Puma engined KA.
10-01-2014, 03:16 PM
#1
Puma engined KA.
my daily drive is dead so i need a new car.
Sportka's are pennies now and ive had one before but you have to nail them everywhere to get the best out of the handling. Not that i have a problem with that.....
I also used to have a KA with a RS1800 zetec in and that went really well.
So im thinking sticking a puma lump in the Sportka, perhaps heavy head mods, throttle bodies and a decent diff and it should be 170bhp of comedyness leaving 2 black lines everywhere should you so wish.
Anyone on here got experience of fitting the puma lump??
There used to be a company that did off the shelf engine mounts for the zetec SE engine for a KA called trackdesigns but they dont seem to be about any more.
Anyone know what needs to be done mounting wise or where i can get pre-made mounts??
Also any experts on the ka/fiesta mk3.5 front chassis legs and differences between that and mk4/puma chassis legs.
From what i can see the ka is based on fiesta 3.5 subframes for each wishbone with an extension from the chassis leg to mount the rear of the subframe. on the mk4/puma the subframe is joined in middle and the extenstion has been moved from chassis leg to subframe. So im thinking if thats the main difference but other than that the chassis legs are basically similar then how feasable would bolting up the puma subframe be with a few modifications with a grinder??
Using the puma subframe makes all the gearbox and drive shaft compatability issues go away plus its a better set up.
Sportka's are pennies now and ive had one before but you have to nail them everywhere to get the best out of the handling. Not that i have a problem with that.....
I also used to have a KA with a RS1800 zetec in and that went really well.
So im thinking sticking a puma lump in the Sportka, perhaps heavy head mods, throttle bodies and a decent diff and it should be 170bhp of comedyness leaving 2 black lines everywhere should you so wish.
Anyone on here got experience of fitting the puma lump??
There used to be a company that did off the shelf engine mounts for the zetec SE engine for a KA called trackdesigns but they dont seem to be about any more.
Anyone know what needs to be done mounting wise or where i can get pre-made mounts??
Also any experts on the ka/fiesta mk3.5 front chassis legs and differences between that and mk4/puma chassis legs.
From what i can see the ka is based on fiesta 3.5 subframes for each wishbone with an extension from the chassis leg to mount the rear of the subframe. on the mk4/puma the subframe is joined in middle and the extenstion has been moved from chassis leg to subframe. So im thinking if thats the main difference but other than that the chassis legs are basically similar then how feasable would bolting up the puma subframe be with a few modifications with a grinder??
Using the puma subframe makes all the gearbox and drive shaft compatability issues go away plus its a better set up.
10-01-2014, 03:50 PM
#3
I've found that life I needed.. It's HERE!!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: wakefield
Posts: 1,007
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes i did a 175bhp 1600 zetec se ka,
i used the ka box with the se bellhousing, needed a uprated rear mount as the power rocked the engine alot, i made the n/s mount from scratch to the original pickup points on the chassis leg.
id use the 1600, cheaper, more around nothing in there power wise really between the 1.6 and 1.7 and no vct hassle if going aftermarket
i used the ka box with the se bellhousing, needed a uprated rear mount as the power rocked the engine alot, i made the n/s mount from scratch to the original pickup points on the chassis leg.
id use the 1600, cheaper, more around nothing in there power wise really between the 1.6 and 1.7 and no vct hassle if going aftermarket
10-01-2014, 03:54 PM
#4
Advanced PassionFord User
Will you do a build thread this time? I remember you posting a pic of your last ka and the Speedo going off the clock haha,but sadly no pics of it being put together
10-01-2014, 04:03 PM
#5
Ben
10-01-2014, 04:05 PM
#6
PassionFord Post Whore!!
iTrader: (4)
my daily drive is dead so i need a new car.
Sportka's are pennies now and ive had one before but you have to nail them everywhere to get the best out of the handling. Not that i have a problem with that.....
I also used to have a KA with a RS1800 zetec in and that went really well.
So im thinking sticking a puma lump in the Sportka, perhaps heavy head mods, throttle bodies and a decent diff and it should be 170bhp of comedyness leaving 2 black lines everywhere should you so wish.
Anyone on here got experience of fitting the puma lump??
There used to be a company that did off the shelf engine mounts for the zetec SE engine for a KA called trackdesigns but they dont seem to be about any more.
Anyone know what needs to be done mounting wise or where i can get pre-made mounts??
Also any experts on the ka/fiesta mk3.5 front chassis legs and differences between that and mk4/puma chassis legs.
From what i can see the ka is based on fiesta 3.5 subframes for each wishbone with an extension from the chassis leg to mount the rear of the subframe. on the mk4/puma the subframe is joined in middle and the extenstion has been moved from chassis leg to subframe. So im thinking if thats the main difference but other than that the chassis legs are basically similar then how feasable would bolting up the puma subframe be with a few modifications with a grinder??
