So I don't like this but as there's pics involved here's a link.

http://bbcboards.zeroforum.com/zerot...postid=1261996

So take a look at the pics!!! a very close look & this um is a "dealer"
saying it's all down to the owner??? because they didn't use the really
really expensive dealer only oil???

This is the sort of damage expected from an engine that has lapsed into
severe detonation!!!

Honestly this "dealer" (presumably of something) will get the woody
spoon big time for actually posting the pics in a public forum of
exactly how these things go out.

Remember despite numerous requests to the NG OMC & ex OMC dealers,
they've never even admitted to ever having seen a failed ficht!!!:-)

So in a way we should all be grateful to this bloke, because in his
usual zeal to blame the owner (classic OMC derived BS being carried on
this time it seems) he's well belled the cat:-)

"Normal" aluminium melts at about 660C but petrol has an autoignition
temp of 246C (if any mixture comes in contact with anything over 246 deg
C it autoignites, search previous posts for detailed explanations). The
fact that there is outright melted aluminium in there & it's not just
around the circumference means the temps inside the chamber were well
past the autoignition point of petrol.

Don't forget according to the spruikers' claims flogging this latest
experiment, this isn't even "normal" aluminium!!! it's their super
duper, get it while it's hot, high temp resistant type; so the mind
boggles at what temps there might have been in the-)

Anyway suggest you save the pics to a safe place (as I have:-)) because
despite the endless opportunities to do so you don't oft see the results
of lean mixtures at power (well as a deliberate design feature
anyway:-)) coupled with poor atomisation from too low an injection
pressure through not much better than a spring loaded garden hose nozzle:-)

Too much fun; even I don't deserve this. I mean when OMC went feet up in
a table drain I thought all my christmases had come at once & it just
couldn't get any better, but gee these blokes are really going well this
time.

K

E-Tec Oil substitution question? (bigfish) » 3:06 PM 10/21/2006
Reply Edit

Here are some pics of what happen's after running 80 hours on oil that
is not suppose to be used. I don't know what went went thru these guys
heads. Yes you can use other oil in a pinch, but be sure to change back
to XD100 when you get back.


E-Tec Oil substitution question? (RUSTY63) » 8:49 AM 10/23/2006
Reply Edit

By the way Bill, that looks like a pic of a carb motor.

Here is another pic. Still look like a carb motor????

E-Tec Oil substitution question? (rudetech1) » 10:33 AM 10/31/2006
Reply Edit

I agree, looks like a classic preignition problem goin on there. I think
something else is happening there besides just the cheap oil.

E-Tec Oil substitution question? (jgwufgator) » 1:03 PM 10/31/2006
Reply Edit

Melted aluminium. See how the edge of the piston is melted away right
down to the top ring by the ex port. Usually caused by lean condition,
overheating, too much ign timing etc...

"Jeff Burke" wrote in message
...

Has this type of damage ever happened to one of these motors that was
using the
recommended oil?

Yes, I know of two this year 1st hand.

I'm not as rabid as Karen... but I don't want every boat ride to be as
"techno-finiky" as a shuttle launch.

-W

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...


Really?

I didn't read the link, but I know of two Etech powerheads that had to be
replaced under warrantee this season. And to me, an Etech is an improved and
rebadged FICHT. IMHO Mercury is ahead of OMC in the DFI department.

-W

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 22:49:52 -0700, Jeff Burke
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 04:53:28 +0000, ksmith1 wrote:
So I don't like this but as there's pics involved here's a link.

http://bbcboards.zeroforum.com/zerot...postid=1261996

So take a look at the pics!!! a very close look & this um is a "dealer"
saying it's all down to the owner??? because they didn't use the really
really expensive dealer only oil???

Has this type of damage ever happened to one of these motors that was using the
recommended oil?

No and that's not an E-TEC.

Man, that woman is some whack job!!

Wow, we now know for sure that three ETECs(???) have had failed powerheads.
In the case of the one Karen has provided weve learned that although the
engine was programmed for only XD-100 oil the user put common everyday TC-W3
oil in it. My expectation would be that the engine would probably fail
having been ued for 80 hours on sub-standard oil.

It's pretty clear that Karen has had it right all along. DFI tecnology just
does not work. Duh!!

Butch
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
On 11/4/2006 11:53 PM, ksmith1 wrote:
So I don't like this but as there's pics involved here's a link.

http://bbcboards.zeroforum.com/zerot...postid=1261996

So take a look at the pics!!! a very close look & this um is a "dealer"
saying it's all down to the owner??? because they didn't use the really
really expensive dealer only oil???

This is the sort of damage expected from an engine that has lapsed into
severe detonation!!!


Is there an award for the simple-minded in Australia? How many times have
you won it?

The first set of photos shows a jug of oil juxtapositioned next to ruined
piston/cylinder combo. The second photo shows a bank of three cylinders
with a ruined piston/cylinder combo. The first photo does not prove that
that oil in the jug was the oil used in the engine, and neither the first
nor the second photo include any analysis by any expert indicating what,
precisely, caused the damage, other than detonation.

From what I see, the second picture shows an increasing combustion
chamber temp from top to bottom, with the top cyl looking good, the
middle one so-so, and the bottom one critical, burned out and detonated
to pieces. This looks vwery much like a cooling issue in the bottom of
the motor, possibly also a decreasing lack of oil spray to the pistons.
My 02
JR

Harry Krause wrote:
On 11/4/2006 11:53 PM, ksmith1 wrote:

So I don't like this but as there's pics involved here's a link.

http://bbcboards.zeroforum.com/zerot...postid=1261996

So take a look at the pics!!! a very close look & this um is a
"dealer" saying it's all down to the owner??? because they didn't use
the really really expensive dealer only oil???

