A Challenge to Mike Troyer and Anybody Else
Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Ffv 5.4l
Just wanted to add to my previous post. A prior mileage check approx. 3 months ago revealed 14.8 mpg and that was with roughly 80% city/20% interstate driving. Like I said b4... last check was 13.8 mpg 100% city and between those two checks I installed a Gibson catback exhaust. 
So this mileage sucks for an '06 F-150??? 
I do not drive hard, usually going an entire tank or two with never a stab at WOT.
great research and info guys. keep up the good work!
should I infer from this thread....
1. FFV motors likely get poorer gas mileage than regular gas motors?
2. If you ever plan on burning E-85 in your FFV motor do not use EDGE Evo??
3. Troyer DOES have FFV tunes "pretty much" figured out and would be fine to use in FFV motor for all available fuels??
Thanks
So this mileage sucks for an '06 F-150??? I do not drive hard, usually going an entire tank or two with never a stab at WOT.great research and info guys. keep up the good work!
should I infer from this thread....
1. FFV motors likely get poorer gas mileage than regular gas motors?
I talked with Rob at Edge about tuning for E85 and he said he wasn't ready. Despite the fact I don't agree with some of the things Troyer has posted about running Ethanol in these trucks, he is still the best tuner in the business. Heck, I'd even send him my E85 tune if he asked for it. No, it won't hurt your truck. In fact, you will be amazed at how good your truck with feel with Troyer Hi-Perf Tune. Your FFV tune already includes a boost to fuel pump voltage so pressure drop across injectors will need to be modified and likely the fuel injector pulse widths.
3. Troyer DOES have FFV tunes "pretty much" figured out and would be fine to use in FFV motor for all available fuels??
Thanks
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 229
Likes: 1
From: Northern Illinois
I don't know if you can draw any of those conclusions. My conversation with Rob was three months ago. As for Troyer having the FFV tune figured out. I don't think this is accurate. To my knowledge, I am the only one that has been actively working on an E85 only performance tune. It is important to point out my tune is done with the single use Pro Racer software and as such is not saleable. I would have to upgrade to SCT Dealer status and I am not in that business nor do I intend to get into it. As I said in a previous post, I would be happy to provide my tune to Mike; but, I don't think he will ask. If he were to add his expertise into it, I suspect it would be better than what I have done especially from a transmission pressure, shift point, and lock up status.
Also, you can use the Edge EVO; but, under load you will likely trend to lean as the RPMs increase. I do not think the Edge manages Fuel Pump Voltage or the Fuel Pressure Drop Across the Injectors. Both must be increased to handle the additional requirements of E85 under WOT and as the RPMS increase.
From a fuel economy standpoint, my E85 tune is getting the same economy I was getting with 93 Octane Gas and Troyer's tune. I did have to lean it out by 5% - 15%, depending upon throttle position, for normal driving. Alcohol runs much cooler than Gas so the leaning does not cause any adverse effects on the engine temp as you would normally have with running lean on gasoline.
Also, you can use the Edge EVO; but, under load you will likely trend to lean as the RPMs increase. I do not think the Edge manages Fuel Pump Voltage or the Fuel Pressure Drop Across the Injectors. Both must be increased to handle the additional requirements of E85 under WOT and as the RPMS increase.
From a fuel economy standpoint, my E85 tune is getting the same economy I was getting with 93 Octane Gas and Troyer's tune. I did have to lean it out by 5% - 15%, depending upon throttle position, for normal driving. Alcohol runs much cooler than Gas so the leaning does not cause any adverse effects on the engine temp as you would normally have with running lean on gasoline.
Last edited by tschaid; Jul 18, 2006 at 01:07 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
From: Chandler,AZ
Originally Posted by tschaid
I don't know if you can draw any of those conclusions. My conversation with Rob was three months ago. As for Troyer having the FFV tune figured out. I don't think this is accurate.
You have to remember Troyer does this stuff for a living! Don’t fool yourself in thinking that Troyer doesn’t already have this tune.
Originally Posted by RED WING NUT
No comment from Troyer. That's surprizing. 
And no I have never purchased anything from Mike but, I have used the knowledge that he has posted here and it has worked for me.
Last edited by Fanuc; Jul 18, 2006 at 08:49 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 5,409
Likes: 1
From: Sunny FL
Originally Posted by RED WING NUT
No comment from Troyer. That's surprizing.
