Quote:
Originally Posted by kk2002s
Fair enough but I don't necessarily agree that it's that simple.
One could say " Jake has seen more M96/97 motors in various conditions, good to bad, then most. Has possibly abused and detailed what can lead to the failures of these motors more than most.
Like all information out there, you have to filter it and keep it in perspective. It doesn't mean it is not valuable and has insight
So No information is better?
If someone does have limited data and it shows trends, isn't that useful?
This whole IMSB failure percentage thing falls into "..who really knows.."
All anyone can agree on is that this area of the motor fails at a surprisingly high rate
Jake keep the info coming. I'll put on my big boy pants and decide what I'm going to do with it
|
Sorry, but where did I question Jake's expertise? I did nothing of the sort. I am merely pointing out that when it comes to judging the reliability of a product, the vendor is not an adequate source of data for overwhelmingly obvious reasons.
Re the limited data, that's fine. The problem arises when things are misrepresented. If Jake had qualified his IMS failure numbers, then one would be inclined to take them seriously. However he did not. He presents them as conclusive, comprehensive facts when in reality there is no way for him to know exactly how many have failed and in turn no way to know the circumstances associated with any failures he may be unaware of.
I don't think there's any doubting his expertise on these matters. But that doesn't mean everything he says on a forum makes sense or amounts to good information / advice. I'm afraid his heavy handed self-promotional instincts undermine his message, in my view.
Threaded Mode