This is the sort of damage expected from an engine that has lapsed
into severe detonation!!!



Is there an award for the simple-minded in Australia? How many times
have you won it?

The first set of photos shows a jug of oil juxtapositioned next to
ruined piston/cylinder combo. The second photo shows a bank of three
cylinders with a ruined piston/cylinder combo. The first photo does not
prove that that oil in the jug was the oil used in the engine, and
neither the first nor the second photo include any analysis by any
expert indicating what, precisely, caused the damage, other than
detonation.




--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 11:37:25 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:


On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 22:49:52 -0700, Jeff Burke
wrote:


On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 04:53:28 +0000, ksmith1 wrote:

So I don't like this but as there's pics involved here's a link.

http://bbcboards.zeroforum.com/zerot...postid=1261996

So take a look at the pics!!! a very close look & this um is a "dealer"
saying it's all down to the owner??? because they didn't use the really
really expensive dealer only oil???

Has this type of damage ever happened to one of these motors that was using the
recommended oil?

No and that's not an E-TEC.


After further review, I think that's a FICHT. I wish I had a high
resolution photo, but I do believe that's a FICHT. It's hard to tell
because there isn't enough of the other side to tell if it's injected
or carbed, but it looks like my old FICHT.

And a dirty one at that.

Ah the nuff nuff desperate:-) It's a wonder you don't claim it's fuel
consumption has dropped to nil per hour:-)

I did tell you to "look" read the ladel on the tank.

The "special" super expensive dealer ONLY oil wasn't & isn't available
for Ficht.

Maybe you're just confirming that an E-Tec is not much different from a
Ficht?? & if that's your point then agreed!!!

K

JR North wrote:
From what I see, the second picture shows an increasing combustion
chamber temp from top to bottom, with the top cyl looking good, the
middle one so-so, and the bottom one critical, burned out and detonated
to pieces. This looks vwery much like a cooling issue in the bottom of
the motor, possibly also a decreasing lack of oil spray to the pistons.
My 02
JR


Come on JR this is one step away from the deny it's even an E-Tec defense:-)

I guess I shouldn't even help the sad sack ripoff E-Tec spruikers with a
reasoned explanation but; here there is even a theory as to "why" this
one when fed a lean poorly atomised improperly ignited mixture detonated
itself to death & no it's not the brand name of approved oil.

The growth shown in the bottom left of the last pic?? if the boat were
taken out with that on it & is a big heavy boat to start with, that
would almost certainly load the prop up even more at low to mid revs
(i.e.lean/repeat spark mode).

The user would apply whatever throttle was needed to attain/maintain the
usual nose high big drag "no wake" speed & there you have it, kaboom:-).
Very very lean at "power" (not full but even so) on a poorly atomised,
inaccurately ignition timed charge??.

As the boards are saying they just keep throwing new powerheads at them
& pricing them higher than the competition so those silly enough to pay
(we even have our own in house NG demo dummy:-)) subsidise the claims of
the others:-).

Sorta socialised engine development ..... hey don't be rude: I didn't
even mention the French!!!

K

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

After further review, I think that's a FICHT. I wish I had a high
resolution photo, but I do believe that's a FICHT. It's hard to tell
because there isn't enough of the other side to tell if it's injected
or carbed, but it looks like my old FICHT.



That bottom photo is definitely an E-TEC V-6.

It is not an oiling problem from from what I can tell. It also is easy to
determine that it did not use factory oil ( which is not required) because
of the carbon deposits on the top cylinder, #2. The Bombardier oils are
non-metallic and do not leave hardened deposits on the top of the piston. On
a motor with over 1000 hours on it, yes Karen it was a FICHT, you could wipe
the piston clean with your finger and still read the part number printed on
the piston top.

Bill Grannis
service manager

Billgran wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

After further review, I think that's a FICHT. I wish I had a high
resolution photo, but I do believe that's a FICHT. It's hard to tell
because there isn't enough of the other side to tell if it's injected
or carbed, but it looks like my old FICHT.




That bottom photo is definitely an E-TEC V-6.

Thanks Bill.

It is not an oiling problem from from what I can tell.

& thanks for that confirmation also.

As I say below I do think the motor was probably overloaded in that
critical lower rev lean mode, which was put forward as an explanation,
more than an excuse for E-Tec.

There are lots of people who at least "move" their boats at lower
speeds, technically such that the prop/engine is overloaded, a foul
buildup as appears here, a heavy load of passengers or "stuff" to the
weekender or say giving someone a tow (see I'm at least trying to be
polite & "didn't" suggest another E-Tec:-)).

It also is easy to
determine that it did not use factory oil ( which is not required) because
of the carbon deposits on the top cylinder, #2. The Bombardier oils are
non-metallic and do not leave hardened deposits on the top of the piston. On
a motor with over 1000 hours on it, yes Karen it was a FICHT, you could wipe
the piston clean with your finger and still read the part number printed on
the piston top.

I don't understand this last bit "it was a FICHT" maybe you meant "if"
it was a FICHT?? but regardless do genuinely thank you for the non
abusive confirmations; appreciated.

Hey you dealer blokes won't send Guido around to that dealer for posting
the pics will ya???:-) He was only trying to blame the owner & the oil:-)

K


Bill Grannis
service manager