Originally Posted by Superchips_Distributor
Tshaid,
You have presented so many different stories on your truck that nobody pays any attention to you - at least, nobody with a brain who is actually keeping track of what you claim. What absolute horse-hockey - here's a link for you to refresh your memory of your multiple stories: https://www.f150online.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=238490
Here's a quote where you claimed that all the spark plug tips were burnt off fro that same thread:
"Yesterday, armed with a TSB 06-3-3 Spark Knock along with P0300 & P0316, I met the Service Director when at 07:30 AM. The tech had already pulled my truck in and was beginning to work on it. I spent the next hour reviewing next steps. I went through Quintin's recommendations along with the TSB above. We then began examining other symptoms. I left an hour later. At 05:00 Pm, I was back and learned that the root cause of the P0300 & the P0316 was burned down tips on all of my spark plugs. What? How could all of the spark plugs be burned down after only 17,000 miles. Some of you may remember, mine was the truck that had the spark plugs broken off in the heads requiring an Engine tear down."
But then, later in that very same thread, you then claim:
"The oil in the truck was Royal Purple with a high flash point. Looks like cylinder head temps were around 500 degrees. It's a long story; but, root cause was a dyno run with no air flow (electric fans were not working) and very high engine temps."
Next we have later in this same thread:
(Originally Posted by expy03)
So who was sitting behind the wheel and let the engine temps get so hi during the dyno run? You have a real nice hot rod there, I'd be having someones lunch if that was my truck. But thanks anyway for sharing the outcome. Always glad to hear it's not the truck, but operator error, like in this case.
Your response:
"I was. Remember, the idiot light showing engine temp on the dash will never show hot in many of these trucks. It simply does not function."
Yep, your credibility is aces with me.
Funny how in thousands of dyno pulls, drag strip sessions, etc., I've never seen any problem with the dashboard temperature gauge failing to show an overheating condition of the engins coolant - to say nothing of the fact that you have a failsafe cooling system on that engine, so the PCM would have dropped cylinders immediately upon the engine's COOLANT actually overheating. But now it's because the temperature sensor doesn't work. Right. And I guess the failsafe cooling system failed, too, right? Because of course, none of them work, either.
By the way - one of the owners of SCT who you were blabbing off to over on those boards didn't think much of you trying to tell him all about what you don't know about these vehicles, either. That really wasn't very smart to try to tell them what was what.
I also loved your side-shifting to yet another story in that same thread when you were asked to post photos of your spark plugs (which of course you never did, not that it would matter at this point, but you DID once again completely change your story, interestingly), in this response:
"I'll get them from the dealer; but, I looked at the plugs and they have a reasonable brown color. I expected to see white; but, didn't. The gaps were out at .055 on the ones we checked."
Gee, what happened to the "root cause of the P0300 & the P0316 was burned down tips on all of my spark plugs" or this one: "Spark Plugs were burned up. Oil was burned as well. The oil in the truck was Royal Purple with a high flash point. Looks like cylinder head temps were around 500 degrees. It's a long story; but, root cause was a dyno run with no air flow (electric fans were not working) and very high engine temps."
This of course, after you telling me on the phone that Royal Purple had a much LOWER thermal breakdown point compared to Mobil 1 - but I don't suppose you remember that claim, either, right? Or any of the numerous other things you were going to do but never did.
Keep right on thinking that you can do what you are doing, I don't care what you do to your truck - but don't you try to attack me or correct me, as you simply are not qualified.
Last - I really hate those few occasions when I finally have to tell someone what's what - it's unprofessional and upsetting - but this has been coming for a very long time and you should have been straightened out a long time ago - instead, I refrained as I do try to be a gentleman, but you have managed to destroy even that with your big mouth & multiple conflicting claims, etc. Hence this long overdue response, which, for the rest of the forum, I do indeed apologize.
