One last effort.
Neither the ATSB report or any of the real issues here have bugger all to do with how 'you' as a professional elect to simulate an EFATO in a FAR 23 certified aircraft.
There is requirement, under the CAO to conduct the procedure, like it or lump it.
The real point is, in the past (mixture or throttle) the engine failure occurred at height and speed which ensured (at instructor discretion) that Bloggs did not plough it into the bricks. Good sense, good airmanship and COMMAND discretion from the instructor ensured that 'Bloggs' and his sorry arse arrived back on the ramp, in one piece.
This is not the current argument being flogged around the GAAP airports, 'to the letter of the law' says the resident 'type specialist', do them, or use the Elite, or your brief will be pulled.
'The PIC must be satisfied' etc. (CAO 40.1 - God luv it) part is no longer applicable according to the 'experts' from the bastion of all things irrelevant to aviation safety.
Forget the bloody endless, pointless puerile mixture/ bloody throttle argument. Look at the 'real' cause of the Camden prang, and praise the very experienced man who saved 'em. Both.
Selah.