Harry Krause wrote:
K. Smith wrote:

wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

basskisser wrote:

Skipper wrote:

basskisser wrote:


K. Smith wrote:

Paste from an "independent" magazine test.
Not surprisingly given its strong on-water performance, the Mercury
250XS pulled the most horsepower (252 hp at 5200 rpm). Next was the
Yamaha (246 hp at 5600 rpm). Evinrude brought up the rear (239
hp at
5600 rpm).
In terms of torque, the Yamaha 250 HPDI VMax edged Mercury with 268
lb.-ft. at 3800 rpm, vs. the Merc's 267 lb.-ft. at 4400 rpm.
Evinrude came in a distant third, with 250 lb.-ft. at 4000 rpm.
end paste;
Gee those pesky "independent" tests, the dealers must be making
up the
excuses as we type:-) look at the lack of E-Tec torque!!! Woohoo
this
before your season even starts!!!!
Yes yes I know it's all technically legal, but be aware when the HP
numbers get big so does that 10% allowance. I assume E-Tec
charge for a
full 250HP??? Oops silly me now I remember, that's right they're
MORE
expensive than the others.

Either cite, or post the ENTIRE article.

Why should she, the point was made. And a very good point it was.

--
Skipper

Without article, or cite it was simply an opinion by someone who
doesn't have the technical training needed to intelligently offer any
facts above what she's allegedly snipped from an alleged article.


There's no evidence extant that Ms. Smith has any valid technical
training whatsoever.


There a cool new web site just for this sort of situation. It's called
google.com. Might want to look into it. I plugged in "Not surprisingly
given its strong on-water performance" and what do you know...

http://www.bassandwalleyeboats.com/output.cfm?id=943489

-phish


Well done phish & thanks for that.

Of course like you I suspect "some" are not as stupid as they pretend,
is it even possible for "some"??? Of course some are more stupid than
they lie:-)

It's part of they object to my on topic boating post because it
doesn't follow the corporate marketing line.

The problem I have is that the dealers in E-Tec have started a full on
Ficht replay of BS advertising, so when there is non Company material
I stumble across I'll share it.

Of course the dealers will be running their stuff unchallenged as they
wish.



K



As I posted previously, there is NO evidence whatsoever that Ms. Smith
has any valid technical training whatsoever, or ANY legitimate
credentials relating to any sort of marine engines. None, zip, zilch.


I think she stayed at a 'Holiday Inn' one night.

Don White wrote:

As I posted previously, there is NO evidence whatsoever that Ms. Smith
has any valid technical training whatsoever, or ANY legitimate
credentials relating to any sort of marine engines. None, zip, zilch.

I think she stayed at a 'Holiday Inn' one night.

Thankfully, K is here to straighten out the uninformed and confused.
Believe you have your Holiday Inn confused with Holiday Inn Express.

--
Skipper

Skipper wrote:
Don White wrote:


As I posted previously, there is NO evidence whatsoever that Ms. Smith
has any valid technical training whatsoever, or ANY legitimate
credentials relating to any sort of marine engines. None, zip, zilch.



I think she stayed at a 'Holiday Inn' one night.


Thankfully, K is here to straighten out the uninformed and confused.
Believe you have your Holiday Inn confused with Holiday Inn Express.

--
Skipper

Thank you..correction noted!

Gene Kearns wrote:
snip

As to contentions that Optimax is only a relabeled Ficht, it appears
that Orbital Technology is the basis for that engine. Some contend
(especially Orbital) that Ficht requires the use of some
characteristics of the Orbital patent. At any rate, the Tohatsu
employed Orbital technology and is pretty well regarded as a
bulletproof engine.... so much for the detractors of technology.
http://www.orbeng.com.au/orbital/abo...al/history.htm

I think the contention is that Etec is a relabled and tweaked Ficht,
which to some extent it is. Optimax is way different.

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

Del Cecchi wrote:
Gene Kearns wrote:
snip

As to contentions that Optimax is only a relabeled Ficht, it appears
that Orbital Technology is the basis for that engine. Some contend
(especially Orbital) that Ficht requires the use of some
characteristics of the Orbital patent. At any rate, the Tohatsu
employed Orbital technology and is pretty well regarded as a
bulletproof engine.... so much for the detractors of technology.
http://www.orbeng.com.au/orbital/abo...al/history.htm

I think the contention is that Etec is a relabled and tweaked Ficht,
which to some extent it is. Optimax is way different.


Del,

Do you have any experience that says Etec has had any unusual problems
related to the Etec technology?

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

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

"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
...
Del Cecchi wrote:
Gene Kearns wrote:
snip

As to contentions that Optimax is only a relabeled Ficht, it appears
that Orbital Technology is the basis for that engine. Some contend
(especially Orbital) that Ficht requires the use of some
characteristics of the Orbital patent. At any rate, the Tohatsu
employed Orbital technology and is pretty well regarded as a
bulletproof engine.... so much for the detractors of technology.
http://www.orbeng.com.au/orbital/abo...al/history.htm

I think the contention is that Etec is a relabled and tweaked Ficht,
which to some extent it is. Optimax is way different.


