2000 225HP Ocean Pro versus 2002 225HP OX66

[fighterpilot]

One boat has 2000 225HP, Carb., Johnson Ocean Pro. Low hours. Other identical boat has 2002 OX66 225HP engines, also low hours. I know that past maintenance and present condition are important but is there anything between the two engines that could make one preferred over the other, given they are equal in condition?? Like past problems, big difference in mpg, or??? Thanks

[wingtime]

I can't tell you much about the OX66.  But I can tell you about the 225 Ocean Pro.  It is a simple, big, beefy, reliable 3.0L motor with lots of torque.  She likes the fuel and oil but you can control that with a flowscan fuel flow gauge.  I have a single one on my 245 Explorer.  It pushes the boat at 28-30 MPH at 4200 RPMS burining 14-15 gallons an hour.  Thats 2 MPG.  If you feed it good fuel and oil and run it regularly it will re a reliable motor.  I hear the OX66 does better on fuel (I think it is direct injected?)

[fitz73222]

Both of the engines have their pros and cons as all of them do but I would be looking potential cost of ownership. Since they're both 10+ year old engines one should consider repair and maintenance costs for each design. The Ocean Runner is a very simple, carbureted engine with "basic" electronic systems for ignition and charging and does not rely on a battery to run. Fuel delivery is standard carburetion/fuel,VRO pump and the oil injection system was problematic in earlier designs but by 2000 was pretty much eliminated as an issue. There is good factory and aftermarket support for standard wear and tear parts and ignition components. There were some issues with bonded flywheel magnets coming loose from corrosion creep and causing potential stator damage. The OX-66 was a very nice running engine and has a loyal following; it is a fuel injected engine and by design has better running quality than the traditional carbureted engine including fuel/oil consumption. With this sophistication comes a price and that is higher maintenance and repair costs. Fuel filtration, injectors, sensors, ECU, connecting wiring and the need for expensive test equipment and talent to properly diagnose an issue can get into serious money fast for labor and components. My perception is that factory support and parts are lacking and what is available is expensive to replace. We have one member with a similar vintage engine that has gone through hell trying to diagnose a bog issue and has spent enough money to rival what the engine is worth. So I think the OX-66 is a better engine until it breaks and then hands down the Ocean Runner is a better engine to maintain and repair. For me, I'd pick the Ocean Runner because of its lack of sophistication especially because it is over 10 years old.

[futch13]

I can see Farley and I butting heads from now on  

My .02... Both are good motors, the OceanRunner is carbed, OX66 is "throttle body" fuel injected, not DFI.  Fuel burn will be a little greater on the OMC but only around 15% due to the fuel curve on the OX66.  The TBI uses the fuel injectors as carbs, meaning they dump lots of fuel and are not controlled as well as a DFI although the burn is better due to atomization.

Problem wise, the OMC is known for reg/rect melt down and Power pack failure.  The VRO system is good although when it does break, a pump is $500 plus labor.  The "high" pressure pump on the OX66 is around the same price after market.  Electrically the OX66 has less issues than the OMC but when a part does fail it is expensive, although the reg/rect and powerpack on the OMC can add up quick.  Usually when the reg/rect goes, it takes the pack with it as it is under the pack.

No matter which you buy, you need to check the head gaskets, and exhaust cover jackets (on the OX66) for delamination and weeping.  If they are starting to weep on the outside, then it won't be long before they start on the inside.  If I was to buy either one, being they are 10 yrs old, I would pull the heads and covers and clean passages and replace gaskets as a preventative measure.  Also on the OX66, pull the O2 sensor to decarbon.

If either motor is maintained properly and run regularly with good fuel and oil, both are capable of 1500 hrs +

Personally I would choose the OX66 due to fewer known recurrent problems, and the better throttle response you get with the "fuel injection".  I also like the Yamaha controls better as they are smoother to operate is set up properly.

[fitz73222]

Hey Futch, let me clear the air...You are in the business, I am not... You have a higher degree of credibility than I do. I look forward to your insight and experience. I'm a Mercury guy who's been running them for over 35 years with some brief affairs with OMC and can honestly say, I've never had one in a dealer shop for repairs either new or used because I have time to research, work at my own pace and do repairs myself because I enjoy it and share what I've gained with others. Fortunatley, I have a shop, equipment, factory manuals and tools to do 90% of what I run into so I've learned Mercs from little to big, good ones and bad ones and basically 1940's-2000's non-injected engines. I'm a tool and die maker by trade so I appreciate details, tolerances, measurement and process. I would not survive in your world; dealing with customers, cost pressures and time. So my hat is off to you and your experience. Opinons are like ....holes, everybody has one. So I try to limit my conjecture and speak from what I know to be true. So you and I will never butt heads!

[futch13]

Hey Futch, let me clear the air...You are in the business, I am not... You have a higher degree of credibility than I do. I look forward to your insight and experience. I'm a Mercury guy who's been running them for over 35 years with some brief affairs with OMC and can honestly say, I've never had one in a dealer shop for repairs either new or used because I have time to research, work at my own pace and do repairs myself because I enjoy it and share what I've gained with others. Fortunatley, I have a shop, equipment, factory manuals and tools to do 90% of what I run into so I've learned Mercs from little to big, good ones and bad ones and basically 1940's-2000's non-injected engines. I'm a tool and die maker by trade so I appreciate details, tolerances, measurement and process. I would not survive in your world; dealing with customers, cost pressures and time. So my hat is off to you and your experience. Opinons are like ....holes, everybody has one. So I try to limit my conjecture and speak from what I know to be true. So you and I will never butt heads!

Was just giving you sh)$ Farley, I don't expect to get into contest either.  I knew you were a Merc guy and was just having fun.  At least you didn't try to get him to go to the dark side         Agree about the opinions.  I was just giving my 2 cents and thought I would raze you while at it!!  It's all good!!  Now that I'm back from the frozen white north, I'll get that list together from the barn!!

[CLM65]

For what it is worth, I have an OX66 (2002 200 hp), and I have no problem recommending an OX66 to anyone else.  They are a little intimidating to work on (as I'm sure all engines are initially), but through some internet research and a service manual, most troubleshooting and maintenance can be accomplished by the average do-it-yourselfer.  Many refer to these engines as "bulletproof", but realistically they do need some routine care (as does any engine).  But they are fairly simple engines, and very reliable.