You have presented so many different stories on your truck that nobody pays any attention to you - at least, nobody with a brain who is actually keeping track of what you claim. What absolute horse-hockey - here's a link for you to refresh your memory of your multiple stories: https://www.f150online.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=238490
Here's a quote where you claimed that all the spark plug tips were burnt off fro that same thread:
"Yesterday, armed with a TSB 06-3-3 Spark Knock along with P0300 & P0316, I met the Service Director when at 07:30 AM. The tech had already pulled my truck in and was beginning to work on it. I spent the next hour reviewing next steps. I went through Quintin's recommendations along with the TSB above. We then began examining other symptoms. I left an hour later. At 05:00 Pm, I was back and learned that the root cause of the P0300 & the P0316 was burned down tips on all of my spark plugs. What? How could all of the spark plugs be burned down after only 17,000 miles. Some of you may remember, mine was the truck that had the spark plugs broken off in the heads requiring an Engine tear down."
But then, later in that very same thread, you then claim:
"The oil in the truck was Royal Purple with a high flash point. Looks like cylinder head temps were around 500 degrees. It's a long story; but, root cause was a dyno run with no air flow (electric fans were not working) and very high engine temps."
Next we have later in this same thread:
(Originally Posted by expy03)
So who was sitting behind the wheel and let the engine temps get so hi during the dyno run? You have a real nice hot rod there, I'd be having someones lunch if that was my truck. But thanks anyway for sharing the outcome. Always glad to hear it's not the truck, but operator error, like in this case.
Your response:
"I was. Remember, the idiot light showing engine temp on the dash will never show hot in many of these trucks. It simply does not function."
Yep, your credibility is aces with me.
Funny how in thousands of dyno pulls, drag strip sessions, etc., I've never seen any problem with the dashboard temperature gauge failing to show an overheating condition of the engins coolant - to say nothing of the fact that you have a failsafe cooling system on that engine, so the PCM would have dropped cylinders immediately upon the engine's COOLANT actually overheating. But now it's because the temperature sensor doesn't work. Right. And I guess the failsafe cooling system failed, too, right? Because of course, none of them work, either.
By the way - one of the owners of SCT who you were blabbing off to over on those boards didn't think much of you trying to tell him all about what you don't know about these vehicles, either. That really wasn't very smart to try to tell them what was what.
I also loved your side-shifting to yet another story in that same thread when you were asked to post photos of your spark plugs (which of course you never did, not that it would matter at this point, but you DID once again completely change your story, interestingly), in this response:
"I'll get them from the dealer; but, I looked at the plugs and they have a reasonable brown color. I expected to see white; but, didn't. The gaps were out at .055 on the ones we checked."
Gee, what happened to the "root cause of the P0300 & the P0316 was burned down tips on all of my spark plugs" or this one: "Spark Plugs were burned up. Oil was burned as well. The oil in the truck was Royal Purple with a high flash point. Looks like cylinder head temps were around 500 degrees. It's a long story; but, root cause was a dyno run with no air flow (electric fans were not working) and very high engine temps."
This of course, after you telling me on the phone that Royal Purple had a much LOWER thermal breakdown point compared to Mobil 1 - but I don't suppose you remember that claim, either, right? Or any of the numerous other things you were going to do but never did.
Keep right on thinking that you can do what you are doing, I don't care what you do to your truck - but don't you try to attack me or correct me, as you simply are not qualified.
Last - I really hate those few occasions when I finally have to tell someone what's what - it's unprofessional and upsetting - but this has been coming for a very long time and you should have been straightened out a long time ago - instead, I refrained as I do try to be a gentleman, but you have managed to destroy even that with your big mouth & multiple conflicting claims, etc. Hence this long overdue response, which, for the rest of the forum, I do indeed apologize.
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 9,417
Likes: 11
From: Windsor,Ontario,Canada
I remember hearing that when Ford upgrades a part they upgrade it to all its applicable vehicles. Take for instance the infamous DPFE. Before it was upgraded it was made of steel and had its own PN. When it was upgraded they may have or may not have changed the PN but if you look up a DPFE for a 2000 it will be the same improved PN as the 2001 or 2000 or ....... Try looking up today's PN and you will only find the plastic one. That doesn't mean that the metal one that is still on my 2000 vehicle is the upgraded one. But according to your logic becasue it will have the same replacement PN in the book as the plastic one it is. So if I try to run E85 in a 2004 that may or may not have the "improved" parts I could risk damage to my vehicle. It would behove you to ask Ford if their MY 2004 vehicles are FF capable. Do not rely on part numbers.
