFIs fail but so far none
absolutely none predate my posts here.

I guess if I'm loony you should try it!!!!! We (that's me & my blokes
before you go mad) got the Ficht defects exactly right & if you'd or OMC
or anyone worth a bean, had listened they wouldn't have bought your
defective engines & saved themselves much heartache. Gee OMC could still
be here today!!!

So dismiss me again this time I don't care, but I'll crow again when
this latest escapade goes the same way & you run away & hide again. Like
then you think technical things can be resolved with a vote:-). It's
like Tom's fuel consumption dreams (religion??), you can all vote anyway
you want the outcome will not change at all just because you wish it to
or in your case so you can take a few more punters for money:-) You're
even running the same BS lines you ran with Ficht saying how many people
are using them with never a word about the failures??? Nothing changes
but hey that applies to lean at power with poor atomisation also:-)

Wake up Bill I know you're totally untrained but it's just rocket
science, you can't run lean mixtures in a closed chamber. Everyone has
wanted to since the 1930s but just like rockets the hardest part is
making sure the mixture is right & remains so even as the conditions
(pressures) change.

K

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Del Cecchi wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 07:19:08 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:

K. Smith wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

-rick- wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:


What "failure rate" statistics can you cite to back up your
claim that
the engines "suffered way too high failure rates for
consumer usage"? Legitimate statistics, please, backed up by
some sort
of legitimate science, not your usual crap you extrapolate from
reading
about three incidents that took place on a hot day in August on an
unnamed lake and involving three guys working their way through
a keg
and bloodworms spread on crackers.


Are legitimate failure rate statistics publicly available for any
consumer item? The companies I've worked for held that data
pretty tightly.



Sure, at least partially. We've all encountered "recalls" with
various products, or at least read or heard about them.

But that's not my point. Ms. Smith is claiming a "way too high
failure rate," based upon nothing more than, basically, nothing.
How can you claim a rate is "too high" without any reliable
quantifying?


The evidence I gave was we all were told this by a dealer friend of
yours in this NG!!! What better evidence could you possibly ask
for??? again are you suggesting this particular dealer was nothing
but lying scum like you???



What I'm stating is that your propaganda is not based upon any
certified, verifiable, enumerated, qualified, or quantified data.



If that's what you're trying to say then just come out with it,
don't be shy.

Also it's clear that Brunswick are not putting any more money into
it & spending vast sums on the 4 strokes. That's the final nail as
far as I'm concerned.



When I bought my Opti in 1998, I read info from Brunswick which said
the Opti technology was a bridge to help the company meet emission
standards in the short term.



If one of your dealer buddies isn't enough for you then I can't
help you further


I'm not making the claim, you are. You need the help, not me.


Harry,
I can remember a very detailed discussion Karen had with some
engineering types who used to frequent this motley group. I thought
they agreed that there was and should be concern about the
lubrication of Fichts at trolling speed.



600+ something hours most at low speed on the ranger and no problems
related to oiling or cylinder wear. i did have a stator problem which
cascaded through the engine, but thats almost unheard of even of other
engines including fichts.

oh, and its an omc ficht.

the problem is that most of the folks, engineers or not, have no clue
about how the system works or doesnt work - mostly doesnt because the
assumptions they make are valuless, uninformed and strictly
speculation - in short, if you cant convince them with brilliance....

its an advanced technology which baffles some who think they know it
all, thus they have to rely on bull**** and bafflement to "make" their
points.

everybody else can buy merc optimaxs and verados and yamaha four
strokes, but they arent going to get the milage i do, the preformance
i do or the reliability i have received.

so im done with this - everybody can do what they want - ill be
laughing all the way to the fishing grounds - or the bank with my
incredibly efficient engines.


