Click Here -> Please Consider Making a PayPal Contribution to the FordSix Forum!
2019 Contributors:
NJwpod, 1strodeo, mightynorseman, maxtrux, 6d7coupe, broncr, Phase3, 68Flareside240, bmbm40,
mustang6, WorldChampGramp, justintendo, BigBlue94, ags290, motorsickle1130, Rooster, ousooner919, ethanperry
rzcrisis, DoctorC, jamyers, Motorboy, fastpat, Silverback280, chad


<<< New Site Update >>>

stock 2bbl!!!

Moderator: Mod Squad

6bangerwanab
Registered User
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 6:06 pm
Location: colorado

stock 2bbl!!!

Post #1 by 6bangerwanab » Wed Mar 10, 2004 8:17 pm

http://home.att.net/~CapriClubChicago/caprihistory.html#Mutant
go to 1981 they say something about a 3.3 liter inline six (200 cubes) but it says that they came with a 2 bbl carb. anybody know anything about these? if they had a different intake(although its most likely unattachable) maybe it would be a better head to work with when some one has performance in mind. And to think, i saw a 6 banger capri the other day in the junkyard! i wish i would have looked closer.

Spyke

Post #2 by Spyke » Wed Mar 10, 2004 11:24 pm

Cool info. If its true I bet they used something like the Cliffy 2v adaptor. I doubt ford cast a new log head a year before they stopped production. But I would love to be wrong!! Some of the guys here have the old parts books and will know for sure...

MLINE
Registered User
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 12:50 am
Location: Ferndale, WA

double barrel

Post #3 by MLINE » Thu Mar 11, 2004 3:31 pm

My brother has an '81 Capri with the 3.3L and it came with a single barrel carb.

I'm pretty sure you couldn't get anything but a single on the 3.3, but the 2.3L four cylinders came with a progressive two barrel.


The little Crapi did respond well to the 1.14 venturi Autolite two barrel we adapted to it.
Mike V.

'66 Mustang - stock 200
'90 Tbird SC - supercharged 3.8
'68 Ch*vy C10 - 350

mustang6
VIP Member
Posts: 1435
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 11:32 pm
Location: near Tacoma, WA USA

Post #4 by mustang6 » Sat Mar 13, 2004 3:47 am

I've caught this reference to a 200/3.3 2 bbl in other sources in the past, and after years of looking in junkyards, car shows, and other reference books that don't show this option at all- I'm pretty much convinced this is always a mistake/mixup with the 232/3.8 V-6 that started being built that year with a 2 bbl. carb.
Scott

68 Mustang 200 ci, Aussie 250-2V head, Dual Headers, Comp Cams 252H, DSII w/MSD 6AL, T-5, V8 suspension.

65 Ranchero 200 ci, late 170 head, Autolite 1101, 3.03 3 speed, Maverick 8" 4 lug rear with 3.55 gears.

Guest

Post #5 by Guest » Sun Mar 14, 2004 12:33 am

Well, here we go again;
I talked with a guy here in Denver who used to service the 'police interceptor' version of the 200 ci (3.3L) engine in a lot of cars for a local security company. They were mostly Fairmonts, with a few Mustangs and some Zephyr-based taxicabs.

His description: "They had a 2-bbl carb with unequal-sized barrels. The carbs were like a quad, with a primary and secondary. The air cleaner was a squarish-looking thing that wrapped over the top of the engine, and the air filter was rectangular. It was too small, in my opinion, because they got dirty very fast, like in 5,000 miles or less. They came to us this way from the factory."

The description sounds like the H-W 32/36 carbs that were common on the Ford I-4 engines, even down to the air cleaner assembly (my Capri had one on its 2000cc engine). They had the extra warm air inlet on the bottom of the intake snout, just like the regular round air cleaners. The one thing he could not remember was whether these engines had an adapter unter the carb that might resemble the Stovebolt adapter.

I worked with Ford vehicles a lot during the 1980s. One thing we used to get was Ford's 'own' 4-wheel drive E350 vans for our oilfield use. Ford did not, however, make a 4-wheel drive van: they were built as regular vans, then sent to Vemco (in Utah), where a Dana 45 front axle and transfer case were adapted to the van. Then they we sent to us (me) as 'new, from Ford'.

I fully suspect that these "police interceptor" 3.3L engines were something along these same lines, having been changed by an 'authorized vendor' in between Ford and the local security company. However, these neat vehicles were very long-lived, reaching 300,000 miles without so much as a valve job or carb rebuild! And, according to the maintenance guy I spoke with, "they were no slouch for performance, nothing like a stock Fairmont".

So, as soon as I don't have to pass local emission looky-loos under my hood, I'm going the H-W and Stovebolt route myself. :wink: They pass emissions OK, according to this mechanic, but in Colorado, you are not allowed to do it because it's not factory. However, after 25 years, the car is not required to pass the visual tests anymore, except for the electronic sentries on many street corners. So, if the tailpipe passes the sniff, you can do what you want under the hood. (Finally, some politician got some sense and lets us raise our MPG and HP!).

6bangerwanab
Registered User
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 6:06 pm
Location: colorado

Post #6 by 6bangerwanab » Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:12 pm

well, that makes sense, and are you in or around denver, cause out here in moron county we dont have to take emissions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests