For 2hp, I’ll leave it in. Would definitely recommend cleaning it periodically though. Any idea how much power is gained by gutting the cat? Thanks for the vid!

 

I am hesitant to make a video dealing with Catalytic removal.... due to environmental extremists

 

H/P gain is not the only benefit from removing restriction from the exhaust such as removing the spark arrestor. Throttle response is increased. Many companies make a much less restrictive spark arrestor for different vehicles so you get the benefits of removing restriction without losing the protection of the spark arrestor. A double win if you ask me. Some mods may give small benefits but when combined with others it enhances and increases the total gain. Cheapest gains are always to improve the intake and exhaust flow.

 

Thanks for posting, I need a SA but may look at putting on a Supertrapp type disc SA that is less restrictive.

 

I would love to see a study on the effectiveness of a spark arrestor and how many fires have been proven to be started by an individual not using one. There's thousands of websites and haters on this website that will argue for the use of a spark arrestor, yet I can't find anything online about a fire caused by an off road vehicle not using one.

 

I know I did a video about removing it but I also get why it is needed in some areas. Some areas are more prone to fires. On older engines with carbon build up the carbon can flake off while glowing red and will then ignite dry flammable matter. On a newer era engine there is not likely much carbon build up because they for one run way cleaner than older engines an leave less deposits. On a brand new machine there is very little chance for carbon to leave and ignite anything because there will likely be no carbon yet. The Spark arrestor is an extra layer to prevent unwanted. In dry areas I would personally keep it in.

 

I can see removal on the dunes maybe but nowhere else. Every measure should be taken in the forest to prevent a fire. You can still make hp with a spark arrestor.

 

With all the fires we had last year out here in CO, i'm not one that would want to remove the SA for just a few more HP.

The Cameron Peak fire just last year was the biggest one in our history. Not caused by a RZR but, it used to be a beautiful place to ride your RZR.

 

The 50" stuff out of Grand lake was bitchin, Illinois pass to teller city, damn it will never be the same.

 

This is really dissappointing thread is a few ways. Not that I care to insult Joey or BKMN, but it is what it is.

1) They observed a roughly 1% difference between w/a SA and WO. In the testing world that's not statistically significant. It may not even be repeatable.

2) Federal law requires SA's, provided by the MFG or otherwise certified, to be essentially non-restrictive for the application they are provided for. I no longer remember, but I want to say they are required to present something like 1" of WC, or some similar really really small number. Its all documented in my exhaust analysis thread if you really want to know.

3) Why in the world would any thinking individual conceive of something that further undermines our rights and access to places to go ride? Are you not paying attention to the losses of places and freedoms we're taking?

4) Letting them get carbon fouled is really the only way they can tangibly affect HP.

5) Throttle response, in any practical way, is only even possibly affected on a turbo machine, and in the case of an SA it's going to be so small as to be undetectable. A Cat, sure, but a great deal of that is due to heat, and there is no thermal reaction happening in a SA.

6) If you wanted to optimize everything possible you'd be better off getting rid of the Cat, going dual exhaust plus SA, and concurrently working on keeping the sound signature down. I've done exactly that. As I understand how quickly restriction drops when flow is reduced, I'm quite certain you could not detect any tangible HP loss due to a SA on mine with any tune a stock crankshaft Poo could run.

I would like to say something positive about the significant number of posters calling out the irresponsible nature of eliminating an SA, and to all of you: "Thank You, Many Props, Much Respect"

-d

 

This is really dissappointing thread is a few ways. Not that I care to insult Joey or BKMN, but it is what it is.

1) They observed a roughly 1% difference between w/a SA and WO. In the testing world that's not statistically significant. It may not even be repeatable.

2) Federal law requires SA's, provided by the MFG or otherwise certified, to be essentially non-restrictive for the application they are provided for. I no longer remember, but I want to say they are required to present something like 1" of WC, or some similar really really small number. Its all documented in my exhaust analysis thread if you really want to know.

3) Why in the world would any thinking individual conceive of something that further undermines our rights and access to places to go ride? Are you not paying attention to the losses of places and freedoms we're taking?

4) Letting them get carbon fouled is really the only way they can tangibly affect HP.

5) Throttle response, in any practical way, is only even possibly affected on a turbo machine, and in the case of an SA it's going to be so small as to be undetectable. A Cat, sure, but a great deal of that is due to heat, and there is no thermal reaction happening in a SA.

6) If you wanted to optimize everything possible you'd be better off getting rid of the Cat, going dual exhaust, and concurrently working on the keeping the sound signature down. I've done exactly that. As I understand how quickly restriction drops when flow is reduced, I'm quite certain you could not detect any tangible HP loss due to a SA on mine with any tune a stock crankshaft Poo could run.

I would like to say something positive about the significant number of posters calling out the irresponsible nature of eliminating an SA, and to all of you: "Thank You, Many Props, Much Respect"

-d

I'm in hopes this thread is done.

 

I think this post has good value, if only to show there is not enough gain to run without a SA. I am interest in how every component affects my NA 1000. Knowledge is good. I still may look at replacing mine with a disc based one only because I have the discs and end caps. Or a dual like dafish brings up.

