I have just taken delivery of a ford Puma 1.7 Zetec SE engine (approx 90k miles with recent cam belt change) and yesterday started removing all of the unnecessary parts ready for my Anglia installation.

I have found a few worrying signs/observations that hopefully the geniuses that are on this forum can either put my mind to rest or scare me witless ? (I have seen a video of the engine running OK before purchase so assumed (possibly stupidly) it was a good'en)

Observation - when removing the inlet manifold I found the inside to be a golden brown and the inlet ports were very black, I also notices that the inlet manifold gasket was cracked and the rubber rings were badly distorted (see pictures below) and finally there was a lot of oil in the centre gallery on the inlet. The inlet side of the engine was generally more oily than the other.

My diagnosis - the inlet manifold gasket had been over tightened, combined with a leaky rocker cover gasket on the inlet side has lead to what I am seeing. So, replace the rocker cover gasket and I am using TBs so it should be OK (optimistically)

Any thoughts/comments etc. would be gratefully received. Many thanks in advance.

Inlet with oil



Inlet Manifold Gasket - interesting !!!



For those interested I am planning to use Triumph 955i RS Sprint throttle bodies - here are a couple of pics of a trial fit (just placed in the correct position) and the port alignment - this is two sets of Triple TBs with one TB remove from one set and added onto the other (took two minutes literally), they are spaced as on the bike which as you can see is pretty close and there is room to squeeze then up by about 2mm which brings then right in line. It will just need a flat plate adaptor to make the bolts fit.






For more pictures have a look at anglia1968.weebly.com or www.flickr.com/photos/uggspics1/sets/72157643119387854/

The inlets on fords are often carbened up due to breathing its own oil vapour and exhaust gasses for emissions purposes.

And yep that inlet gasket is buggered. If the ecu thought it was running lean it would dump extra fuel in adding to the problem.

[Edited on 5/5/14 by big_wasa]

Cheers, starts to put my mind at rest, just need to give it a good clean, change the rocker gasket and see how she goes (bit more involved than that and need to sort out a few bits on the car but heading in the right direction). Also did not help that the engine was shipped with all of the fluids still in it including engine and gearbox oil and water as well !!!!

i would say its more likley to have been on its side at some point and oil run into the inlet

anyway good luck with what your planning!

Thanks, thats definitely a possibility given that it was shipped full of fluids.

i track day one and yes thats a common problem and they are not cheap to replace i now use a good sealant to be sure its sealed dont forget if you are using the std ECU it needs to teach its self the car set up you can find the propper way to do it on puma people

Rick, thanks for the info but will probably not use it in the future, not sure on the ecu yet.

I have a "dive" ecu, key, lock and transponder with wiring loom so can go that way but will need to make up a plenum to attach the maf sensor to if using my tbs, I've contacted pumaspeed about their ecu mod as an option.

Alternatively I can go emerald, omex or canems whickh will cost more but may be easier and neater in the long run.

Decisions? need to get it cleaned, mechanically sorted (will need mounts and a modded sump) before I think about electrickery.

What spec engine are you running and what do you think of it as engines go? Next job on the list is a bellhousing for a type 9, are you running this and if so which one did you use and what clutch with it, also did you go cable or hydraulic?

Cheers

[Edited on 5/5/14 by Ugg10]

i have run it almost std and its a great engine realy likes to be reved hard but later when i get the kitcar done im going to lighten the flywheel
get the cams ground to a race spec
make up a set of throttle bodes and will use a mega ecu

im sure the kit will be a faster car but i like a roof when its cold and raining




[Edited on 5/5/14 by rick1962uk]

Sounds like a plan.

The triumph tb's look like a really good fit and can be attached with a simple flat plate, i'll be getting one made up soon. Only problem is having to buy two sets as they are from a three cylinder engine. Both sets cost me £75 incl p&p from ebay so not too bad plus will need no engineering to get them to fit. For info vauxhall v6 injectors work if you don't use the puma ones (which I am). Measurements of the tbs are on my blog in the imahes section if you need them.