Using the puma subframe makes all the gearbox and drive shaft compatability issues go away plus its a better set up.
Sportka's are pennies now and ive had one before but you have to nail them everywhere to get the best out of the handling. Not that i have a problem with that.....
I also used to have a KA with a RS1800 zetec in and that went really well.
So im thinking sticking a puma lump in the Sportka, perhaps heavy head mods, throttle bodies and a decent diff and it should be 170bhp of comedyness leaving 2 black lines everywhere should you so wish.
Anyone on here got experience of fitting the puma lump??
There used to be a company that did off the shelf engine mounts for the zetec SE engine for a KA called trackdesigns but they dont seem to be about any more.
Anyone know what needs to be done mounting wise or where i can get pre-made mounts??
Also any experts on the ka/fiesta mk3.5 front chassis legs and differences between that and mk4/puma chassis legs.
From what i can see the ka is based on fiesta 3.5 subframes for each wishbone with an extension from the chassis leg to mount the rear of the subframe. on the mk4/puma the subframe is joined in middle and the extenstion has been moved from chassis leg to subframe. So im thinking if thats the main difference but other than that the chassis legs are basically similar then how feasable would bolting up the puma subframe be with a few modifications with a grinder??
Using the puma subframe makes all the gearbox and drive shaft compatability issues go away plus its a better set up.
10-01-2014, 04:17 PM
#7
unfortunately not as there was a complete change of subframes at the front end between fez 3.5/ka and mk4/puma shells.
I want to avoid fucking about with the boxes too much if i can avoid it. - hence the subframe idea.
Ive had a 1.7 on throttle bodies with VCT before no problem. I dont see VCT as a disadvantage really as long as you dont have a poverty spec ECU controlling it!! Plus the engines are cheap enough in either 1.6 or 1.7 guise.
4 up too
Ran out of "private runway" so i reckon it might of got 140.
that would be no fun.
i used the ka box with the se bellhousing, needed a uprated rear mount as the power rocked the engine alot, i made the n/s mount from scratch to the original pickup points on the chassis leg.
id use the 1600, cheaper, more around nothing in there power wise really between the 1.6 and 1.7 and no vct hassle if going aftermarket
id use the 1600, cheaper, more around nothing in there power wise really between the 1.6 and 1.7 and no vct hassle if going aftermarket
Ive had a 1.7 on throttle bodies with VCT before no problem. I dont see VCT as a disadvantage really as long as you dont have a poverty spec ECU controlling it!! Plus the engines are cheap enough in either 1.6 or 1.7 guise.
4 up too
Ran out of "private runway" so i reckon it might of got 140.
that would be no fun.
Trending Topics
bet it was fun thou
11-01-2014, 02:08 PM
#18
Wahay!! I've lost my Virginity!!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Chelmsford, Essex
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't help you with anything you have asked for Warren, it's a shame your Shogun is dead 
.
Look forward to following progress with this.
.Look forward to following progress with this.
11-01-2014, 10:01 PM
#20
Kyle the aim is to use puma box and subframe the lot. Requires a bit of chassis leg modding to bolt up but from the basic measurements in the scrappy, it should all fit up ok. The key bolt distances for the rear of the subframe are strangely the same lol. good old fords. main difference is the subframe had a mount cradle on the bottom of chassis leg on mk3.5/ka shell, where as later cars they ditched it, put a captive nut in and the extension became part of the subframe instead.
12-01-2014, 08:53 AM
#22
Ben
13-01-2014, 12:36 PM
#29
Advanced PassionFord User
Ah I see, will that be a first then or is that the norm to swap subframe and box?
Ł750 is that all??? They appear cheaper than a basic ka. I guess that's due to higher running costs.
Ł750 is that all??? They appear cheaper than a basic ka. I guess that's due to higher running costs.
13-01-2014, 01:06 PM
#30
most people use the KA gearbox casing to make the gearbox mounts standard KA. However, i'd rather use puma mounts and box and hubs etc as it makes everything simple like puma drive shafts etc throughout rather than bodging things. Mixing and matching just makes it more complicated.
15-01-2014, 11:51 AM
#31
The only useful info I can add is that you might need to chop the slam panel as the cam pulleys would foul otherwise. I know that's right for the standard Ka, and presume it's the same for the SportKa.
I've seen that Ka in the flesh, bought my roll cage and exhaust off him
very tidy conversion.
I've seen that Ka in the flesh, bought my roll cage and exhaust off him
very tidy conversion.