Personally I would have thought the impact would have been greater, nice to know being safe doesn’t have a cost.

 

I’m glad that the subject came up a and that it is pretty much laid to rest. I was also glad to see that everyone here is responsible enough to keep their sa installed.

 

Spark arrestor are required and needed in some areas. Please check local requirements before removal.

Short video on the engine dyno to show you exactly what you gain without the spark arrestor.
This is on a RS1 engine but 1000 should be similar if you have an XP1K or 1000s

Have you removed it on yours?
Did you notice a difference?

Seems like a really bad idea posting this.. Don't come out west without spark arrestors, we are in for a hell of a fire season. Personally, I don't think stuff like this should be posted on this site.

 

Non restrictive by law? The spark arrestor in both my YXZ and Raptor are highly restrictive. That is why companies make ones that remove that restriction.

 

Lets not go off the deep end .. BMP was just giving some good technical info about exhaust restriction and the effects it has on HP .

 

'89:

Been too long since I did all that research, but yes. As I recall it was the US Forrest Service, and I think it was actually 1PSI for 4 stroke. 2 stroke, sometimes benefiting from back pressure, were allowed a higher value. As I recall.. Digging deeper in the memory, the rated flow, in CFM for a SA was to not exceed 1 PSI.

Now I don't know if a US FS approved SA regulation is a "law" once the USFS says something, so I've perhaps over-stated thing sawyng law or legal. I know I can get a ticket without one, and that every state I know bases their laws on USFS regulations, but in truth I don't know the mechanics of how USFS regulations are or become law when written or are merely guidelines that effectively become law when states adopt them.

1) I suppose it's possible that said back-pressure / CRM rating guideline can be violated and a mfg get away with it. You seem to think this is so (I'm assuming, please forgive me if I'm wrong). I don't know why any MFG would so something that stupid, but I've long since given up trying to understand marketing compromises mfg make.

2) I also don't know the process that happens in guidelines becoming laws, be it federal or state. Might in practice it be legal to accept a screen based spark arrestor that doesn't meet the 1 PSI guideline?

I see no other wiggle room for a muffler to be stamped USFS approved. Mind you I'm thinking "Boeing" right now too, so there's that. There is also something called "Confirmation Bias" to consider as regards marketing of "HP improvements" in general.

Let me offer this thought: IF a MFG were to get an exhaust stamped USFS approved that didn't meet USFS pressure guideline, that seems more an indictment of said manufacturer, not of spark arrestors, the USFS, or SA performance. There are plenty of SA's out there the do meet the 1 PSI guidelines and thus have no tangible impact on our performance. You've seen the insignificant dyno results on this very thread showing just that.

In any event, this is all memory. I spent a lot of time in this like a year ago, and it's just too much reading and digging to redo over something as irresponsible as not running an SA. I hope I've clarified a bit more, but otherwise running sans SA isn't a topic worthy of more discussion on my part.

Best of luck to you though!

-d

 

More food for thought directly from the Forestry Service:

Do Turbochargers qualify as effective Spark Arresters?

Turbochargers qualify as effective spark arresters when 100% of the exhaust gasses pass through the turbine wheel. The turbine wheel must be turning at all times and there must be no exhaust bypass to the atmosphere. Depending on design, small enclosed system bypasses that reroute some exhaust back through the engine may be allowed. The illustration of the exhaust-driven turbocharger shows the air intake and the exhaust path through the turbine wheel. The action of the rotating turbine wheel causes carbon particles to remain within the confines of the turbo-drive section until they are reduced to a harmless size by attrition.

 

Joe, Thestir:

Sirs, keep in mind ours machines to not meet that test. To get 100% and no exhaust bypass means no wastegate. We have same, so our machines do not meet the 100% definition.

Shame though.

 

We are all enthusiasts here and knowledge is power. I have not seen this thread as advocating the removal of spark arrestors, but simply the effect of the stock SA on on a dyno and that it is pretty darn effective with only a potential 2HP hit.

I am like knowing that I am giving up basically nothing running the spark arrestor from a reputable source as the only evidence I had seen in the past were rumors of tests and those rumors were from 1 to 5HP

I run a SA and I always will, even at the dunes. Part is obeying the law, part is making sure I do what I can to make sure my actions do not cause harm to others, nice to know I am not giving up performance doing so.

 

Some of ya'll take stuff way too far.....just saying

Give BMP a break, Joey was just providing information.

 

Probably shouldn't be sayin😏 but yeah info is cool, we're all getting it👍

 

Of course I live in the desert; but it has been about a year and a half since there was any amount of precipitation. If it doesn’t do some raining soon we can expect a fire season from hell in the whole mountain west. So please just be responsible.

 

Late to the party but a few years ago in halsey national forest in nebraska there was a large fire that burned half of it. Forest service was pointing fingers at us atv riders left and right but everyone they checked the spark arresors were in good condition. Except one! A forest service utility side by side with an under maintained exhaust with a big hole in its spark arrestor and which gps and satellite confirmed to be the culprit for starting the fire. So they may or may not work but I will keep mine in on my 700r because I do not want my quad to be the cause of a huge damaging fire.