Not sure what to do with the exhaust yet, in the anglia I can run full tubular or I can get a down pipe and rear box made up which is easier fornow, no cat for me :-)

Cheers

Have you sorted the crank and the spigot bearing issue?

If your going for bodies I would junk the vct fit a set of shawspeed ss4 cams with uprated valve springs and rod bolts from shawspeed and it will do 170bhp or there abouts at 8k all day long

Feel free to drop me a pm I've built a fair few sigma engines from standard to my 340bhp one

Cheers, may do, the spiggot bearing is on my to do list, probably getting the gearbox input shaft ground down, need to do a quick measure up but I think 1mm is to thin for a phosy bronsze bearing. (17mm socket, 15mm shaft if I an correct as standard).

Had a chat to canems and they can run the ecu in either vtec on/off mode or full pcm control for the vvc, the latter will take more dyno time to set up though I guess unless I can find the ford profile and copy as a starter.

Must admit I am not after big bhp, 140hp would be plenty in the anglia which is limited by brake size and tyre size so do not want to go too mad.

Well I would run th stock ecu then and a set of ss4 cams, you can still get it mapped but retain the proper vct workings that will see your 140bhp target no problem

How difficult is it to get running on the stock ecu, I think I have a full engine loom with ecu/key/transponder? Is there an idiots guide to wiring this into a kit type car anywhere (the anglia currently has no wiring so going to get a kit car loom to fit in it)?

I'm running the 1.7 in my kit with the stock Ford ECU and you really don't need much to get it going. Strip a loom from a donor car, plug in all the sensors, fit the PATS immobiliser and jury rig an ignition key.

wiring

There's a video of me starting my engine on a pallet using this simple setup (including a coffee jar as a fuel tank) here: <YouTube link>

I'd advise getting hold of the Ford TIS DVD as well if you can. Lots of useful wiring info on there.

Ed.

Gaskets look identical to the ones I removed from my 72k engine, must be an inherent design fault....also, the thermostat housing is plastic, and the rubber seals seem to do the same thing....so worth replacing.

Jenko, will do.

Whilst I am on - what's the usual fix for the crank breather - route it to a catch tank, put a plate over it, leave it to dangle ?

[Edited on 6/5/14 by Ugg10]

I have a catch tank with two inlets, one from the crank breather, the other from the cam cover. Should be said, I've not tried and tested it, but this should work fine.

Thanks, something like this - Universal Oil Breather Catch Tank 2 litre 11/15mm fittings (UK)

Thre are cheaper single inlet - can I "Y" the two breather together on one of these ?

Yep, thats the one.......Not sure about the y piece idea unless the single out put has increased diameter over the two inlets to ensure the correct amount of breathing.

the engines dont breath heavy at all, not in my experience, i would get a temporary catch tank rigged up but i bet you could run back into the inlet like stock

my n/a motors and the turbo engine i run no never push any oil out at all into the catch tank i have

Thanks both, will bear that in mind, I have a few other jobs to do (brakes, clean up and paint bits etc.) but think I may try and get it running out of the car on the Ford ECU to see how it goes. Do you know if it will at least idle with no flow through the MAF (otherwise I will have to make up quick plenum to attach this to) or gearbox sensors ? Will also have to work out how to attach the Ford TPS to the bike TBs, should not be too difficuly hopefully (or check impedance at closed and open to see if they are compatible).

quote:

---

Originally posted by beaver34
the engines dont breath heavy at all, not in my experience, i would get a temporary catch tank rigged up but i bet you could run back into the inlet like stock

my n/a motors and the turbo engine i run no never push any oil out at all into the catch tank i have

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jenko

quote:

---

Originally posted by beaver34
the engines dont breath heavy at all, not in my experience, i would get a temporary catch tank rigged up but i bet you could run back into the inlet like stock

my n/a motors and the turbo engine i run no never push any oil out at all into the catch tank i have

---

Good to know....as mentioned, mines not tried or tested as yet. I'm just parinoid as my previous car had a CVH, and that was a heavy breather!.

