I spent £££££s and even more hours on blueprinting some A series Mini engines, much of it done with Clive Trickey's input; largely to extract as much a possible out of the lumps for autocross racing.......... .........in my opinion, it wasn't worth it........... .......the best results came from a 1600 Ford / BDA engine machined to fit the straight cut gearbox from a 1275 Cooper S.........it had 4 Amal Concentric carbs facing forwards, so in effect they acted like ram air......... .........trouble is, on a muddy track, the carbs soon got filled with crap..........unless the car was out in front.
" the car that's out in front" sounds like one from Murry Walkers collection... I think I might take Glens advice and get a S4rs lump for her.. But then again.......
Most of what is described in this thread is not Blueprinting Skimmed heads, shaved cranks different cams, high compression pistons etc are performance tuning Engine blueprinting means specifically to create an engine that reflects the design intent through the removal of manufacturing tolerances insofar as that is possible such that the engine literally reflects the actual blueprint created by the original engineers who designed the engine. Many confuse blueprinting with high-performance engine building or tuning, these are in fact different goals. Few have the capability to actually blueprint; a lot of firms will claim they have performed the work, and these days most have come to believe blueprinting only means that all the specifications are double-checked. Doing the job properly requires serious efforts at blueprinting and results in better-than-factory tolerances, almost to the point of re-manufacturing to achieve the rated power for its manufacturer's design, not all mass-production engines put out the rated power, you could sample engines from the same line and all would be slightly different but will be within a specified acceptable tolerance, if we are only talking about power them this can easily be + or - 10 bhp Blueprinted components allow for a more exact balancing of reciprocating parts and rotating assemblies so that less power is lost through excessive engine vibrations and other mechanical inefficiencies.
Kato, that is almost precisely the explanation of the process given me by Rich Lewellyn. In fact he specifically warned me away from high performance after-markets internal which would be wildly expensive and could do more harm than good (despite the fact he could happily have supplied me with set of hot cams at £800 a stick, high comp pistons, lightened rods etc which would have more than doubled the cost). He said that proper blue-printing was one of the most cost effective improvements that could be made to an engine, particularly a Ducati Testastretta engine which are strong units by design but built to slack tolerances with considerable room for improvement. He regarded it as a base procedure on which all other enhancements are built, not a last ditch grab for a few more hp. And with that in mind he said the best approach was not to wait for an engine to wear but to blue-print it while it was still sound and had not been subjected to unknown (and unmeasurable) stress and fatigue. The work I had done produced gains of 22 bhp and 12 lb/ft of torque. It is smoother, more tractable, much punchier, easier to ride and mechanically quieter. Crucially, its now a more satisfying and exciting road bike to ride. For the record, all my internals are stock. The crank and rods were sent for balancing. The gearbox was shimmed. The heads were ported but were almost perfect anyway and needed the minimum in the way of reshaping. The additional measures they took to deliver the punch and midrange for road riding I had asked for were to lighten the flywheel by 30%, skim the heads by .5 mm and advance the inlet timing by 6 degrees. (It ought to go without saying that servicing, particularly with regard to valve clearances, is now critical. DIY that'll-do servicing or a half-trained baboon with a near-enough shim is out of the question which is precisely why manufactures try to idiot-proof engines by building in a certain amount of slack to start with. By taking that out an owner is committing to maintaining high level servicing. It doesn't cost any more or shorten the intervals, it just needs to be done right by someone competent. I'm prepared for that. I've got a user-friendly KTM to parctice my DIY on..) I trusted the opinions of the team who did it, who do it for a living and who have done hundreds of them. They've delivered the goods and it works. Can't say more than that.
If you were right , which you arent , I Dont know why they bothered making cnc lathe / milling machines . Computer Numerical Control machines make thousands of parts all exactly the same . Maybey the ducati you had to bits and measured was of the older variety where blue printing was a gain.