Respectfully
Jean Marc Chartier
Respectfully
Jean Marc Chartier
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 229
Likes: 1
From: Northern Illinois
Jpdadeo & Troyer,
Funny, I missed that post. Before I answer Mike's post. I really need to say thanks. Despite your ranting and shots at my credibility, I still have tremendous respect for you. You have taught me a lot about these trucks in the past year and I sincerely appreciate it. Still.....
With each examination and mistake, we learn. Yes. I have learned and you will notice I admitted my mistakes. How about you? Can you admit when you are speaking not from facts; but, from your beliefs or can you at least present the facts instead of pure rhetoric. All I am asking for is the facts. Why is that so hard? That is the challenge. I have converted my truck. This may indeed be a mistake. All I am asking (I think others would like to know as well) is for you to find the fault with this project. All I am asking is for you to illustrate the facts and show me and everyone what piece of the puzzle I have missed; but, please present the facts.
Personal shots are a foolish game. Challenging my creidibility is equally silly. It is even more interesting how you have taken comments out of context and re-assembled them purely to shoot at me. Why? Did I strike a nerve by asking for the facts. I am not in your league when it comes to these vehicles. I have never claimed to be in your league. In fact, if you re-read the posts you will see I point this out over and over again. I am not; however, going to sit by and not comment when you post opinions without specifying a reference point. You are correct, I have not done thousands of dyno pulls nor will I ever do thousands of dyno pulls. I am but a single individual seeking the facts.
As for the flashpoint on Mobil 1 vs. Royal Purple. I think you have your facts backwards. I told you both Mobil 1 and Royal Purple have lower flashpoints than Amsoil. Let's get the facts straight Mike.
As to the questions on the SCT Forum. They were the same presented to you. An SCT representative, apparently shared in your opinion, that the entire fuel system needs to be changed out. On that forum, just as on this one, I am simply seeking facts... Not Opinions. Why is that so hard ?
As for the engine temp. Much of the info I assembled on this came from conversations I had with you on the phone. You remember. Several were hours long.
For all the time it must have taken you to go through all of these past posts looking to hammer at my credibility you could have been doing the research all on this board would like to see. Hmmm.
Now. What about the facts. Where are they ? Prove me wrong, so we can all learn.
Funny, I missed that post. Before I answer Mike's post. I really need to say thanks. Despite your ranting and shots at my credibility, I still have tremendous respect for you. You have taught me a lot about these trucks in the past year and I sincerely appreciate it. Still.....
With each examination and mistake, we learn. Yes. I have learned and you will notice I admitted my mistakes. How about you? Can you admit when you are speaking not from facts; but, from your beliefs or can you at least present the facts instead of pure rhetoric. All I am asking for is the facts. Why is that so hard? That is the challenge. I have converted my truck. This may indeed be a mistake. All I am asking (I think others would like to know as well) is for you to find the fault with this project. All I am asking is for you to illustrate the facts and show me and everyone what piece of the puzzle I have missed; but, please present the facts.
Personal shots are a foolish game. Challenging my creidibility is equally silly. It is even more interesting how you have taken comments out of context and re-assembled them purely to shoot at me. Why? Did I strike a nerve by asking for the facts. I am not in your league when it comes to these vehicles. I have never claimed to be in your league. In fact, if you re-read the posts you will see I point this out over and over again. I am not; however, going to sit by and not comment when you post opinions without specifying a reference point. You are correct, I have not done thousands of dyno pulls nor will I ever do thousands of dyno pulls. I am but a single individual seeking the facts.
As for the flashpoint on Mobil 1 vs. Royal Purple. I think you have your facts backwards. I told you both Mobil 1 and Royal Purple have lower flashpoints than Amsoil. Let's get the facts straight Mike.
As to the questions on the SCT Forum. They were the same presented to you. An SCT representative, apparently shared in your opinion, that the entire fuel system needs to be changed out. On that forum, just as on this one, I am simply seeking facts... Not Opinions. Why is that so hard ?
As for the engine temp. Much of the info I assembled on this came from conversations I had with you on the phone. You remember. Several were hours long.
For all the time it must have taken you to go through all of these past posts looking to hammer at my credibility you could have been doing the research all on this board would like to see. Hmmm.
Now. What about the facts. Where are they ? Prove me wrong, so we can all learn.