15-01-2014, 03:20 PM
#35
I've found that life I needed.. It's HERE!!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: wakefield
Posts: 1,007
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
most people use the KA gearbox casing to make the gearbox mounts standard KA. However, i'd rather use puma mounts and box and hubs etc as it makes everything simple like puma drive shafts etc throughout rather than bodging things. Mixing and matching just makes it more complicated.
what ecu are you going to use?
15-01-2014, 06:41 PM
#36
Using puma hubs. Shocks fit fine plenty of KA ford racing suspension kits fitted to pumas.
I might even be able to keep the ka subframe and modify the lower arm holders to take the puma arms with a bit of welding. All the measurements like distance between lower arm on each side (bolt points) are funnily enough the same. So even the geometry basics are scarily similar. The sportka already has a lower cross brace between the lower arms and if converted to later arms, can fit a lower strut brace.
Im modifying the puma engine going in it to be on throttle bodies so likely to be aftermarket management although not decided who's yet.
I might even be able to keep the ka subframe and modify the lower arm holders to take the puma arms with a bit of welding. All the measurements like distance between lower arm on each side (bolt points) are funnily enough the same. So even the geometry basics are scarily similar. The sportka already has a lower cross brace between the lower arms and if converted to later arms, can fit a lower strut brace.
Im modifying the puma engine going in it to be on throttle bodies so likely to be aftermarket management although not decided who's yet.
17-01-2014, 05:19 PM
#37
Got to say, and not being rude there is some false information on this thread..
Puma shafts do fit Ka hubs, but are the wrong length.
It's much easier to bolt a Ka box with puma bell housing to the puma engine. I would imagine that the subframe would be quite challenging to fit to a Ka. The Ka is based on a mk3/3.5 fiesta.
It's a relatively easy conversion although not done it myself. But I have done the fiesta turbo conversion and after that put the FRS engine in one.
Puma shafts do fit Ka hubs, but are the wrong length.
It's much easier to bolt a Ka box with puma bell housing to the puma engine. I would imagine that the subframe would be quite challenging to fit to a Ka. The Ka is based on a mk3/3.5 fiesta.
It's a relatively easy conversion although not done it myself. But I have done the fiesta turbo conversion and after that put the FRS engine in one.
17-01-2014, 08:49 PM
#38
I dont intend to use ka hubs or wishbones so cv size and driveshaft length is irrelevant.... thats why i want it all puma upfront. less complications to maintain.
The mk3 fiesta floorpan is significantly different to mk3.5 Mk3.5 is basically the development mk4 floorpan. Aft of the engine bulkhead, the floorpan is virtually identical to mk4 fiesta upto turret hieght. Even the seat mounts fit etc. The front chassis legs are modified from mk3's and an interim for the older engine packages of the mk3/3.5 compared to the mk4.
The front subframe bolt centres are the same in many key places as are wishbone pivot dimensions and ARB locations
The mk3 fiesta floorpan is significantly different to mk3.5 Mk3.5 is basically the development mk4 floorpan. Aft of the engine bulkhead, the floorpan is virtually identical to mk4 fiesta upto turret hieght. Even the seat mounts fit etc. The front chassis legs are modified from mk3's and an interim for the older engine packages of the mk3/3.5 compared to the mk4.
The front subframe bolt centres are the same in many key places as are wishbone pivot dimensions and ARB locations
18-01-2014, 08:49 PM
#39
Fair enough.. Looks pretty different to me, but maybe I'm wrong. When I came to the puma I found a fair number of differences that held me up.
Engine bay is different - chassis legs etc.
So do you plan to have a wider track at the front? I'm just confused with why the driveshaft length doesn't matter? Puma hubs make up the difference?
Engine bay is different - chassis legs etc.
So do you plan to have a wider track at the front? I'm just confused with why the driveshaft length doesn't matter? Puma hubs make up the difference?
18-01-2014, 09:05 PM
#40
As said the chassis legs are more mk3 than mk4, primarily the front mount for the subframe is on a weld on drop mount on the mk3/ka. on later mk4 they ditched it, and put a raiser on the subframe instead.
Theres other differences, eg on ka, rack is mounted to bulkhead, puma its on the subframe. Not a problem, can be left where it is. also lower gearbox mount is on chassis on KA, but on subframe on puma. The puma and ka lower mounts are different anyway. Conveniently the sportka has a lower cross brace in a close enough location to mount the gearbox mount if i cant fit the puma subframe.
driveshaft length doesnt matter if im using componants all from one car as they will match up.
Theres other differences, eg on ka, rack is mounted to bulkhead, puma its on the subframe. Not a problem, can be left where it is. also lower gearbox mount is on chassis on KA, but on subframe on puma. The puma and ka lower mounts are different anyway. Conveniently the sportka has a lower cross brace in a close enough location to mount the gearbox mount if i cant fit the puma subframe.
driveshaft length doesnt matter if im using componants all from one car as they will match up.