We've all heard these terms thrown around. What do you think/expect to be involved in an engine when a shop says:

"Balance and Blueprinted shortblock"

Ryan

 

http://www.custompistols.com/cars/articles/balanced.htm

 

basically, a balance is a balance. blueprinting is where the engine is matched perfectly. each cylinder volume is excact with each other. each combustion chamberis excact, each intake runne, etc. a true blueprint will cost thousands and take a hundred hours or more to complete. now, older restored cars might have a blueprinted engine advertised. this could mean what i explained, or it could mean it was built to excact specs of the engine in that year. people make blueprint cams, heads, intakes, pistons, etc to match what was stock back then. that can also be referred to as "blueprinting"

 

We don't use the term "blueprinted"

The motor is either set up correctly for the application or it isn't.

In basic terms, blueprinting just means that all the tolerances were measured and recorded, not always that they are where they need to be for best performance...

 

As you can see, the term "blueprinting" means different things to different people. It is not used much in the performance field any longer. I think when it first came into use was in the 60's. What it meant then was rebuilding to factory spec with much tighter tolerances than the factory would accept. Also, the tolerances would be adjusted to maximize performance. For example, the chambers would not only be polished and equalized for volume, but would be at the lowest limit for size so as to maximize compression, and so on. The reason to do it was for the OEM's to produce cars for journalists that would perform better than a production line car but could still be said to be stock.

Of course, then there was out and out cheating. Sometimes with the cooperation of the car mags. The most famous example was Car and Driver's famous "GTO v. GTO" where they comparison tested a Pontiac and a Ferrari GTO. The Pontiac turned out to be a ringer, as was revealed years later but suspected by anyone who knew anything at the time. Basically, the motor was far from a production line unit, though it supposedly used mostly production line pieces. Ran the 1/4 mile more than a full second faster than it should have. I think the work was done on the car by a big Detroit area Pontiac dealer with GM's connivance and the magazines complicity. Can't recall the dealerships name though.

Don't trust everything you read in a magazine or on the Internet. Do you believe in "factory freaks"? I don't.

Rich

 

Rich, how does Royal Pontiac sound?

 

I remember that GTO test. IIRC, it had the Super Duty 421 in it instead of the 389. Royal Pontiac was the tuner behind the "Bobcat" GTO cars. As Rich says, it was widely suspected that something wasn't right with the GTO supplied by Pontiac for the mags to test.

 

Obviously the balancing part has been discussed already. As far as blueprinting an engine; it's basically what Machinistone stated; measuring and recording everything in the engine. It's typically only done now a days on 1) race engines 2) test engines 3) retentive people who want to know everything about the motor.

Basically the Blueprint is a record of the measurements from each Rod weight, piston weight, to the journal size on each part of the crank, bearing clearances, etc. It's typically only stored, and the only time it's used is when the engine is torn back apart; then everything is checked to determine how much wear has occoured during either the race, test, or XXX miles for the respective types.

 

Basically the Blueprint is a record of the measurements from each Rod weight, piston weight, to the journal size on each part of the crank, bearing clearances, etc. It's typically only stored, and the only time it's used is when the engine is torn back apart; then everything is checked to determine how much wear has occoured during either the race, test, or XXX miles for the respective types.[/QUOTE]

Agree; hence the name. I do not think it has anything to do with how tight your motor is. It's just a record of measurement. How the other rumor was started who knows.

 

Yeah, that was it. And as Moparman says, it may well have actually had a 421.

Rich

 

I actually do believe in factory freaks... heres why...

STOCK 1997 Camaro Z28 30th Anniversary Collectors Edition

Had 140K miles on the clock. Automatic.

Drove it from SC to OH... 31mpg (yes I did the math right)

Dyno... 271rwhp

1/4 mile time... on street tires... spinning the beginning of first, and a second or two in second... 13.821 @ 99.94mph.

After the motor was blown... we took it out... and its stock as all hell. That is what I would call, a factory freak. Was it some type of test motor??? I dont know. But its possible... as we have a test model outboard on our I/O Four Winns that was never suppost to be released.

 

The dyno was off... 271 rwhp should translate to 103-104 mph in an automatic.. probably close to 105 in a stock stall automatic.

My car went 13.9 @ 99.x mph with just an SLP CAI on street tires, really as close to stock as you can get... so I wouldn't call what you had a freak.

A freak LT1 to me is a 13.2 @ 104 car stock.

 

I see hundreds of LT1's run mid to low 14's with mods.

 

Personally I ran a 13.76 @ 102.28 W a 2.1 60', with only a K&N filter on my car, with 51K miles on it....

Call it what u want.

 

Thanks guys. That clarifies the subjectivity of it .

Ryan