Last edited by tschaid; Jul 20, 2006 at 08:32 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,278
Likes: 0
From: Seabrook,NH
Originally Posted by tschaid
Over the course of the past 6 months, I have spent enormous time researching the differences between the 2004 and up F150s vs the newly released 2006 F150 FFV. Now. Mike Troyer continues to put up posts about how the entire fuel delivery system needs to be completely changed out to handle the "caustic" properties of alcohol. He even told me on the phone to stop using 30% ethanol in my tank. He told me my engine was likely running very lean and as a result hot. He told me I would likely have to go to 42 lb injectors. Instead, I jumped all the way to E85 when I had my initial tune available and I had the EGT installed. I am now 6000 miles down the road, still running E85, my engine is running somewhere between 100 and 200 degrees cooler and seemingly better than ever. I could be absolutely wrong and have my engine go south in the near future. Time will tell. My research says otherwise. So...
Following is the challenge to Mike Troyer. Load up PCM code RYB2 and compare it against any PCM code for a 2004, 2005, or 2006 F150 Gas tuned vehicle. Your SCT Advantage Software allows you to compare two tunes and produce a text file for review. Why not just go ahead and use AGB3 for a 2004 F150.
Also, contact your local Ford Dealer and get a part number printout for the 22.5 lb injectors in the 2004 F150 and the 2006 F150 FFV. Do the same for the fuel filter, the fuel pump, the fuel lines, upstream O2 Sensors, and the regulator. Then post the results on this board for everyone to see.
Lastly, from the file comparison done earlier in the challenge, post the following data to this board comparing a 2004 F150 AGB3 to a 2006 F150 FFV RYB2: This by the way is a code from one of the earliest 2004 F150 (mine is amount the first 2000 made with the new design) compared to the most current 2006 F150 FFV.
Scalar Fuel Stoichiometric Value.
Fuel Pump Voltage.
Scalar Fuel Injector High Slope, Low Slope, BreakPoint, and Minimum Pulse Widths. Then go to the multipliers.
Fuel Open Loop TP
Scalar Threshold to set adaptive limit code too lean
Scalar Threshold to set adaptive limit code too rich
There are a number of other changes Ford made to the stock tune; but, these will answer a lot of questions and put to rest a lot of popular misconceptions about these trucks and their capabilities.
When this is done, take the Ethanol Challenge. Run your gas tank down to a couple of gallons. Then add 10 gallons of E85 Ethanol. Who wants to bet on the absence of a CEL ? Don't worry, you can always fill the rest of the tank with gasoline. Don't put the engine under heavy load until you have added pressure across the injectors and increased the fuel pump voltage. Until this tuning change is made, it will lean out; but, still won't throw a CEL.
Following is the challenge to Mike Troyer. Load up PCM code RYB2 and compare it against any PCM code for a 2004, 2005, or 2006 F150 Gas tuned vehicle. Your SCT Advantage Software allows you to compare two tunes and produce a text file for review. Why not just go ahead and use AGB3 for a 2004 F150.
Also, contact your local Ford Dealer and get a part number printout for the 22.5 lb injectors in the 2004 F150 and the 2006 F150 FFV. Do the same for the fuel filter, the fuel pump, the fuel lines, upstream O2 Sensors, and the regulator. Then post the results on this board for everyone to see.
Lastly, from the file comparison done earlier in the challenge, post the following data to this board comparing a 2004 F150 AGB3 to a 2006 F150 FFV RYB2: This by the way is a code from one of the earliest 2004 F150 (mine is amount the first 2000 made with the new design) compared to the most current 2006 F150 FFV.
Scalar Fuel Stoichiometric Value.
Fuel Pump Voltage.
Scalar Fuel Injector High Slope, Low Slope, BreakPoint, and Minimum Pulse Widths. Then go to the multipliers.
Fuel Open Loop TP
Scalar Threshold to set adaptive limit code too lean
Scalar Threshold to set adaptive limit code too rich
There are a number of other changes Ford made to the stock tune; but, these will answer a lot of questions and put to rest a lot of popular misconceptions about these trucks and their capabilities.
When this is done, take the Ethanol Challenge. Run your gas tank down to a couple of gallons. Then add 10 gallons of E85 Ethanol. Who wants to bet on the absence of a CEL ? Don't worry, you can always fill the rest of the tank with gasoline. Don't put the engine under heavy load until you have added pressure across the injectors and increased the fuel pump voltage. Until this tuning change is made, it will lean out; but, still won't throw a CEL.
