Vette Tech Tri-Y Status?





(Good news is alum doesn't transmit heat as easily as steel/iron.)
The bad news is that aluminum has a considerably higher
rate of thermal conductivity than either steel or iron.
Heat transfer coefficients (W/mK) at 25ºC
Aluminum: 250
Iron ......: 80 (Wrought: 59; Cast: 55)
Steel ....: 46
A high coefficient means heat moves very quickly; a low
coefficient means heat moves very slowly.
.





Alum transfers more heat into the cooling system. It's less thermally efficient, so you generally need more compression or more advance or both.
I remembered the "less thermally efficient" part. (I bet that was supposed to be MORE thermally efficient!)
....So, if alum transfers heat more easily, then the control arm bushings would be more prone to heat damage.
And, there is "no good news"!





Thanks for the link! Looks like great stuff (@ 90% heat reflectivity). I guess there is good news!





We already know the front tube(s) are a problem. #2 is a given thought #1 is not clear.
Also, I'm not clear on the length of the headers. I feel they should be shortened to allow installation of "expander cones". It also appears this could provide a reduced angle to the mid-section -- creating less backpressure. We've seen only one dyno and the high rpm performance is suspect. I feel the crowding and need for sharp turns could be the culprit. I also don't believe this alteration would negatively affect performance. Would like more feedback on this.
After reviewing all pics, I also wonder about heat-transfer to the brake lines. It looks like something needs to be done here as well. Don't want boiling brake fluid, do we?
And, what about heat transfer to the interior of the car. Are the pipes so close to the floorboards, that interior temps likely to be raised?
Finally, what about changing plugs. Does this look to be reasonable after header install? And, will shortening #2 (and maybe #1) cause restricted access to #1 and #2 plugs?
Thanks!!!
Unless I get talked out of it, I'm probably going to return mine next week. Conventional 4-1 headers might have a little less torque but they might be better on top (as shown by Bandit's results). Also, 4-1 headers allow room for front cats -- and a quieter result on my car. 4-1's would appear to allow for a shallower transition for the pipes entering the mid-section. Heat transfer may be less of an issue -- as would high-rpm loss.
I'm not sure I can continue to delay a decision -- hoping for a positive result. Though Brian did not specify an interval for return, I feel mine need to go back soon -- if they aren't going to prove to be the best option.
And, that's what he said they'd be. But, he also said they'd bolt right in without modification.
Last edited by GREGGPENN; Jul 18, 2008 at 12:21 AM.
We already know the front tube(s) are a problem. #2 is a given thought #1 is not clear.
Also, I'm not clear on the length of the headers. I feel they should be shortened to allow installation of "expander cones". It also appears this could provide a reduced angle to the mid-section -- creating less backpressure. We've seen only one dyno and the high rpm performance is suspect. I feel the crowding and need for sharp turns could be the culprit. I also don't believe this alteration would negatively affect performance. Would like more feedback on this.
After reviewing all pics, I also wonder about heat-transfer to the brake lines. It looks like something needs to be done here as well. Don't want boiling brake fluid, do we?
And, what about heat transfer to the interior of the car. Are the pipes so close to the floorboards, that interior temps likely to be raised?
Finally, what about changing plugs. Does this look to be reasonable after header install? And, will shortening #2 (and maybe #1) cause restricted access to #1 and #2 plugs?
Thanks!!!
Unless I get talked out of it, I'm probably going to return mine next week. Conventional 4-1 headers might have a little less torque but they might be better on top (as shown by Bandit's results). Also, 4-1 headers allow room for front cats -- and a quieter result on my car. 4-1's would appear to allow for a shallower transition for the pipes entering the mid-section. Heat transfer may be less of an issue -- as would high-rpm loss.
I'm not sure I can continue to delay a decision -- hoping for a positive result. Though Brian did not specify an interval for return, I feel mine need to go back soon -- if they aren't going to prove to be the best option.
And, that's what he said they'd be. But, he also said they'd bolt right in without modification.

