Welcome to Club Hot Rod!  The premier site for everything to do with Hot Rod, Customs, Low Riders, Rat Rods, and more. 

  •  » Members from all over the US and the world!
  •  » Help from all over the world for your questions
  •  » Build logs for you and all members
  •  » Blogs
  •  » Image Gallery
  •  » Many thousands of members and hundreds of thousands of posts! 

YES! I want to register an account for free right now!  p.s.: For registered members this ad will NOT show

 

Thread: SHORTY headers vs tri ys. which is better for my applacation
          
   
   

Reply To Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    68montego is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Downingtown
    Posts
    8

    SHORTY headers vs tri ys. which is better for my applacation

     



    Hey there all again. I have a 66 390 with a comp cam for the low end and an edelbrock aluminum performer intake with some rebuilt performance heads and a 600cfm carb and a stock dist with a crane cam pickup. Right now i have the stock log exhaust manifolds and im loooking for headers. But i want to know.which would be better... Shorty headers or tri ys? Also has any one used the sanderson shortys for the fe?

  2. #2
    pat mccarthy's Avatar
    pat mccarthy is offline CHR Member/Contributor Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    bay city
    Posts
    10,462

    if you have the room longer headers should work better then short in your case. recurve the stock dist should help

  3. #3
    Rrumbler is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Car Year, Make, Model: Sans hot rod, sold the truck.
    Posts
    901

    Tri-Y's will generally give you a bit better grunt down low in the RPM range; long tubes will move the range up a grand or so, and shorties won't change much over the stock manifolds. That has been my experience. I had a set of long tubes on one of my work trucks when I bought it, 400 Chevy, T400, 3/4T, 4x4, and it was a bit slow getting it going with a load in the bed and a jobsite or equipment trailer on behind until the revs got up over 2000 to 2500; changing over to Tri-Y's like I had on the other trucks made a world of difference in loaded performance - it was much easier to get a load moving, it pulled well right off idle. All three of my older trucks were essentially the same, with the 400SB and 4WD, 2 were 3/4T an one was a one ton, all got Erson "RV" cams at the first opportunity, and dual plane tall carb base manifolds and Q-Jets. They worked very well both on highway and off road, in some pretty rough service.
    Rrumbler, Aka: Hey you, "Old School", Hairy, and other unsavory monickers.

    Twistin' and bangin' on stuff for about sixty or so years; beat up and busted, but not entirely dead - yet.

  4. #4
    68montego is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Downingtown
    Posts
    8

    My main two problems are that i mounted the motor to fit just right and have clearance everywhere esp to get out the trans bolts. So it mught be forward in the engine bay alittle bit by and inch or so. Dont know. Plus its a wagon and very low to the ground up front. so i dont want longtubes have dealt with them on my 73 mustang and they scrapped all the time. Im looking for low to mid range power. Its a street car that i would like to take to the track every once in awhile. I was looking at fpa tri ys. They look like they are good. But dont know if they will fit right.

Reply To Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Links monetized by VigLink