I'm sorry to provide a contradictory data point, courtesy of the folks
at Bass and Walleye Boats. In the 12/2005 issue they had the 200HP DFI
shootout where they compared the Optimax, HPDI, and Etec on identical
bass boats. In Optimum Fuel Economy, the Etec was last at 4.4 mpg,
compared to 5.5 on the HPDI and 5.8 for the Optimax. At WOT it was 3.7
for the etec, 4.2 for the merc, and 4.1 for the yamaha.

Top speeds were almost identical.

0-30 hole shot was 8.2 for the etec, 7.6 for the Optimax, and 6.7 for
the HPDI.

And list price was highest for the etec.

Note, the hulls were weighed and made to be exactly the same.

All setups were done by the bass cat factory folks

Here is a quote "After all the emissions and mileage hype from
Evinrude, we expected the E-Tec HO tr really put a hurtin' on the other
two when it came to the fuel fillup. Yet that was not the case at all."


Hi Del

Good to see you!!! this is pretty good for me to!!!, it's as if I
haven't aged even a single day!!! & mostly the same players even
spruiking the same BS.

As for the fuel consumption watch out for Tom & his highly technical
"bull" rejoinder:-) he thinks fuel consumption is sort of a mystical
thing, if you believe it, it might happen:-) True!!!!

His latest is a deceptive claim i.e. a 31ftr (E-Tec X 2) cruising at 35
mph on 11 gph!!! I calced it as easily as you will & that's asking for
300 prop HP all on 11 gph!!! The very best, highest tech diesels can't
even claim close to that:-)

He hasn't even tried to defend it; but hey I'm repeatedly asking &
waiting for the story; it will rival the dealers I suspect:-)

K

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Karen,
For me the fallacy in your argument is that over the years we have seen
numerous people make posts in rec.boats and the other boating NGs
whenever they feel they have been slighted by a manufacturer. I can not
remember one complaint about Ficht and Etec, even with the problems they
had initially.

I would still look at a 4 stroke and compare the weight, gas consumption
and sound levels between the 4 stroke and Etec, but I can not find
anything in the last few years that validates your premise.
--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

Reggie Smithers wrote:

Karen,
For me the fallacy in your argument is that over the years we have seen
numerous people make posts in rec.boats and the other boating NGs
whenever they feel they have been slighted by a manufacturer. I can not
remember one complaint about Ficht and Etec, even with the problems they
had initially.

I would still look at a 4 stroke and compare the weight, gas consumption
and sound levels between the 4 stroke and Etec, but I can not find
anything in the last few years that validates your premise.

Honestly Reggie there have been heaps here in this NG, at the time there
were even Ficht specific boards, damn in texas apparently they were
putting up bill boards (how appropriate!!) saying Ficht sucks!! (don't
cross the good ol' boys) but you don't seem motivated to find them, you
claimed you couldn't find any failed E-Tecs so in 2 minutes I rustled up
pages of them for you, but you just ignored them. Same story with Matt
he claims to want to know but then .............. doesn't.

I know you want me to spoon feed you but it's OK I don't have anything
to prove, however note this is a re-run of Ficht using Ficht & you don't
even take the idiots to task!!!! What you think they'll be your
friends?? believe me when it happens again they'll dump you & run away
as they did last time, with your money also if you're silly enough.

What say you of the E-tec, 11gph @ 35mph??? from the king of the OT
posts, or when Del posts the actual news you sit back & let the world's
biggest non boating nuff nuff liar Krause come out with the wrong boat
story!!!;-) Damn they said that exact same thing about Ficht!!! I
promise you:-) when they had worn out the "it's the oil", "it's the
fuel", "it's the owner", they then said "it's the boat!!":-) Did you
like the fuel BS'ter's rejoinder?? "bull" Honestly this place is a hoot,
again thanks to all.



K

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

K. Smith wrote:
Reggie Smithers wrote:

Karen,
For me the fallacy in your argument is that over the years we have
seen numerous people make posts in rec.boats and the other boating NGs
whenever they feel they have been slighted by a manufacturer. I can
not remember one complaint about Ficht and Etec, even with the
problems they had initially.

