I have a 2001 202 Coral with a 2001 Mercury 200 Classic (carbs). I am going to upgrade and have two options at this point: a brand new 2003 Merc 225 EFI, or a low hour 2006 200 Optimax. Obviously the 200 Optimax will provide better fuel economy. Would the 225 EFI provide better fuel economy than my 200 classic? Opinions on which would be best for my Coral?
Steve...If it was me I'd put the 225 EFI on it because even though it will definitely suck more gas and oil than the OptiMax you don't have to drive around at WOT all the time either and there's no substitute for HP, the more the better. A 200HP in my opinion makes your 202 Coral underpowered. The maximum HP rating for your Coral is 250HP. EFI engines are pretty much bullet proof but that is not to say they've never had any issues. The EFI should do slightly better than your current carbed engine but not leaps and bounds better. Carbed engines are pretty much bullet proof too. Whay are you wanting to re-power?
I thought I would be on Easy Street by now but somehow I missed the off ramp!
I have owned them both and I would go with the Optimax. 25hp is not going to be any significant difference. The 200 Optimax puts out around 220hp and the 225 EFI is going to be around 240hp. After it is all said and done it will be about a .5-1mph difference.
The holeshot on the optimax will be better as well as overall smoothness of the engine. An 03 engine I think is still a 4 butterfly intake and not the newer throttle body intake.
For a better opinion, I would ask this same question under the Mercury engines forum.
I'm wanting to re-power basically because the boat does feel under powered the way I use it. We take full advantage of the "fish & ski" aspects of the boat. I may take a buddy and go fishing. With two in the boat, full fishing gear load, 23 pitch prop, and I top out at 60 if I'm lucky. By myself in the boat I can get to 60. The next day, we may go out skiing/wake boarding with 4-5 people in the boat. I have to put a 20 or 21 pitch prop on to pull good enough with the added skiing/wakeboard load and more people in the boat. I was hoping that the added HP from a 225 or the better performance from a 200 optimax would solve the underpowered feeling, if you know what I mean.
Steve...As noted, Ben (Psychologist) has run both these Merc engines at one time or another but I think that was on his 201 Cobra and not a Coral. The Viper Coral is a different beast. Although built on the Cobra 201 hull design the weight is distributed differently and the Coral actually weighs @200 pounds more than the 201 Cobra, tipping the scales at 1650 pounds as opposed to 1440 pounds. Also, it is my understanding that the Merc 225 EFI actually puts out closer to 247HP at the prop and not 240HP. (Ben, please correct me about that if that is incorrect). Most all of the folks I've talked to running 225 EFI Merc's on their 202 Coral's have indicated that they're getting between 70-72 mph in them.
The suggestion to ask your question in the Mercury Forum is a good one. When posting be sure to mention that you're running a Fish & Ski boat and not a bass boat along with mentioning the difference in weights. Good luck with your choice...those Corals are quite the F&S boat!
I thought I would be on Easy Street by now but somehow I missed the off ramp!
What are the prices on the 2 motors? Is the 200 Optimax a 3.0 liter motor like the 225EFI?
Your old 200 Classic is a 2.5 liter motor. I think that 202 Coral would greatly benefit from a larger displacement engine for more torque. If the 200 Optimax is a 3 liter, it will probably do better than the 2.5 liter 200. However, it would seem you basically answered your own question when you said you are repowering to increase performance. The 225 EFI is certainly a gas & oil hog, but it will increase your boat's performance.
I think the price of the two motors would factor into my decision.
Mercury experimented with several different intakes on the EFI engine. Some were dogs out of the hole. The newer single butterfly may make the HP you are talking about, but I have always been able to out perform a EFI with my Optimaxs.
Sounds like what you are wanting is lowend torque. To be honest about it, a 200 or 225 HPDI Yamaha will have much more low end grunt that a Mercury if you are not brand biased.
However, as far as holeshot goes, I have had much better performance out of an Optimax. I think you will be more pleased with the optimax. It is going to make hp and torque at the lower rpm range quicker than the EFI.
EFI engine also can build carbon much quicker if you are not running then in the upper RPM range. So, if you idle a lot or pull at lower RPM's you are going to get some build up and maybe smoking. They make cleaner to fix than though.
Like I said, I am only speaking from personal experience. I am not a tech or professional. Talk to Redline or EuropeanAM under the Mercury 3 Liter High Performance Board.