---

Rather than open up a new thread I have another related questions -

Using the Type 9 with the sigma needs one of the following (assuming I get the end of the input shaft reduced to 12mm and use an RWD motorsport small spigot bearing) -

1) The splined re-manufactured to match the sigma 17 spine/20mm diam clutch hub and then use the Puma Standard clutch
2) Use a friction plate that fits with the Puma pressure case (2.0l Sierra is 215mm which is the correct diam and hub)
3) Use a frinction plate and pressure case from a 23 spline 1" hub clutch - may need the fixings re-drilled in to the flywheel

So, I guess No1 is the ideal but a PIA and could be costly.

Here's where the questions start -

For No2 has anyone used the Sierra friction plate with the Puma pressure case and does this work with the sierra relase bearing and cable clutch fork ?

For No3 does anyone know whether the pressure case for the Sierra has the same fixings to the flywheel as the Puma standard one.

Finally, can you let me know what clutch you are using if you have a Sigma/Type 9 set up and I can then work out where to go from there.

Many thanks for the help so far, much appreciated.

i would machine the crank to suit the normal spigot bearing

you use a type 9 clutch friction plate with the standard puma cover

also dont it may be a sigma but its not the same as the 1.25 1.4 and 1.6 as they are need to mods to the crank to fit the stock spigot bearing

also for the engine bits, bellhousing, and the clutch bits jon@shawspeed.com is your man drop me a email, tell him al sent you

Beaver - cheers for that, agreed the 1.7 is a stange beast and different to all other Ford engines in the spigot bearing department ???? any reason for machinging the crank end rather than the gearbox shaft ? Is it easier i.e. can be done in situ or is there a structureal/strength issues as I have read of both being done.

Sent Shawspeed an email a couple of weeks ago with no reply, guess I will have to find time to call them but will also send and email to the address above as I just used their general one.

Do you know what the differences are between the Shawspeed, Tiger Racing and RWD Motorsport bell housings - weights, size etc. ?


]

[Edited on 7/5/14 by Ugg10]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ugg10
Beaver - cheers for that, agreed the 1.7 is a stange beast and different to all other Ford engines in the spigot bearing department ???? any reason for machinging the crank end rather than the gearbox shaft ? Is it easier i.e. can be done in situ or is there a structureal/strength issues as I have read of both being done.

Sent Shawspeed an email a couple of weeks ago with no reply, guess I will have to find time to call them but will also send and email to the address above as I just used their general one.

Do you know what the differences are between the Shawspeed, Tiger Racing and RWD Motorsport bell housings - weights, size etc. ?


]

[Edited on 7/5/14 by Ugg10]

---

Cheers, thanks again for the useful info,

I'll give a couple of machine shops a call and see what their views are on ease/cost, do you know whether the crank bore can be done in situ (i.e. lock the flywheel and bolt the whole engine to a mill ?) or do I need to take the crank out, I guess the same goes for grinding the gearbox shaft ? 21mm is the size I assume.

I'll drop Jon another email at his jon@ address when I get home tonight.

Looking at the bellhousings the Tiger seems the chunkiest, the RWD one looks the most tapered/smallest but needs a plate fitting underneath (may be useful for inspections) and I can't find a picture of the Shawspeed one at the moment as I have an old version of IE on this machine and the SS website doesn't load well. The Westie and Caterham ones seem to be top money for the same. Will keep digging for info.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ugg10
Cheers, thanks again for the useful info,

I'll give a couple of machine shops a call and see what their views are on ease/cost, do you know whether the crank bore can be done in situ (i.e. lock the flywheel and bolt the whole engine to a mill ?) or do I need to take the crank out, I guess the same goes for grinding the gearbox shaft ? 21mm is the size I assume.

I'll drop Jon another email at his jon@ address when I get home tonight.

Looking at the bellhousings the Tiger seems the chunkiest, the RWD one looks the most tapered/smallest but needs a plate fitting underneath (may be useful for inspections) and I can't find a picture of the Shawspeed one at the moment as I have an old version of IE on this machine and the SS website doesn't load well. The Westie and Caterham ones seem to be top money for the same. Will keep digging for info.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beaver34

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ugg10
although i suppect he may tell you to junk the 1.7 for a 1.6 as there less hassle and cheaper

---

Thanks for that !!!

Don't suppose you can do a "simple" 1.6 head swap so you get a 1.7 capacity/higher compression ratio non vvc engine that would be too easy ?

I'll think I will try and get it running on the standard ECU but with TBs and a "plenum" for the MAF (will not be pretty but will be air tight, probably made from some plumbing parts ) and then go from there, nothing an expensive ECU and a lot of rolling road time will not fix I am sure !!!

I'll post up some pictures of the differnt bell housings if I get time tonight for reference.

[Edited on 7/5/14 by Ugg10]

---

owelly - 7/5/14 at 04:22 PM

I drilled out the end of an Alfa crankshaft to accept a standard spigot bearing by using a mag-mounted drill (Motabroach) and stuck it on the flat face of the flywheel. I did it with the engine hanging from an engine crane. I used a tapered centre to locate the drill then took out the centre and replaced it with the correct sized drill bit. It worked a treat.

---

Ugg10 - 7/5/14 at 05:51 PM

Cheers owelly, that gives me something to benchmark any quotes I get - Magdrill hire seems to be about £50 per day + bit hire.

---

beaver34 - 7/5/14 at 05:54 PM

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ugg10

quote:

---

Originally posted by beaver34

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ugg10
although i suppect he may tell you to junk the 1.7 for a 1.6 as there less hassle and cheaper

---

Thanks for that !!!

Don't suppose you can do a "simple" 1.6 head swap so you get a 1.7 capacity/higher compression ratio non vvc engine that would be too easy ?

I'll think I will try and get it running on the standard ECU but with TBs and a "plenum" for the MAF (will not be pretty but will be air tight, probably made from some plumbing parts ) and then go from there, nothing an expensive ECU and a lot of rolling road time will not fix I am sure !!!

I'll post up some pictures of the differnt bell housings if I get time tonight for reference.

[Edited on 7/5/14 by Ugg10]

---

nope head oil gallery's dont line up, re the crank is forged and very strong so its not a easy job

i would run the stock inlet dont bother with the tb's it dont see it working on the oem ecu with them, unless the tps signal will be the same

---

Ugg10 - 7/5/14 at 06:12 PM

Ok, thought that would be too good to be true.

I am planning on measuring the impedence of the bike throttlebody tps and the ford one. If they are different I an sure it will be possible to swap them over with a bet of planning and a Bracket. I will report back when I have done it.

---

beaver34 - 7/5/14 at 06:57 PM

Wish you all the best

Keep us informed

---

Ugg10 - 7/5/14 at 08:11 PM

OK, so I have just popped out to the garage an measured the impedance of the TPS on the bike throttle bodies and puma inlet. And it looks like I have a result !

The scores on the doors are -

Puma TPS throttle closed (in k ohms)

Pins 1-2 > 3.47
Pins 1-3 > 3.91
Pins 2-3 > 0.82

Puma TPS throttle fully open (in k ohms)

Pins 1-2 > 0.28
Pins 1-3 > 3.92
Pins 2-3 > 3.81

Bike TBs TPS throttle closed (in k ohms)

Pins 1-2 > 3.47
Pins 1-3 > 3.85
Pins 2-3 > 0.54

Bike TBs TPS throttle fully open (in k ohms)

Pins 1-2 > 0.51
Pins 1-3 > 3.84
Pins 2-3 > 3.56

So, they look pretty close to me at both fully open and fully closed so when I get round to wiring it up I will splice the TB connector in to the loom so I can use both.

One small step ........

---

beaver34 - 7/5/14 at 08:44 PM

I'm no expert but fairly close but not the same will they not end up in different results?

