Go Back  Offshoreonly.com > Technical > General Q & A
496 Flame Arrestor >

496 Flame Arrestor

Notices

496 Flame Arrestor

Thread Tools
 
Old 03-10-2026 | 01:28 PM
  #11  
Registered
 
Joined: Oct 2022
Posts: 283
Likes: 89
From: WI
Default

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
CheckmateScarab is offline  
Reply
Old 03-10-2026 | 02:18 PM
  #12  
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,822
Likes: 376
From: IL
Default



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
boatnt is offline  
Reply
Old 03-10-2026 | 03:47 PM
  #13  
Registered
Veteran: Navy
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 274
Likes: 153
From: texas
Default

Originally Posted by Brad Christy
Xlint,




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.
either way the engine room looks freaking amazing
powerboatr is offline  
Reply
Old 03-10-2026 | 04:13 PM
  #14  
Thread Starter
VIP Member
Community Builder
VIP Member
 
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 2,136
From: SW Ohio
Default

Originally Posted by CheckmateScarab
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
CheckmatScarab,

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.
Brad Christy is offline  
Reply
Old 03-10-2026 | 04:17 PM
  #15  
Thread Starter
VIP Member
Community Builder
VIP Member
 
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 2,136
From: SW Ohio
Default

Originally Posted by boatnt


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
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.
Brad Christy is offline  
Reply
Old 03-10-2026 | 04:44 PM
  #16  
Registered
10 Year Member
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 867
Likes: 257
From: Portland, OR
Default

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.
Diamond Dave is offline  
Reply
Old 03-10-2026 | 05:50 PM
  #17  
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,822
Likes: 376
From: IL
Default

Originally Posted by Diamond Dave
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.
I guess different people have different experience, back when I replaced my stock flame arresters on my fountain with twin 502’s and added it KN I noticed the difference in a positive way, that was just me
boatnt is offline  
Reply
Old 03-10-2026 | 05:54 PM
  #18  
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,822
Likes: 376
From: IL
Default

Originally Posted by Brad Christy
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.
no, I don’t have any data. I don’t get that consumed with a filter, you can remove that filter and drive your boat and I guarantee you’re not gonna see any difference so a filter is not going to help you, all I can tell you is the stock 496 flame arrestor is not providing any filtration, all the belt dust goes right through that stock filter and into your engine, I like the K&N because simply it filters better it sounds better and does not affect in a negative way and no more belt dust in my throttle body
boatnt is offline  
Reply
Old 03-10-2026 | 06:01 PM
  #19  
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,822
Likes: 376
From: IL
Default

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?
boatnt is offline  
Reply
Old 03-10-2026 | 06:13 PM
  #20  
Sydwayz's Avatar
Forum Regulator
20 Year Member
Super Moderators
VIP Member
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 24,211
Likes: 1,608
From: Worldwide
Default

Originally Posted by CheckmateScarab
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
Not impossible, but unlikely for a fuel injected motor to backfire. I'm pretty safety conscious, and I'd do it.
I don't think it's really "cleaning" any air. It's typically not dusty out on the water, nor in a boat bilge.
Sydwayz is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.