Why make it a school boy call out to someone that would clearly win because of his 15 years of experience on these trucks?
If you would just share what you claim to already know we would be done with this thread already.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 229
Likes: 1
From: Northern Illinois
Because while I have done a bunch of research, it is important for everyone to know if my research is complete or lacking. I am not interested in win or lose and I am not competing with anyone. I am simply trying to learn based upon facts. I have already, in other posts, indicated what I have found to date. Mike Troyer has stated many of the components of the fuel system need to be replaced. Others agree with him. If this is true and the data I have gathered has gaps, the facts will back that up. This is why I have put up the challenge. It is not to make anyone look bad. That was never the intent even though some see a challenge as a personal attack. Never was intended this way and never will be.
If we don't see an answer within a week, I will post the tables and comparisons I have gathered for all to see. Still, it would be very beneficial to see this data and it's interpretation from those with much more experience than I.
If we don't see an answer within a week, I will post the tables and comparisons I have gathered for all to see. Still, it would be very beneficial to see this data and it's interpretation from those with much more experience than I.
Last edited by tschaid; Jul 20, 2006 at 10:19 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,278
Likes: 0
From: Seabrook,NH
That is fine, just state that your research is incomplete and provide us with what you have found so far. Making it a challenge is the wrong approach.
With cooperation we can fill in the areas you feel are incomplete or lacking. Do not believe service manuals are always correct. There are many part numbers that do not match service manuals. There are mid year changes, reliability changes, vendor changes etc. You could also get 2 of the same part number, 1 from a dealer with old stock and low turnaround and another from a high volume dealer, and see that it has been revised and the parts are not identical. Service manuals are usually written when the product is launched. There are people on here that have worked on these trucks for years and have experienced this first hand. Mike is not the only one that can help you fill in the blanks.
With cooperation we can fill in the areas you feel are incomplete or lacking. Do not believe service manuals are always correct. There are many part numbers that do not match service manuals. There are mid year changes, reliability changes, vendor changes etc. You could also get 2 of the same part number, 1 from a dealer with old stock and low turnaround and another from a high volume dealer, and see that it has been revised and the parts are not identical. Service manuals are usually written when the product is launched. There are people on here that have worked on these trucks for years and have experienced this first hand. Mike is not the only one that can help you fill in the blanks.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 229
Likes: 1
From: Northern Illinois
Originally Posted by Norm
That is fine, just state that your research is incomplete and provide us with what you have found so far. Making it a challenge is the wrong approach.
With cooperation we can fill in the areas you feel are incomplete or lacking. Do not believe service manuals are always correct. There are many part numbers that do not match service manuals. There are mid year changes, reliability changes, vendor changes etc. You could also get 2 of the same part number, 1 from a dealer with old stock and low turnaround and another from a high volume dealer, and see that it has been revised and the parts are not identical. Service manuals are usually written when the product is launched. There are people on here that have worked on these trucks for years and have experienced this first hand. Mike is not the only one that can help you fill in the blanks.
With cooperation we can fill in the areas you feel are incomplete or lacking. Do not believe service manuals are always correct. There are many part numbers that do not match service manuals. There are mid year changes, reliability changes, vendor changes etc. You could also get 2 of the same part number, 1 from a dealer with old stock and low turnaround and another from a high volume dealer, and see that it has been revised and the parts are not identical. Service manuals are usually written when the product is launched. There are people on here that have worked on these trucks for years and have experienced this first hand. Mike is not the only one that can help you fill in the blanks.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 229
Likes: 1
From: Northern Illinois
I have decided to consider myself "banned" from this site. Following is a brief (well maybe not so brief) explanation as to why.
Forums such as this are designed with one primary reason in mind. That is to openly share information from which all can receive a benefit or share in as well. When sharing information leads to hard feelings it is no longer fun. I realize that some on this site are genuinely interested in the project I am working on. Others have a real good case of "hardening of the attitudes" instead of looking at what is possible, they choose to explain with opinions why something is not possible. This is real interesting since many on this forum test the limits of these trucks all the time. Instead of presenting facts as to why something will not work, they choose to state opinions and in a couple of cases attack credibility. This is just no good. Please understand I really do not care about credibility attacks. I have seen and experienced the workings of politicians and have learned how silly and fact avoiding personal attacks are.
