Is "Blueprinting" a "Performance mod"

From Wiki

Blueprinting[edit]
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. While many people confuse blueprinting with high-performance engine building or tuning, these are in fact different goals.
 
Would it be fair to assume that any advantages of blueprinting would be less pronounced on a modern engine, given the tighter manufacturing tolerances that modern production techniques can produce?
 
The only things that you declare to Insurers are things that they'll find if you end up claiming. Be it an accident etc!

They'll never know you blueprinted an engine, and quite frankly.. even mentioning it is a recipe for disaster.

I declared my Eibach Springs, and Enkei 17" Track rims to Admiral insurance the other week. They told me they'd be unable to insure my car as a I go on track!

I told them it had nothing to do with them, and that I was only insured with them on the road. But they still refused!!
 
It's primary relevance these days is in forms of Motorsport that insist on engines remaining 'standard' where blue printing is used to build an engine to the very edge of allowable tolerances allowing you to get the maximum performance from the engine whilst still being within the regulations
 
Rebuilding an engine to perfect tolerances.

Of course that is a contradiction, the purpose of tolerances is because you can't really make things perfectly repeatably, so you have a dimensional plus and minus window which will do. It's when you get the tolerances that stack against you (min/max) that you get the occasional unintended "characteristic" as they like to call them.
 
Last edited:
Blue-printing wouldn't be a 'performance modification', someone else could have got an engine that has the same engine tolerances that your 'blue-printed' engine would have, no matter how small the chances.
 
Blueprinting is old school, how can people not know what it is?

When our engine builder was doing the Westfield engine, eventually taking it to 250BHP, he blueprinted it to one thou. Having seen his workshops, I believe him when he says that's how accurate he got it! Engine was relatively modern - a 2L Zetec bought new off a crate from Ford Racing in 2001, and had about 1500 miles put on it.
 
The only things that you declare to Insurers are things that they'll find if you end up claiming. Be it an accident etc!

They'll never know you blueprinted an engine, and quite frankly.. even mentioning it is a recipe for disaster.

I declared my Eibach Springs, and Enkei 17" Track rims to Admiral insurance the other week. They told me they'd be unable to insure my car as a I go on track!

I told them it had nothing to do with them, and that I was only insured with them on the road. But they still refused!!

I fell for a similar trick. Insurers have no right to tell me what I can and can't do with my vehicle with off public roads, I won't be using a company like that again trust me!
 
Would it be fair to assume that any advantages of blueprinting would be less pronounced on a modern engine, given the tighter manufacturing tolerances that modern production techniques can produce?

It would depend on the manufacturer, casting methods and material quality.
 
I fell for a similar trick. Insurers have no right to tell me what I can and can't do with my vehicle with off public roads, I won't be using a company like that again trust me!

The thing is as soon as you declare to them that you drive on a track, it immediately puts you into a bracket of people who enjoy driving their cars fast.

It doesn't matter to them that because you're doing your fast driving on the track you're probably less likely to be driving in the same manner on the roads, they now know that you like driving fast, which makes you a bigger risk.
 
Back
Top Bottom