Del,

Do you have any experience that says Etec has had any unusual problems
related to the Etec technology?

No, and I never claimed it did. The post above was just correcting the
notion that Etec is related to Orbital/Optimax when it is really a ficht
follow on. I did question whether OMC was open about any systematic
Ficht problems that might have existed.

If you read my posts on the subject you will see I expressed some
trepidation in 98 over the "new technology" aspects of all those motors
and ended up buying carbs. Later on I have provided objective input,
references to patents, or quotes from reputable publications. I have
tried diligently to not say things beyond my knowledge unless I had a
reputable source.

del

Del Cecchi wrote:
"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
...
Del Cecchi wrote:
Gene Kearns wrote:
snip
As to contentions that Optimax is only a relabeled Ficht, it appears
that Orbital Technology is the basis for that engine. Some contend
(especially Orbital) that Ficht requires the use of some
characteristics of the Orbital patent. At any rate, the Tohatsu
employed Orbital technology and is pretty well regarded as a
bulletproof engine.... so much for the detractors of technology.
http://www.orbeng.com.au/orbital/abo...al/history.htm
I think the contention is that Etec is a relabled and tweaked Ficht,
which to some extent it is. Optimax is way different.

Del,

Do you have any experience that says Etec has had any unusual problems
related to the Etec technology?

No, and I never claimed it did. The post above was just correcting the
notion that Etec is related to Orbital/Optimax when it is really a ficht
follow on. I did question whether OMC was open about any systematic
Ficht problems that might have existed.

If you read my posts on the subject you will see I expressed some
trepidation in 98 over the "new technology" aspects of all those motors
and ended up buying carbs. Later on I have provided objective input,
references to patents, or quotes from reputable publications. I have
tried diligently to not say things beyond my knowledge unless I had a
reputable source.

del


Del,

I do remember your extremely knowledgeable posts concerning Fichts, that
were always objective and from what I could figure out they were accurate.

That is why I asked you if you had heard of any problems.

My feeling is that Karen's concern about Ficht and Etec is based upon
her honest opinion, and the initial problems validated her initial
opinion of Ficht. By the same token, after they corrected the initial
problems, Ficht has performed well and their has not been any unusual
problems with Etec. My problem with Karen's posts is her personal
attacks on those that support Ficht and Etec. They are completed
without without merit, and the NG has lost some valuable contributors
because of her personal attacks.

I had not seen you in the NG for awhile, I hope you stay around. The NG
needs someone of your expertise.


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

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

Reggie Smithers wrote:
Del Cecchi wrote:

"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
...

Del Cecchi wrote:

Gene Kearns wrote:
snip

As to contentions that Optimax is only a relabeled Ficht, it appears
that Orbital Technology is the basis for that engine. Some contend
(especially Orbital) that Ficht requires the use of some
characteristics of the Orbital patent. At any rate, the Tohatsu
employed Orbital technology and is pretty well regarded as a
bulletproof engine.... so much for the detractors of technology.
http://www.orbeng.com.au/orbital/abo...al/history.htm

I think the contention is that Etec is a relabled and tweaked Ficht,
which to some extent it is. Optimax is way different.

Del,

Do you have any experience that says Etec has had any unusual
problems related to the Etec technology?

No, and I never claimed it did. The post above was just correcting
the notion that Etec is related to Orbital/Optimax when it is really a
ficht follow on. I did question whether OMC was open about any
systematic Ficht problems that might have existed.

If you read my posts on the subject you will see I expressed some
trepidation in 98 over the "new technology" aspects of all those
motors and ended up buying carbs. Later on I have provided objective
input, references to patents, or quotes from reputable publications.
I have tried diligently to not say things beyond my knowledge unless I
had a reputable source.

del

Del,

I do remember your extremely knowledgeable posts concerning Fichts, that
were always objective and from what I could figure out they were accurate.

That is why I asked you if you had heard of any problems.

My feeling is that Karen's concern about Ficht and Etec is based upon
her honest opinion, and the initial problems validated her initial
opinion of Ficht. By the same token, after they corrected the initial
problems, Ficht has performed well and their has not been any unusual
problems with Etec. My problem with Karen's posts is her personal
attacks on those that support Ficht and Etec. They are completed
without without merit, and the NG has lost some valuable contributors
because of her personal attacks.

I had not seen you in the NG for awhile, I hope you stay around. The NG
needs someone of your expertise.


Thanks. Karen has a bad opinion of dealers for some reason. And she
has her own opinions about motors and what works.

I try to not get emotionally involved. I am just interested in how
things work, and I have been around long enough to be cautious with new
technology in motors, car or boat.

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