1995 Sailfish 272 Repower. Suzuki 200 or 225??

[Late Again Grady]

I think that you're looking at the wrong model of Suzuki's. Per Google, each of the OP's 2006 ETEC 250's weigh approximately 516-530 lbs depending on the model, shaft length and so forth. Comparatively, a brand new Suzuki DF200A weighs 531 lbs for the 25" shaft with the digital/fly by wire controls. Not sure if you're looking at the DF200T, which has the mechanical controls and weighs 606 lbs a piece for the 25" shaft version? Either way, I doubt the OP would feel much of any difference at all back there with the DF200A's weighing essentially the same as his current ETEC's.

To the OP... here's the thread from Skunk Boat on his repower, check it out.

Thread '265 Express/Suzuki DF200APXW2'

Mar 6, 2020

Bye Bye Yamahas.... she is off to get Suzukis

Edit: In case you land here and don't want to read thru the whole thread, here is a summary...

Twin DF200APXW2 inline 4 cylinder 4 stroke 531 pounds each
Drive by wire. http://www.suzukimarine.com/Product Lines/Outboard Motors/Products/DF200AP/2012/DF200AP.aspx
settled on 4 blade 15.25 x 22 props after poor results with 3 blade 16 x 20. They slippped when goosing the throttle on takeoff and in current against standing waves.
4 blades feel good.

Loaded with 250 gals of gas and 150 pounds of...

• SkunkBoat
• 265 express df200ap suzuki
• Replies: 140
• Forum: General Discussion

• 

I was using the Zuke 225's in my comparison.

 

[Mustang65fbk]

I was using the Zuke 225's in my comparison.

Ok... well the DF200A's are about 75 lbs lighter per unit, for a total of at least 150 lbs less weight.

 

[Fishtales]

More than I would thought it would be. I like the weight reduction for sure. How do you use the boat? If you ok with the lower performance and better price point, the weight reduction is the way to go.
In my case, I'd go for the 200s. but you may want the extra ponies.

 

[garrett fish]

Ok guys, I think Ive decided against the 200s. Don't want to risk being underpowered and losing the torque of the V6. I typically run with full gas tanks and pretty loaded down, so want the power when i need it. Just need to make a decision between the mechanical 225 and digital 250. I tested the boat over the weekend and put 175lbs on the transom and it didn't affect the water line much. water was barely kissing the bottom edge of the scupper opening. maybe sunk the stern by 1/4" to 1/2" if anything. I did see a guy who did 250s on the stepped hull and his boat seems to sit okay in the water. See link. My question is, is the FBW worth it. The digital 250s are another 6k. And thats a lot of gas money or other upgrades for the boat. Is the smooth shifting and being able to use one throttle with twins really that big of a deal?

 

[DennisG01]

I think that question is one only you can answer. IS FBW nicer? Oh my gosh, yes! Every aspect of usability is nicer and easier. The only downside is if the system craps out - but generally speaking, FBW is very reliable - but make sure you battery connections are good/clean as FBW is voltage sensitive.

Mercury started using it back in the early 2000's and it been a good, reliable system. I don't know how long Suzuki has had it, but I would imagine it should be similar to Merc. The question is... is the $6K worth it to YOU? Or are you plenty happy with 'ol school? Nothing wrong with 'ol school, either!

 

[family affair]

Does it bug you to constantly have to sync engines manually? Does the lack of precision around the dock piss you off? Do you plan to keep the boat for more than 7 years?
$6k is a lot. I think on the 4 cylinders the total difference was about $2k for twins. I would think rigging digital would be way less time consuming. Does the price reflect that?
By chance have you priced Hondas?

 

[garrett fish]

Does it bug you to constantly have to sync engines manually? Does the lack of precision around the dock piss you off? Do you plan to keep the boat for more than 7 years?
$6k is a lot. I think on the 4 cylinders the total difference was about $2k for twins. I would think rigging digital would be way less time consuming. Does the price reflect that?
By chance have you priced Hondas?

I wouldn't say any of those things bug me. I haven't ever experienced the fly by wire. I have managed without it obviously. I do plan to keep the boat longer than 7 years.