I am not banning myself because of the attacks. I am doing so because it doesn't apprear to matter if I have 6,000 miles, 10,000 miles, 20,000 miles or more on my truck after converting it to run on E85, those with more experience than I will continue to hold their ground stating their opinions that it won't work. Additionally, regardless of the personal attacks made by Mike Troyer, I remain thankful I met him and talked with him. I learned a tremendous amount from him about these trucks. In fact, it is highly unlikely I could have initiated such an important project without the knowledge I gained from the many conversations I had with him.
So long. For those who remian interested in this project, don't hesitate to send me an e-mail. You can also visit www.e85vehicles.com. This is a web site with many people with varying levels of automotive skill and knowledge. The people on that website have one very important thing in common. They are contributing to the extent they can to take one step toward reducing America's dependence on foreign oil.
Forums such as this are designed with one primary reason in mind. That is to openly share information from which all can receive a benefit or share in as well. When sharing information leads to hard feelings it is no longer fun. I realize that some on this site are genuinely interested in the project I am working on. Others have a real good case of "hardening of the attitudes" instead of looking at what is possible, they choose to explain with opinions why something is not possible. This is real interesting since many on this forum test the limits of these trucks all the time. Instead of presenting facts as to why something will not work, they choose to state opinions and in a couple of cases attack credibility. This is just no good. Please understand I really do not care about credibility attacks. I have seen and experienced the workings of politicians and have learned how silly and fact avoiding personal attacks are.
I am not banning myself because of the attacks. I am doing so because it doesn't apprear to matter if I have 6,000 miles, 10,000 miles, 20,000 miles or more on my truck after converting it to run on E85, those with more experience than I will continue to hold their ground stating their opinions that it won't work. Additionally, regardless of the personal attacks made by Mike Troyer, I remain thankful I met him and talked with him. I learned a tremendous amount from him about these trucks. In fact, it is highly unlikely I could have initiated such an important project without the knowledge I gained from the many conversations I had with him.
So long. For those who remian interested in this project, don't hesitate to send me an e-mail. You can also visit www.e85vehicles.com. This is a web site with many people with varying levels of automotive skill and knowledge. The people on that website have one very important thing in common. They are contributing to the extent they can to take one step toward reducing America's dependence on foreign oil.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 10,390
Likes: 10
Hi.
Bye. Sorry you feel that way, and sorry to see you go.
For myself, I've enjoyed this thread for it's info & drama both.
Remember that, while it is true sites of this nature are for sharing info, sharing one's opinion (right, wrong, ignorant, clueless, humourous, or banal) are equally valid. I'll reserve comment on personal attacks, or perceptions thereof. I've been the target of several myself - water off a duck.
On a lighter note, it's atypical to advocate a desire to reduce dependence on foreign oil, while driving a lifted hi-performance 6000 lb truck
You appear to be articulate and a gentleman, and I wish you good luck.
Cheers
Vic
Bye. Sorry you feel that way, and sorry to see you go.
For myself, I've enjoyed this thread for it's info & drama both.
Remember that, while it is true sites of this nature are for sharing info, sharing one's opinion (right, wrong, ignorant, clueless, humourous, or banal) are equally valid. I'll reserve comment on personal attacks, or perceptions thereof. I've been the target of several myself - water off a duck.
On a lighter note, it's atypical to advocate a desire to reduce dependence on foreign oil, while driving a lifted hi-performance 6000 lb truck
You appear to be articulate and a gentleman, and I wish you good luck.
Cheers
Vic
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,278
Likes: 0
From: Seabrook,NH
Sorry to see you go. I was looking forward to the open sharing of information and learning from your project as it developed. Too bad you felt that your credibilty was attacked. I think Mike felt the same way. Mike can be defensive but he is still a great guy with a wealth of knowledge.
Realize that your retreat will appear as an admission that you were wrong by some people here. It really is in your best interest to stay and stand your ground and share what you have learned. I will check out the link you provided, thanks.
Realize that your retreat will appear as an admission that you were wrong by some people here. It really is in your best interest to stay and stand your ground and share what you have learned. I will check out the link you provided, thanks.