I'm not disagreeing with you, things are a lot better now than they used to be, however CNC is not perfect even they work to acceptable tolerance. If everything were as prefect as your rose tinted specs are letting you see, we would not need shims or to micro polish to allow smoother operation or to balance components or remove obtrusive casting debris or to gap rings etc etc etc etc the list just goes on and on If you had understood the post you would also have read that gain is not the primary target.
I can remember thinking back to my 7 years as a MV technician, mind you that was a long time ago ( Romans roamed the earth then) all the cars with the highly tuned road engines, for example Burton scholar and holbay etc, they had very small tolerances on just about everthing, obviously materials and techniques are a great deal improved now, however, those engines were not very reliable, having said that though the owners were the type of people who could afford almost constant rebuilds.. But you only needed a slight overheating issue or similar and the tight tolerances meant you were very lucky if you got away with it .. Also the racing engines back then ( I used to work on a top british speedway and grass track stars bikes ) after every meeting they would be stripped and rebuilt at great cost even back then.. As I say, things are way better now, whilst it's still the same principles.. Regardless of if your looking for more power, efficiency, or just a smoother more balanced engine, when the tolerances come down there is less room for things like overheating or a slight lack of oil etc before a failure.. Guess that's partially why racing is so expensive in all it's forms. However, a really well built engine should be fine if it's well maintained and not constantly at full throttle.. After all racehorses are not always flat out, also very expensive to look after, injury prone etc.. Overall I guess as with most things in life there are pros and cons, which is why life can be so much fun.. However, whilst family cars may have sloppy tolerances it's sometimes better to have those for the average Joe.. For longevity etc.. You would be amazed at some of the things we would find on brand new cars that were straight from the factory. When carrying out the Pdi the loose bolts etc were scary.. Thankfully all things have been tightened up nowadays, eg quality control.. So in theory anyway we can push everything just that little bit further... Great read this thread though ...
you can argue about blue printing all you want but their is no need at all on a road bike your excuse of an answer is utter bollox. Shims are in all engines even blue printed ones
and hasn't the OP been polishing the crank like its going out of fashion and talking of knife edging and the like.......are we blue printing on this thread or modifying? Another helpful post brought to you by me...
I can remember thinking back to my 7 years as a MV technician, mind you that was a long time ago ( Romans roamed the earth then) all the cars with the highly tuned road engines, for example Burton scholar and holbay etc, they had very small tolerances on just about everthing, obviously materials and techniques are a great deal improved now, however, those engines were not very reliable, having said that though the owners were the type of people who could afford almost constant rebuilds.. But you only needed a slight overheating issue or similar and the tight tolerances meant you were very lucky if you got away with it .. Also the racing engines back then ( I used to work on a top british speedway and grass track stars bikes ) after every meeting they would be stripped and rebuilt at great cost even back then.. As I say, things are way better now, whilst it's still the same principles.. Regardless of if your looking for more power, efficiency, or just a smoother more balanced engine, when the tolerances come down there is less room for things like overheating or a slight lack of oil etc before a failure.. Guess that's partially why racing is so expensive in all it's forms. However, a really well built engine should be fine if it's well maintained and not constantly at full throttle.. After all racehorses are not always flat out, also very expensive to look after, injury prone etc.. Overall I guess as with most things in life there's pros and cons, which is why life can be so much fun.. However, whilst family cars may have sloppy tolerances it's sometimes better to have those for the average Joe.. For longevity etc.. You would be amazed at some of the things we would find on brand new cars that were straight from the factory. When carrying out the Pdi the loose bolts etc were scary.. Thankfully all things have been tightened up nowadays, eg quality control.. So in theory anyway we can push everything just that little bit further... Great read this thread though ... Me....., I'm greedy.... I'm having both, modifying and blueprinting... Sorry to disappoint ..... X
Firstly I've not argued either way, secondly I was not aware I was making excuses and third you are sadly not blessed with enough intelligence to understand what you are reading, fair enough have it your way, I'll not post on the subject again