My mechanic friend who works at a dealer is giving me a deal on the suzukis. So no I haven't priced hondas. Not really interested in them. Basically the quote I received for the 250s digital is 6k more than the mechanical 225s. Going to select one or the other. Just keep going back and forth and hoping some people on here might sway me one way or the other.

 

[family affair]

I wouldn't say any of those things bug me. I haven't ever experienced the fly by wire. I have managed without it obviously. I do plan to keep the boat longer than 7 years.

My mechanic friend who works at a dealer is giving me a deal on the suzukis. So no I haven't priced hondas. Not really interested in them. Basically the quote I received for the 250s digital is 6k more than the mechanical 225s. Going to select one or the other. Just keep going back and forth and hoping some people on here might sway me one way or the other.

In that case, go with the 225s. Save some weight over the v6 aps, and a decent chunk of $$.

 

[DennisG01]

I wouldn't say any of those things bug me. I haven't ever experienced the fly by wire. I have managed without it obviously. I do plan to keep the boat longer than 7 years.

My mechanic friend who works at a dealer is giving me a deal on the suzukis. So no I haven't priced hondas. Not really interested in them. Basically the quote I received for the 250s digital is 6k more than the mechanical 225s. Going to select one or the other. Just keep going back and forth and hoping some people on here might sway me one way or the other.

There's not much else we can say - its the going to be the same thing over and over and over, you know?

If you can't make the decision based on the responses... go find someone with digital controls and give 'em some money for gas and go play for a bit

 

[garrett fish]

Thanks for all the input. I'm definitely in a better position to pull the trigger than I was. Gonna sleep on it and make a call.

 

[SkunkBoat]

Thanks for all the input. I'm definitely in a better position to pull the trigger than I was. Gonna sleep on it and make a call.

My 265 is wide and heavy. It carries 250 gal of gas and 300 lbs of ice...often....on 3 hr runs to canyons.
I am very happy with the DF200APs. Would DF250APs be faster and get even better fuel economy, yes. But the weight and price are a problem.

IMO get the fly by wire. Would you buy a car with a cassette player and crank windows? No! Its 2026 bro... join the 21st century.

https://www.greatgrady.com/threads/265-express-suzuki-df200apxw2.29099/

 

[garrett fish]

My 265 is wide and heavy. It carries 250 gal of gas and 300 lbs of ice...often....on 3 hr runs to canyons.
I am very happy with the DF200APs. Would DF250APs be faster and get even better fuel economy, yes. But the weight and price are a problem.

IMO get the fly by wire. Would you buy a car with a cassette player and crank windows? No! Its 2026 bro... join the 21st century.

https://www.greatgrady.com/threads/265-express-suzuki-df200apxw2.29099/

I'm surprised you're getting 1.8mpg. Cruising normally at over 5000rpm seems a little hard on the engines to me though. I do get the 21st century argument for sure. New 225 V6s just seem like they would provide more torque and get better mileage being able to cruise 30-35 at a lower rpm.

Do you have any torque issues staying on plane at low rpm in rough conditions? How's the hole shot?

 

[SkunkBoat]

I'm surprised you're getting 1.8mpg. Cruising normally at over 5000rpm seems a little hard on the engines to me though. I do get the 21st century argument for sure. New 225 V6s just seem like they would provide more torque and get better mileage being able to cruise 30-35 at a lower rpm.

Do you have any torque issues staying on plane at low rpm in rough conditions? How's the hole shot?

Once we got the props right, there is no problem out of hole or in a crazy inlet against the tide. The 4 blade props were a must.
The zuke i4s are geared differently than any motor you are used to. Running at 5k is normal. You are swinging a bigger prop and have the torque to do it.

The 265 wants to go 28mph or more with hands off the throttle.. Below that in snotty conditions you have to be on the throttle to maintain speed. I can run it as low as 21mph but there is no momentum to power thru swell. The boat thumps the waves. You have to work it. I previously had 225 OX66s. They had a higher top end. They didn't keep the boat on plane any better at slow speeds.
I find faster is better in snot (to a point). I have worked my way home for 2 hours at 24-25mph but 28 is the magic number if you can find a groove. The 272 might be a little different?