I think Ben is right about the different intakes for the EFIs. I have a 200 EFI on my Cobra, but have yet to run against a 225 of either a Johnson or Merc on a Cobra that I am not leaving them behind at hole shot and match them even on top end. I never have figured out why I could leave my buddy so far behind out of the hole with his 201 with a 225. He was running a 25 Tempest, so it wasn't like he had it propped wrong, and we tried several different height settings.
Brother's 201 with a Limited Edition 225 Johnson and I had better hole shot and top end. Guess I got lucky, but the intake tinkering is about the only thing that makes sense.
Personally, if I were having to repower, I would seriously consider the 225 or 250 pro xs. STOUT motors!!
Sometimes a bigger boat with an undersized engine will have surprising good holeshot and initial acceleration. I have a friend who has a big, heavy, high sided, 21'+ Stratos Fish & Ski with carbed OMC 175 on it. His top speed is only around 55mph, but he beats damn near everybody out of the hole and getting up & running.
My Coral 191/200EFI and my friends Coral 202/225EFI will both out-holeshot and have better initial acceleration than most all bass boats, even with bigger motors, and including Cobras. In fact, my friends Coral 202/225EFI made another guy get disgusted and sell his Gambler bass boat because he could never outrun a damn old fish &ski boat
But, to get back to the topic...Steve202 says his Coral 202 with 200 Classic will run at best 60mph or a little better with a light load. My friend's Coral 202 with a 225EFI will run 71-72 mph by GPS with a light load ( 25" Tempest prop & 10" jackplate)
Alan,
Thats weird, My sister and brother-in-law used to have a 1996 model 202 with a 200 Johnson Venom ,23 pitch Ballistic 4 blade prop. That thing would run 70 easy with dealer setup.
I have a 1999 190D and my boat will not lift or run any thing like that boat would. These boats were bought from Travis Boating in 2000, and they said that the 202 Coral and the 201 Cobra had the same hull with different caps.
I believe this because it came from Mr Breed,s mouth and he was one of Viper biggest supporters and dealers.
Wise 1
My 202 with the 200 classic has a 4 blade ballistic prop, 23 pitch also. I can get a little over 60 with just myself in the boat (I do have quite a lot of gear in the boat that just stays there....added weight). But I still have to wonder if the boat is set-up correctly (given the lower top end compared to other 202s). The boat has a jack plate but I have never played around with set-up at this point.
Steve,
One thing to consider is overall weight of your boat.
Fish & Ski boats are heavier to start with than their bass boat counterparts by around 200lbs plus have the drag of a big windshield. Then you go stuffing all those huge storage compartments on a Coral with gear, TM, 3 or 4 batteries, and you've got a heavy slug of a boat. I don't think a lot of Fish & Ski people really understand this or under-estimate the affect on performance.
If you are really worried about your speed & performance-try this:
Pick a day with good running conditions, not cold, but not hot and humid. Take your fishing & other gear, all of it, out of your boat. Pop the trolling motor off and remove all but the starting battery. Drain the livewell and try to not have more than half a tank of gas. Go run your boat by yourself ( and a GPS ) as fast as it will go. If it runs 65 mph, then you have your answer. Remember your top speed, RPMS @ WOT, and water pressure @ WOT and post those on here.
If removing the weight doesn't help, and assuming there is no problem with your motor, your prop and motor height would be the thing to look at, as it would seem like you should get a little more speed.
I know next to nothing, maybe all of nothing, about props for OMC engines.
Psychologist in one of the above replies could give you much better advice on that as he has apparently tried more props than Carter has pills
And, Wise1, it seems to me that bigger, longer, wider boats often get better lift than a smaller one, even though the bigger boat is heavier.
My friend's Coral 202/225EFI and my Coral 191/200EFI both have about exactly the same power-to-weight ratio. We are both running 25" Tempest props at about the same WOT RPMs with about the same set-back & motor height. We are pretty even on holeshot and mid-range, but his boat tops out at 70-72 mph and mine tops out at 67, maybe 68 mph. Go figure....
Alan, the gas tank is in the back of the Coral instead of being under the seat. I personally believe that is the difference in the top end speed. When you take all your heaviest items in the boat and place it in the center rear, you get natural bow lift. That's an old drag racer trick. Place all the batteries in the center of the boat as close to the transom as possible and you can pick up a few mph. Just my 2 cents.
Well, the difference I was speaking of was Coral-to-Coral, big Coral to little Coral, so they're both built the same way. Why his is 4 mph faster I don't know...
In a Coral rear compartment, you have the gas tank at the back against the transom, and the tank is shaped like a wide, shallow, forward-facing U that cradles the batteries and oil tank. You can't get anything further back than it already is
Yeah, I read that after I posted.
Reply With Quote