I can remember thinking back to my 7 years as a MV technician, mind you that was a long time ago ( Romans roamed the earth then) all the cars with the highly tuned road engines, for example Burton scholar and holbay etc, they had very small tolerances on just about everthing, obviously materials and techniques are a great deal improved now, however, those engines were not very reliable, having said that though the owners were the type of people who could afford almost constant rebuilds.. But you only needed a slight overheating issue or similar and the tight tolerances meant you were very lucky if you got away with it .. Also the racing engines back then ( I used to work on a top british speedway and grass track stars bikes ) after every meeting they would be stripped and rebuilt at great cost even back then.. As I say, things are way better now, whilst it's still the same principles.. Regardless of if your looking for more power, efficiency, or just a smoother more balanced engine, when the tolerances come down there is less room for things like overheating or a slight lack of oil etc before a failure.. Guess that's partially why racing is so expensive in all it's forms. However, a really well built engine should be fine if it's well maintained and not constantly at full throttle.. After all racehorses are not always flat out, also very expensive to look after, injury prone etc.. Overall I guess as with most things in life there's pros and cons, which is why life can be so much fun.. However, whilst family cars may have sloppy tolerances it's sometimes better to have those for the average Joe.. For longevity etc.. You would be amazed at some of the things we would find on brand new cars that were straight from the factory. When carrying out the Pdi the loose bolts etc were scary.. Thankfully all things have been tightened up nowadays, eg quality control.. So in theory anyway we can push everything just that little bit further... Great read this thread though ... Me....., I'm greedy.... I'm having both, modifying and blueprinting... X
Nods, Both Kato and Gimlet are pretty much spot on. People do confuse performance tuning and blue printing. @ducati2242, Manufacturing tolerances are designed to make production cheaper for the business, so as long as the thing works for the duration of its lifespan and more than the tolerance can drift a little. Yes you have wonderful cnc machines, but for every micron on tolerance you put on to a part the cost goes up exponentially. It’s not that manufactures can’t do it, but it’s not cost effective to do, for the requirement and cost. Blue printing is best described as everything in the engine being to perfect design intent, so for example, let’s take a piston. The piston design intent is 92,00mm. The production piston is created from a forged blank to a tolerance say of +/- 0.5mm, knowing that the drift won’t be a problem, and the mismatch in weight of 1-3gms won’t be an issue. That same blue printed piston will have a tolerance of 0,001 – 0,005, and the drift in weight between them may be as little as 0,005gms. (centre of gravity would also be considered). In tightening tolerance you’re making that engine or component as tight to the perfect tolerances as possible, making that engine as optimally perfect as it can be in standard trim which translates into balance smoothness and performance longevity. It’s the foundation of all subsequent performance. Remember how people sometimes say (not so much now) that their mates XXX just felt quicker than their XXX and they were identical, or its always been a fast one? – probably down to tighter tolerances on that particular engine’s batch of components. Look at it like watch making, you can sling the gears together and your clock will work, but to have that silky smooth action takes craft and fettling of every component. Like gimlet said Noods, in stock trim, that blue printed engine is as perfect as it can be – off the drawing board perfect. Short of Plate honing the cylinders you won’t get it any better, with the optimised fueling map it should be near as the maker intended. Fuelling is out of the factory, a compromise for engine life / fuel economy and emissions vs performance. Is it worth it? – depends on you the individual. But a hand crafted swiss watch is always going to be better than a sekonda. The knife edging, lightening and exotic material stuff is the performance tuning. J
Those tolerances would be probably based on the tighter tolerances of the Ti rods / valves etc, rather than an engine builder from the Reparto Corse lovingly assembling each engine Tony Scott style (wouldn’t that be lovely!). From your experience with your crank – which is one component of many, imagine measuring every bore, every diameter, every surface, and shimming where it’s under and machining where it’s over, measuring, balancing everything, it takes a long time. In the truest sense of the word you have an artisan built engine. The lumpy tick over is the trade off for lighter internals and cam timing more than anything, It’s by no accident that a formula1 engine (and I imagine a Moto GP) won’t idle at anything less than 4k, that and stupid high compression. Lighten the internals and you trade increased engine response with a lower moment of inertia which is what smoothes out the mechanical motion at low rpm, but this much you already know. Those counterweight lobes on your crankshaft have pretty much the same function, and it’s the same as your crankshaft guy when he balanced the crank, then adds the flywheel and starter sprag and balances it again and again until all your components are in perfect equilibrium. Plate homing by the way just in case you didn’t know is a method whereby you bolt the block down on a simulated engine case plate, and then bring it up to operational temperature before you hone the bores out to nominal so that the engine is at perfect tolerance when at temperature. Taken to extremes of tolerance and you’d need to pre-heat the engine in order to get the bore and other operational tolerances to the correct size before firing the engine up.
