There were different 3x2 setups for the 390 T-Bird setup with the flat carb flanges, and the angled Galaxie unit on 390's and 406's, and the carbs are also different

 

The T-Bird set up was different or at least the manifold was to clear the low hood. The also used a different 4 barrel manifold because of the hood on the T-birds. But those things are at least 4 or 5 times as rare as the 390-406 3X2 setup. I've only ever seen two and they were on show cars.

 

I didn't stutter- the Bird manifold is different because the engine sat level in the Bird, and also had provisions for the auto trans kickdown linkage for the Bird. Carbs are the same size venturis and CFM rating, 320 center and 350 on the ends as the Galaxie units, but have C2SE #'s instead of the 390-406 Galaxie carbs with C1AE #'s, again for the auto setup with different linkage. The 390-406 Galaxie 6V intakes are basically the same from '61-up, but the early ones have some different mounting bosses on the back of the intake, and a few other details changed over the years. Got a Bird setup and 3 Gal setups upstairs in the shop. 390-6V 401HP and 406-405HP were full hipo solid lifter engines with improved oiling, big rod bolts, grooved cranks etc. 390-6V 340HP Bird engines for 62-63 were "plain" hydraulic cam 390-4V 300HP engines with the 6V intake added, still had log exhaust manifolds to fit in the Bird.
And while the 6V setup was stronger than the primitive factory 4V intakes of the day, and have excellent eye-candy value, a good later 4V setup will usually show it the way home. There are a few running around that guys have modified to keep the look and using 500cfm end carbs, but it's a lot of work, and a really good modern 4V setup will still chew its butt pretty hard

 

On my 428CJ the 3X2 was good for 2 tens and 3 mph over the stock 735 CFM Holley in my 1969 Ford Cobra at the strip.

 

"a good later 4V setup"
"a really good modern 4V setup"
Current events like modified Streetmasters, Victors etc., even the Performer RPM with a good carb can put the hurt on a 6V- nostalgia and fond memories or not. Next best thing to a 2x4 for looks, but these days that's the best use for them, for eye candy or "correct". 2x4 LR runs better, and the 2x4 MR intake actually runs VERY well

 

What is a good carb these days? I would like to swap the 2v with boat anchor for a "really good modern 4v setup".

 

Thanks for all the input guys.Maybe I'll just keep the stock set up for the time being.
I just cruise in it anyway.Not really looking for performance,just looks.sound and cool factor.

 

Double Post -- Sorry...

 

This one of those - what your comfortable tuning questions...


I vote for a 70's 800 cfm 455 quadrajet, needs an adapter to the manifold tho.... cheap and plentiful.... Cliffs High Performance Quadrajets :: Qjet Carburetor Rebuilding Book

 

It's funny that you should mention the Quadrajet. I just read an article in True Blue Trucks, I believe, where the author picked up a junkyard Quadrajet, rebuilt it, and claimed to improve the mileage 3 mpg from a Holley. While cognizant of installing a GM product in a Ford, the author liked the carb, because wide open it performed, and at lower speeds provided good economy. I'm not sure that I would do this though. Thanks for the info.

Kurt

 

Yes, this is true. You put a bigger displacement air pump under the intake and carb and the flow numbers wil change. The Holley CFM ratings are taken at a set atmospheric drop, 1.5" hg for 4 bbl carbs, 3" hg for 2bbls. Those are std mediums for measuring and comparing carbs, no two engines (unless they're built identical to each other) will pull the same vacuum with the same intake/carb setup. The center carb on my 3x2 (small block repop setup) is rated at 250 cfm. But in actual operation it's flowing about 350 cfm right before you open up the secondary carbs.

 

Tell us why a 3x2 would fall short of a 4 bbl when a 2x4 low riser setup wouldn't ? I think you're just repeating what you've been told. I've run all three setups and the 3x2 is nowhere near "short" of a 4 bbl in performance. It's everybit as reliable and responsive as any 4 bbl. The fuel distribution is far better too.

 

Nope, don't have to "repeat what I've been told", and certainly have enough experience and background with these things to have a clue, and separate the baloney from the steak. I love my 6V's, as I have an original '62 Galaxie 500XL 406-6V 405hp car that I got from the original owner in '77, currently has a '64 427 with a 2x4MR intake, C6 w/4000 converter and 5.14 gears. One of 10 427's I currently have (never mind the CJ's and 390's), including two 454 strokers and a 505 Genesis/SCAT. Have three Galaxie and one Bird 6V's right now, the Bird intake is destined for my '40 pickup as eye candy along with a Vertex and a 324/500 cam I have laying around for ear candy- another severely outdated piece but it sounds mean as hell for a cruiser. I have a stack of Streetmasters and Street Dominators, a Port-O-Sonic, Sidewinder, Dominator-flange Victor, PSE adapter/351C tunnel ram etc. One of the other 6V's will go on my other '62 XL ragtop for eye candy, but I don't kid myself and run them in place of better,more modern setups for serious power. And if you had read for comprehension a little more, you might have found this:
"And while the 6V setup was stronger than the primitive factory 4V intakes of the day, and have excellent eye-candy value, a good later 4V setup will usually show it the way home. There are a few running around that guys have modified to keep the look and using 500cfm end carbs, but it's a lot of work, and a really good modern 4V setup will still chew its butt pretty hard"

 

MEANGENE427
like your pair of black galaxies !!

 

Still got to disagree with you. Most of the bad rep the multiple carb setups got was due not to the carbs themselves but running them with points ignitions. ("the carbs never stay set"........yea, right! it's not the carbs causing the problems in the first place). Also trying to run em with old, worn out carbs is a major headache. Been there-done that with my first 3x2. I've run both a LR 2x4 (with 1850 600's) on a 427 and a 454 and currently have a 331 running a repop 3x2 (Mustangs Unlimited setup) Never had issues with any of them. And the difference in performance is like night and day. There's no comparison to a 4 bbl anything. One of the mistakes is trying to run carbs that are too big, like those you mentioned using 500's on the ends. Huge mistake there IMO. They'd have had better luck with the 500 in the middle and the smaller carbs on the ends. I also went the wrong way once with the 427 and the 2x4, while I had the engine out of the car for a couple years, my bro-in-law borrowed the two 600's off it, so I was forced to use two 750's. The topend was severely limited vs the two 600's on the 454. Just swapping to the 2x4 on the 454 from a 428PI topped with a single 750 was like night and day. The motor was litterally starving with the 750.