![]() |
I was never a fan of the clamp on style, but that looks pretty thin, seems like the wrong corner to cut when the worst case scenario is igniting your engine bay
Lots of better flowing aftermarket parts for $100-200 without introducing additional risk |
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...12c8dc060.jpeg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...afcb0e52d.jpeg I use K&N and they work well, and it’s your lucky day as I have a brand new extra one you can have for $65 |
Originally Posted by Brad Christy
(Post 4944093)
Xlint,
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...42fc6dd2e.jpeg https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...ea3af13e5.jpeg Little late for that. Besides…. Without a dyno specifically set up for closed cooling (consumed water), it’s nearly impossible to do a dyno pull. We could potentially just do a with/without empirical test. But, I can tell you, without a doubt, without some sort of bellmouth, the “without” flow will be worse than with the FA. Thanks. Brad. |
Originally Posted by CheckmateScarab
(Post 4944143)
I was never a fan of the clamp on style, but that looks pretty thin, seems like the wrong corner to cut when the worst case scenario is igniting your engine bay
Lots of better flowing aftermarket parts for $100-200 without introducing additional risk That's an OEM Merc 496 FA. As I stated in the starting post, I have serious doubts a flame front is going to be able to travel that far, plus through the intercooler and the ProCharger. Thanks. Brad. |
Originally Posted by boatnt
(Post 4944145)
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...12c8dc060.jpeg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...afcb0e52d.jpeg I use K&N and they work well, and it’s your lucky day as I have a brand new extra one you can have for $65 I've been told the K&N flows worse than the OEM 496 breather. Or, at least, they offered one at one point in time that did. Do you have any data on that one? Thanks. Brad. |
Brad, in that same thread I referenced, the 502MPI version of that K&N filter killed HP compared to the OEM flame arrestor. Again, different app but I bet you are correct also.
|
Originally Posted by Diamond Dave
(Post 4944161)
Brad, in that same thread I referenced, the 502MPI version of that K&N filter killed HP compared to the OEM flame arrestor. Again, different app but I bet you are correct also.
|
Originally Posted by Brad Christy
(Post 4944158)
BoatNT,
I've been told the K&N flows worse than the OEM 496 breather. Or, at least, they offered one at one point in time that did. Do you have any data on that one? Thanks. Brad. |
and I will tell you one more thing, and I know a lot of people are gonna disagree with me because I am full of crap, and I don’t know what I’m talking about, but in the unlikely event you ever have any kind of fire in your boat and it ends up being from a backfire and there is an investigation by the insurance or anybody else and see the flame arrestor has been modified you’re gonna have explaining to do,
let’s think about this if mercruiser could get more performance out of those engines and did not have to add the mash to their flame arrestor why would they? |
Originally Posted by CheckmateScarab
(Post 4944143)
I was never a fan of the clamp on style, but that looks pretty thin, seems like the wrong corner to cut when the worst case scenario is igniting your engine bay
Lots of better flowing aftermarket parts for $100-200 without introducing additional risk I don't think it's really "cleaning" any air. It's typically not dusty out on the water, nor in a boat bilge. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:33 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.