1) The #2 is a problem. It needs to be addressed. Brian seems to be a stand up guy and facing the issue commendably. The #1 tube is not
a problem unless it is actually in contact with the steering rag joint. As the engine torques over, the #1 will rise away from the steering. If it is touching, address that the same as #2. I don't think it'll be a problem. Besides, if it's that low, maybe an engine mount WOULD be the answer in this case as this IS the side that is pulled on during normal operation. While the mount on the pass side may not help much, I think the opposite might be true on the driver side. It's cheap insurance, and you're gonna be in that area of the engine anyway.
2) The expander cones aren't critical to guys like me and you because we're not gonna see the sunny side of 6,000rpm too often. As soon as I get my pass side back, (it ships home friday 7-18-08) I'm gonna get it on there and start finalizing my Y pipe.
3) Remember the self adhesive heat blanket I showed the link to? I used some of it on my brake line shield and I expect it to work well.
4) I'm not too worried about heat transfer to the interior. Remember, there were pre-cats on my '88 along with the bare OEM pipes making a bunch of heat down there. No, I don't think the pipes are unusually close to the floorboards. If the driver side is any indication, they're a little lower than the OEM pipe, But certainly NOT by much. Maybe an inch?
5) I really don't expect to have any trouble with plug access or heat on the wires. He would have to shorten the pipes to the point where they turn down immediately upon leaving the flange to cause that kind of interference.
Who knows, I might either be screaming for his head, or calling him my bestest pal when I get the pass side back. That remains to be seen when it arrives. I really DON'T expect any problem. Besides you got all of us to help
The other stuff is normal. With the exception of the Extremely LOoooonggggg tubes. That's just part of this beast.
A custom Y is looking like $250.00- $300.00 for 3" with Ceramic coating.
However, after all has been said, you have a different situation with your side exhaust, and you may need to re-think ...into a set that is know to fit that application.
I suggest e-mailing Melrose. They are small enough to respond and have a product second to none.
Tell 'em what you have and see if they have a "Kit to Fit"?
Keep us posted on your decision, and what happens.
TJM
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
I have been following this thread and the other tri-y thread from the start, and most of the problems i am having you guys have come up with the solutions or ways around. I received my set of these several weeks ago and have been slowly installing them, as the car is not a daily drive but a toy and I am in no real hurry. I big thanks to all the guys who have helped and pioneered installing these.
This some of what i have found and a few questions.
My #1 tube has about 3/4" from the steering shaft rubber which I have coated with heat reflective tape and I am happy with.
My #2 tube is only 6/16" away from the a- arm, again ive heat coated this. I am going to try this and see how it goes, I my have to modify the tube like the other guys if it causes any problems. Hopefully not.
I am going to get a custom y piece made, hopefully with the expanders supplied which i will get bent or modified away from the floor pan as you guys suggested. This will properly be expensive but i have come this far so can't cut corners know.!!
I have also braided the fuel and brake lines on the passenger side. The fuel lines run less than 1/2" from the #2 tube, does this sound accepable enough clearance?.
The wiring loom for the blower motor a/c line switches etc, was routed up by the fuel lines on the passenger, and touched the #6 tube. I re-routed this under the a/c housing where I suspect it should off been anyway, as none off your pictures show it routed where mine was.
The only other issue that is concerning me is that #8 tube runs about 1/2" away from the a/c housing. Its hard to see from the other guys pictures but is yours the same?. I am going to use heat shielding and stick that on the housing to try to protect it better, but it is very close. I am I little worried about it melting the housing. How close is it with yours?, is this a issue with all types of headers and has it caused problems?
Sorry for the long post, I will post up my pics when complete and hopefully a dyno run in the near future. Keep going and we will get there in the end.
My car is a early 86 with iron heads.
further remove any oily stuff. After allowing it some time to air out and dry, I cut a few pieces of the self adhesive heat barrier to fit the contours and laid it in place.
As for the fuel lines, I found a way to use the same stuff on it to ward off heat.





further remove any oily stuff. After allowing it some time to air out and dry, I cut a few pieces of the self adhesive heat barrier to fit the contours and laid it in place.
As for the fuel lines, I found a way to use the same stuff on it to ward off heat.
On the fuel lines, there is some flexibility in where mine sit. Have you considered just tying them back to gain more clearance?
CBob, got any notification of shipment yet?





Glad you received it! I spoke to Brian and mine should be going out this week. He told me he re-did the #2 tube-not just cut it shorter.
Steven
then sectioned in a new piece to replace the area of my hack work. The entire header was then re-coated. It looks pretty good, and when it's on the car, it's gonna look alot better this way than before. (beat on) If this goes on like I think it will, I'll be very satisfied with the outcome. I wouldn"t let this kind of repair get in my way of using them.
Here's a few pics. I was gonna get one to show the length of the tube and how much it was shortened, but my camera ran outta gas.
Come to think of it, if it's still too close to the fuel line, I'll get some wrap and cover the tube where it needs to be, and it prolly won't even show.


Got the exhaust done. Drove the car.
Other than a drive line "thunk" [ I'm guessing the universal @ the Trans is tapping the pipe, damn].
Now, I have to figure what to do with first gear [an auto] it shifts into second so fast it isn't funny?
I guess I'll start a thread with this issue?
TJM





Tom,
That's the kind of thing I'm afraid of. I wonder if you could be hitting the floorboard (since the pipes looked so close).
How'd the power feel?
You probably already know a shift kit is the way to change shift points.
Tom,
That's the kind of thing I'm afraid of. I wonder if you could be hitting the floorboard (since the pipes looked so close).
How'd the power feel?
You probably already know a shift kit is the way to change shift points.
Pretty sure the noise is related to drive line. In neutral you rev?.... no affect.
At a stop you can power brake... nothing.
Only when rolling. The faster the louder .
Pretty sure the noise is minor. Anyway, I still have my Harley Davidson tool #7 [ a hammer!].
The Chip I have changes the shift points and may need to "learn" a little?
The car 'feels' better, but until I get rid of the "banging" I won't stress it to much.
I take the quicker shift as a pretty good sign [ I think?] ?
TJM
TJM