Or is close enough good enough not to affect the mapping

---

Ugg10 - 7/5/14 at 09:34 PM

I would have thought that the ecu should learn where the end stops are otherwise it could not take into account any assembly/manufacture tollerances. On the emerald/megajolt I have had on a previou car setting the end stops was part of the set up. Will have to look into how the ecu does the learning, if it is running closed loop (likely from just above tick over) then it should not matter anyway as for each load site it just tries to get back to target afr by altering the injector duration.

Thats the theiry anyway????

P.S. Sent shawspeed another email quoting your name as suggested.


[Edited on 7/5/14 by Ugg10]

---

Jenko - 8/5/14 at 10:02 AM

I agree with Beaver......Close is not really good enough.....the TPS needs calibrating to the ECU, this is usually done by setting it at closed and wide open throttle. The ECU learns it, but you need to tell it to (probably not possible with standard ECU).
You won't know where the tick over point is set to. The cell in the ignition and fuel table will be different. In fact, I think having TB's on a standard ECU is going to cause some headaches. The map sensor will not read as is should. Sorry to be a bit negative....but I would really do what I could to go for an after merket ECU.

[Edited on 8/5/14 by Jenko]

---

Ugg10 - 8/5/14 at 03:38 PM

Cheers Jenko.

Just a couple of point that hoopefully you can calarify, I thought the engine did not have a MAP sensor as it worked out load by the MAF and the TPS ? Am I correct ? How does the Standard ECU take into account a change of TPS in the event of a failure where it may not be in exactly the same place as the original ?

I have had quotes for a 3rd party ECU that can run either VTEC type on/off VVC or full PDM VVC and does not break the bank, this will also be easier to plumb in to a new loom that I need to sort out. This was my original plan but the comments about being able to run the standard ECU with TBs so longs as the MAF is connected got me going down that route. The 3rd party ECU is a route I am possibly happier to go down as I have installed an Emerald and a Megajolt in my Fury in the past, but I will have to make quite a few decisions in the electrics departmet so I can specify the loom/instruments/lights/switched etc. in one go.

Thanks for all of the comments everyone, very helpful and sorry for all of the numpty questions.

---

Jenko - 8/5/14 at 04:28 PM

Im trying my hardest to think back to when I removed the engine from my Puma. In fact, you have a pic of your engine on a pallet on your website, and sat on the top looks something suspiciously like a map sensor. A fair few manufactures use tps and MAP, and blend them depending on throttle load and revs. When using ITB's the 'norm' is to use TPS although MAP still can be used. The GSXR 750 TB's I am using came with both TPS and MAP sensor.

With regard to the VCT function, there is plenty of mixed views, and thats good, but at the end of the day, I'm yet to see evidence that the VCT off / on technique with a 'correctly' mapped engine does not work well. The likes of omex can turn the system on and off again at higher rpm, and this I have heard works well........Again, I've heard, not seen. The good news is....in a few weeks time you should have a true comparisson, as I'm planning to get my car on the rollers using Omex 600, and ITB's with TPS only (bog standard engine), I will of course publish the results good or bad, we should then get a much better idea if this system does work. May be worth hanging on and letting me go throught the expense of trying it :-) could turn out to be a crock of course!.

---

Ugg10 - 8/5/14 at 07:09 PM

Jenko, most excellent, many thanks, nothing like real and relevant experience. Looking forward to seeing how it turns out.

Thanks for the map info and I bow to your superior knowledge, there is a map sensor as well as a tps and maf, a few years ago you would have had to use a cray to combine all of those sensors.

I think I need to clear an evening to read through your blog!

P.S. Got a decent quote for a local company to bore the crank spigot cavity, decision made on that one.

[Edited on 8/5/14 by Ugg10]

---

johnH20 - 9/5/14 at 08:46 PM

I think you will have a problem finding a MAP sensor on a Puma engine. I have 3 and have not found one yet. I plan to add one for use with throttle bodies some time in the future. In the meantime I am using the standard ECU as worked out by Madinventions, Blackfingernail and others on here. Well done chaps!

---