My recollection of blue printing is that it was a technique employed by racing divisions of large manufacturers to get the best engine they could without modifying it any way because that would be against the regulations. So they couldn't idealise a part by machining it to exact specifications but they could build an engine from parts that most closely matched ideal specifications by carefully selecting them from large numbers of production parts.
That is truly fascinating... I could talk about all things this for Muchly many time.. So where's your font of knowledge from.. Racing? Engineering?
Bit of both Noods I worked for the woking crowd till 2010 when I was forced to leave as were many others due to the RRA. I was an F1 modelmaker Noods, so we used to work on 60% scale model, so spent a fair share of my time mopping up flow-viz off the model and the tunnel after the aerodynamicists had had their fun! Anywhere near a UV light and you looked like an elephant had just jizzed on you! I started out on GT car's and making the structural composite seats for Kenny Roberts KR3's back in late 90's. I work with a guy who used to work for Mercedes HPE or illmor as was, and looking at some of the stuff he's been involved with is staggering. I'm involved with road cars and gtr now so am forced to see it from the auto manufacturer point of view rather than the cost doesn't matter side of things. Endurance racers are somewhere in between. But since I cut my teeth on them I have a soft spot for them, and who doesn't love an air jack! I met @nuttynick last year at our place But back on topic... All you need to be aware of is that blue printing say a modern engine of five years vintage won't get you the before and after differences that blue printing an engine of twenty year vintage will yield due to advances in manufacturing technology. Most important rule of any tuning or improvement work is be clear about what you're trying to achieve and why. In that way you avoid that all too easy road of "well, as I've got the engine apart..." Wallet haemorrhaging.
Wow ... King Kenny.. I used to watch him as a kid in the transatlantic races.. He was one tough Mother.. It's a really tough call to make.. My 796 is a project bike, I'm really very meticulous in just about everything and will never give up.. The work thus far has already totally transformed her from standard, just for starters she has a S4rs swing arm now.. With the engine I'm looking for either a re mapped blue print version of my 796 2 valve or I might purchase a s4rs lump or perhaps a good 796r engine and shoe horn it in.. My bike is seriously on a diet, all panels etc are painted carbon and as much weight loss as possible is the objective .. I'm looking for seriously more low down power, top end is not really my thing, obv make sprocket changes etc, some ask why didn't you get an evo or sp.. ? Well, I'm small and after test riding I luved the nimble handling of the little brother.. So bought her with a view to a later project.. Now, so I'm told, she's on the way to becoming a top shelf job, but, I must get the power source right somehow.. If I swap the engine.. I don't think much would need doing as the choices are lively as is.. But, I could throw a grand on b printing plus another couple of grand on internal mods, porting and balancing etc etc.. And it would still be a 2 valve 796 with poss a few extra h power.. I can get a low mileage 749r engine for half that... So ? .. Indecision.. and yet muchly more.. Indecision.. NOODS x
