Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Has anyone seen any advantage with a Tri Y over a Standard header in a stocker setup, WITH THE SAME CAM? I run a modified set of Lemon's Headers and want to explore a little on the topic. I know some have shown better numbers after a cam swap, but it seems to take several tries to make a small gain. Not dis-satisfied with what I have, just pecking......

Wade O

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Wade,
I wouldn't be dis-satisfied with the way your car runs either. I was at Indy last year when you were running class and I swear the headers were spitting HP.

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Wade get in touch with Bill Grubb, he had those tri-y's on Brenda's car when it had the small block program. He'll tell you straight. I have a set on my stick car but, haven't been out yet. Jury's out........

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

I bought a set of Elston,s Tri Y's and didn't change anything else and saw about eight hundreth's.

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Flowmaster's 4-2-1 Scavenger collectors were worth 8 hundreths on my 468 BBC running a 1 3/4" primary tube header.

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Wade,
Beautiful car!!! I wanted to say hi at BR, but could not find time.

Anyway, to answer your question (it is at the bottom of the page) ----> http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...ech/index.html

Bill Grubbs

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

In order to gain the most from a tri-y or 4-2-1 header, the camshaft needs to be correct for the header. By the way, so does the firing order. The tri-y or 4-2-1 header allows you to do things with the camshaft that most 4 into 1 headers will not allow, due to sizing and tuning requirements.

If you have, for what ever reason, an exhaust lobe that is too small, the tri-y will improve scavenging. Of course, if your valve or port is so small that you cannot get enough cam lobe on the exhaust, the tri-y will help there, too.

For a Chevrolet V-8, the "A" firing order, 1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2, and the "C" firing order 1-8-7-2-6-5-4-3 (AKA 4/7-3/2 swap) will work on the same tri-y header. The "B" firing order, 1-8-7-3-6-5-4-2 (AKA 4/7 swap) requires a dedicated tr-y header. Some merge collectors, as well as the Flowmaster "scavenger" collectors are also firing order specific.

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Preach on alan!!!!!!!!

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Alan can preach on all he wants as I have read many to hundreds of his posts and the man is a wealth of information that I enjoy and appreciate. He is a straight shooter and right to the point . I would not think twice about PM ing for information I might need. Never met him and only recently seen a picture of him and I respect him. A good man on the forum .-------John

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

I also have a side line. I stand in as a scarecrow for farmers. It's boring, but it pays, and nothing will go into one of those fields if it has any sort of decent eyesight.

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

my initial gains were with the standard F.O. years later I swap to the "C": F.O.

Can't say it was any quicker and it wasn't slower but definitely had a new sound.

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Wade check p.m.

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Not really a thorough evaluation, but we did a dyno pull using the same stepped primary pipes, first pulls were with a 4 into one burns merge collector and 18" of collector pipe, then replaced that with a 4 into two into one merge collector setup with a megaphone style end. We changed nothing else and saw a 4 hp increase. We were chasing other issues and did not change the tuneup, but felt that at least we did no harm with the Tri-Y setup so intend to use them in the car and test further at the track. It seems that the fuel curve was considerably leaner than previous tests we had done but the BSFC numbers looked good on our dyno sheets so we'll give them a try...

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Especially if you're wearing shorts!!:eek::eek: Jim


.

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

What really worries me is that you were actually looking ...............................

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Now that is funny, I don't care who you are.....

David
The New Hemi Guy

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

Grant, thanks for the info. I really think the 283 would benefit from them, maybe more than a larger cid. Its all theory for now, but, would I like to mock up a set and see.......

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

A Dyno is not the best place to try headers. A bigger header may make more power on the Dyno but be slower down the race track.

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

What you'd look for when dyno testing headers would be average torque and horsepower through the RPM range you're running. You'd also want to look at the acceleration rate you test at. You have at least 3 different acceleration rates, if you have a 3 speed transmission, and that does not account for the fact that once you shift from first to second, from there on, your acceleration rate (in RPM per minute) slows at a progressive rate, the higher the gear, the slower the acceleration rate.

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

a dyno is the only repeatable situation.......I know there are many who would rather make a million runs on the car and put more variables to see if a header is any better than another.....

dyno is much more affordable in my book......

Re: Tri Y vs. Conventional Header....
 

I totally agree with data from a dyno. Most runs can be very closely simulated with a dyno if it has a servo controlled valve. I reworked my dyno well over a year ago to simulate (make) gear changes. If you have your car on a data logger, you can totally simulate the run. Example lets say the car launches at 5600 rpm and stays in low gear for 2 seconds and accelerates to 8500 in that time and then the gear change is made from 1st to 2nd and motor drops 1500 rpm's on the gear change and accelerates to 8700 in 3 seconds and makes 2nd to 3rd gear change and engine drops 1300 rpm and accelerates to 8900 rpm's and goes thru the traps at that rpm and it takes 4 seconds to do that. With my dyno, I can take that info and program with a formula that will duplicate that exact run. You can actually let the dyno acclerate the engine at each individual gears acceleration rate. If you overlay that dyno run to one made with regular headers, you can see any gains and losses in any gear. If you see gains, you could actually hypothesize as to how much change in ET you would actually see. You notice I said hypothesize. Then it is ready to go to track to see if it does exactly that. Damn I luv this crap; dont yall
reed