NL 10, SH, 66, 3bet bluff from SB = marginal?

$0.05/$0.1 No-Limit Hold'em (5 handed)

BB: $13.57 - VPIP: 24, PFR: 19, 3B: 7, AF: 3.8, Hands: 204
UTG: $13.00 - VPIP: 14, PFR: 11, 3B: 4, AF: 3.1, Hands: 359
CO: $10.00 - VPIP: 19, PFR: 15, 3B: 12, AF: 4.4, Hands: 182
BTN: $9.42 - VPIP: 28, PFR: 17, 3B: 11, AF: 9.0, Hands: 46
Hero (SB): $13.03 - VPIP: 16, PFR: 14, 3B: 4, AF: 3.8, Hands: 138914

Preflop: Hero is SB with 6:c, 6:s.
2 folds, BU raises to $0.30, Hero raises to $1.00, BB calls $0.90, BU calls $0.70.

Flop: ($3) 7:c, A:s, 3:d (3 players)
Hero checks, BB checks, BU checks.

Turn: ($3) 6:d (3 players)
Hero bets $2.20, BB calls $2.20, BU folds.

River: ($7.4) 3:s (2 players)
Hero bets $9.83, BB calls $9.83.

Final Pot: $27.06.

His fold vs. 3Bet = unknown.
I wanted to talk about this hand, if it is suited for 3Bet bluffing between these 2 positions [SBvBU].
I agree, that flatting makes no sense, because I can only play for set value with this weak hand.
So, I have 2 options left:
- 3betting;
- folding.

3betting probably against opponents who can fold is better.
(This time I had no such stats.)
What I was thinking - I have other hands, which also can be used for 3Bet bluffing.
For example: Axs, SC, suited gappers, which will have more equity on more flops than small PP's.
So, is it better to add Axs and remove small PP's or leave it as it is?

Folding pre-flop probably will be better with small PP's?
(I actually don't know where I heard about this concept to 3bet small PP's.
In my database I see it's proffitable to 3bet these, but the main reason why =
because opponents fold like 80%, so I 3bet all: small PP's, SC, Axs, suited gappers, Axo - sometimes).