I would still look at a 4 stroke and compare the weight, gas consumption
and sound levels between the 4 stroke and Etec, but I can not find
anything in the last few years that validates your premise.

Honestly Reggie there have been heaps here in this NG, at the time there
were even Ficht specific boards, damn in texas apparently they were
putting up bill boards (how appropriate!!) saying Ficht sucks!! (don't
cross the good ol' boys) but you don't seem motivated to find them, you
claimed you couldn't find any failed E-Tecs so in 2 minutes I rustled up
pages of them for you, but you just ignored them. Same story with Matt
he claims to want to know but then .............. doesn't.

I know you want me to spoon feed you but it's OK I don't have anything
to prove, however note this is a re-run of Ficht using Ficht & you don't
even take the idiots to task!!!! What you think they'll be your
friends?? believe me when it happens again they'll dump you & run away
as they did last time, with your money also if you're silly enough.

What say you of the E-tec, 11gph @ 35mph??? from the king of the OT
posts, or when Del posts the actual news you sit back & let the world's
biggest non boating nuff nuff liar Krause come out with the wrong boat
story!!!;-) Damn they said that exact same thing about Ficht!!! I
promise you:-) when they had worn out the "it's the oil", "it's the
fuel", "it's the owner", they then said "it's the boat!!":-) Did you
like the fuel BS'ter's rejoinder?? "bull" Honestly this place is a hoot,
again thanks to all.



K
Karen,
I can find problems related to the 1998-2000 model years. I can not
find any on the newer models. As far as "making friends", I really
don't care if someone likes me or not, but I am not interested in
getting into a ****ing contest with anyone, since it does nothing to
further boating discussions. While some people might prefer to respond
to your posts with flames, I have always kept the discussion on topic.

Since these forums discussing the problems with the 2001-2005 Ficht/Etec
problems are readily available, can you point me to a few of them? You
should be able to find a few much quicker than it takes you to type your
average post.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

you
claimed you couldn't find any failed E-Tecs so in 2 minutes I rustled up
pages of them for you, but you just ignored them. Same story with Matt
he claims to want to know but then .............. doesn't.

the pages you showed didnt convince me there are problems with ETec ..
the one claiming that several blew up at a tournament didnt have much
credibility to me ..

The other smaller issues I beleive but its nothing related to the 2DFI
technology ...

So far the Etec does seem to be holding up ... that doesnt mean the
fuel use claims are holding up to the expectations ... they really dont
seem to and there are some facts to substantiate that. Facts for
kabooms are still missing


Matt

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

I agree but thats not the case for everybody ... the boating I do, I
cover a lot of distance ... 10-15% less range would be annoying to me
....

Matt

Why Optimax is not true DFI
 

On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 15:17:31 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

wrote:
you
claimed you couldn't find any failed E-Tecs so in 2 minutes I rustled up
pages of them for you, but you just ignored them. Same story with Matt
he claims to want to know but then .............. doesn't.

the pages you showed didnt convince me there are problems with ETec ..
the one claiming that several blew up at a tournament didnt have much
credibility to me ..

The other smaller issues I beleive but its nothing related to the 2DFI
technology ...

So far the Etec does seem to be holding up ... that doesnt mean the
fuel use claims are holding up to the expectations ... they really dont
seem to and there are some facts to substantiate that. Facts for
kabooms are still missing


Matt



When you have a high horsepower outboard or a pair of them pushing a
sportfishing boat, you're not overly concerned about which brand of
similar-power outboard might get a hair more MPG at a given speed. There
are just too many variables. If I burn $50 worth of gas on a given
outing, it isn't going to make any difference to me whether another
brand of outboard *might* do the same job on $43 worth of fuel. In fact,
about all that matters to me is that when I turn the key, the engine
starts instantly and runs properly until I return and my boating day is
over.

That $7 will buy a dozen bloodworms!
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************