I have the DF200APs for 5 seasons (6 month seasons) and I'm at 998 hours. No problems. There are several 265s with DF200APs and nobody complains.

Yes, no doubt that V6s will perform "better". But I can cruise at 33mph no problem. I have no desire to go over 40mph.

The 225s are their very old block. Mechanical only. I think maybe the choice of gauges is different too? Its a relic that is offered at a discount with no options.

 

[garrett fish]

My 265 is wide and heavy. It carries 250 gal of gas and 300 lbs of ice...often....on 3 hr runs to canyons.
I am very happy with the DF200APs. Would DF250APs be faster and get even better fuel economy, yes. But the weight and price are a problem.

IMO get the fly by wire. Would you buy a car with a cassette player and crank windows? No! Its 2026 bro... join the 21st century.

https://www.greatgrady.com/threads/265-express-suzuki-df200apxw2.29099/

I'm surprised you're getting 1.8mpg. Cruising normally at over 5000rpm seems a little hard on the engines to me though. I do get the 21st century argument for sure. New 225 V6s just seem like they would provide more torque and get better mileage being able to cruise 30-3at a lower rpm.

Do you have any torque issues staying on plane at low rpm in rough conditions? How's the hole shot?

Once we got the props right, there is no problem out of hole or in a crazy inlet against the tide. The 4 blade props were a must.
The zuke i4s are geared differently than any motor you are used to. Running at 5k is normal. You are swinging a bigger prop and have the torque to do it.

The 265 wants to go 28mph or more with hands off the throttle.. Below that in snotty conditions you have to be on the throttle to maintain speed. I can run it as low as 21mph but there is no momentum to power thru swell. The boat thumps the waves. You have to work it. I previously had 225 OX66s. They had a higher top end. They didn't keep the boat on plane any better at slow speeds.
I find faster is better in snot (to a point). I have worked my way home for 2 hours at 24-25mph but 28 is the magic number if you can find a groove. The 272 might be a little different?

I have the DF200APs for 5 seasons (6 month seasons) and I'm at 998 hours. No problems. There are several 265s with DF200APs and nobody complains.

Yes, no doubt that V6s will perform "better". But I can cruise at 33mph no problem. I have no desire to go over 40mph.

The 225s are their very old block. Mechanical only. I think maybe the choice of gauges is different too? Its a relic that is offered at a discount with no options.

thanks for the detailed response. Seems like you really like the 200s. Just wonder if it's an equivalent performance comparison between the 265 and the sailfish.

What are your thoughts on the fuel economy of the 200s vs the 225s. You think the lean burn tech of the 200s at 5000rpm cruise beats the 225 at lower rpm?

My dealer has the new smg4 gauges on the quote for the 225.

 

[SkunkBoat]

I'm surprised you're getting 1.8mpg. Cruising normally at over 5000rpm seems a little hard on the engines to me though. I do get the 21st century argument for sure. New 225 V6s just seem like they would provide more torque and get better mileage being able to cruise 30-3at a lower rpm.

Do you have any torque issues staying on plane at low rpm in rough conditions? How's the hole shot?

thanks for the detailed response. Seems like you really like the 200s. Just wonder if it's an equivalent performance comparison between the 265 and the sailfish.

What are your thoughts on the fuel economy of the 200s vs the 225s. You think the lean burn tech of the 200s at 5000rpm cruise beats the 225 at lower rpm?

My dealer has the new smg4 gauges on the quote for the 225.

IDK the specs on a '95 272. Add the motors, fuel , ice, gear and hardtop and the 265 is close to 10k in the water. 9'7" beam. its a heavy boat.
Motors are on the transom. no set-back, no bracket. My 2000 has a 22 degree deadrise(another reason it doesn't like to go slow)
They clear the water in stowed position. I NEVER use trim tabs.


Does the 272 have a bracket?

I'm guessing that 4 stroke V6s will get better fuel ecomnomy but idk. The 200s made me so happy after the OX66s that got 1mpg.

If money was not a problem and transom weight was not a problem, I would probably have got DF250APs. They would probably get better than 2mpg.
But I am extremely happy with these motors.