Cylinder Porting DIY

I left the intake porting out for a reason. It's way too easy to screw up your cylinder if you just go in and start cutting. If you want to try it, I suggest you start on a junk cylinder and get some practice. Don't remove any material from the bridge width but you can try to give it a wedge. You can open up the sides .5 mm, raise .5 mm and drop 1mm. Be sure to keep the lines straight. You can also lift the boost port .5mm but be very careful not to widen it or you'll stick a ring. This is still some mild porting. You're going to lose a little low but pick up a bunch of mid and top. It's worth the trade. Much broader power. You can also bore the carb 1mm bigger. This porting ( exhaust, transfers and intake) works well with the Toomy or FMF pipe, bored carb and head mod. Be sure to poke a few (8) ¾ “ holes in the top of the air box lid also.

So my question is are you saying that we can simply do the exhaust port like you said in the first 2 vids. and get away without doing the intake and or transfers (granted the transfers are reasonably ok) and get an ok amount of power from our tired cylinders? Or is it simply do the exhaust then do the intake with some 120 grit rough sand paper to clean it up right? Also can you make a list of bits/cutters we will need for 1 cylinder, Cause I got dial up here in the country and it's easier to make a list than wait most of an hour to watch the vids again(as much as I want to) Thanks Ken your the best:D
 
ken mentions in part 1 of the banshee porting vid, that someone from out west contacted him, who did exactly as he shows in the blaster diy porting vid on youtube, then had it dyno tested and it did 28hp.
unknown supporting mods

thats a little more than 5hp.
 
ken mentions in part 1 of the banshee porting vid, that someone from out west contacted him, who did exactly as he shows in the blaster diy porting vid on youtube, then had it dyno tested and it did 28hp.
unknown supporting mods

thats a little more than 5hp.

still nothin to snuff at, sounds promising B)
 
I don't have a dyno, but we (my son and I) do have a DT200 engine in a Blaster that was ostensibly rated at 31hp. Using that as the yard stick, after running it through the calibrated ass-dyno, I would estimate that the head mod alone (done first), would raise the HP to about 25. The exhaust porting (and other details) would pretty much complete it to arrive at the claimed 31 hp.

There is a lot of devil in the details. Too much or too little squish or compression or port timing can make all the difference in a bad way. There is only one way to get it right and a hundred ways to get it wrong!

It is possible to get high hp that is too peaky and hard to use, and with a previous motor we had about 25hp that was all mid-range and just about un-stall-able, with 4 stroke like torque. 31hp will spin the Blaster's tires with glorious abandon, the trick is to do it without losing mid-range. Here is a vid of the DT200 cylinder, the 31hp "yardstick".
Note if you can the lack of traction when the abrupt powerband comes on.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds like a very decent gain then :D. I do have previous experience with porting both 2 and 4 strokes but i am new to blasters and am learning the ropes at the mo.
This is definitely a mod i am going to do along with an fmf pipe and boyeson pro dual stage reeds with maybe a carb upgrade also, fingers crossed this will give me a nice power figure.
 
funny you say that cause the motor I did this to also has dual stage reeds and and an fmf fatty pipe set up but a stock carb:-[
 
Considering a +3 stroker crank now and just wondering what sort of modifying to the port i will have to do with this to get the most gain with the stroker
 
Considering a +3 stroker crank now and just wondering what sort of modifying to the port i will have to do with this to get the most gain with the stroker

Karterphil, here is the secret to making power... PLAN
Pressure, average pressure in the cylinder
Length of stroke, part of displacement
Area of the piston, other component of displacement
Number of power strokes per minute, takes into account rpm and cylinders

These factors are multiplied together and then divided by a constant to get gross hp developed. This comes from back before even gas (petrol!) engines. We don't need to get into complicated math to see that the percentage that we increase pressure (which comes indirectly from compression and flow), displacement, and rpm has a direct relationship with power.

Your 3mm stroker will raise your displacement from 195cc to 205cc, a 5% increase. Expect this same increase of power if nothing else is changed.
So if you made 17hp, expect it to jump to 17.8hp. Sad isn't it?

Well, Luckily there are other factors at work too. By increasing the displacement you are potentially increasing the compression (head volume stayed the same) and a stroker can potentially change the port timing which can affect the rpm range. So if you increased displacement by 5%, compression (and potentially pressure) by 5%, and raised the rpm of the powerband by 5%, this could be a 15% power increase.
So your stock 17hp now becomes 19.5hp. Better, but you were looking for more, right?

There is more. Here is the good news:
A Blaster motor is heavily detuned, so unlike most motors, you can expect to increase the average pressure about 50%.
That is a lot. Most motocross engines and 4 strokes are lucky if you can raise average cylinder pressure by 10%.
Displacement can be raised 5% by stroke, 6% by boring, 19% with a Big Bore Kit, or about 25% maximum.
And rpm, this comes from port tuning. This engine has a fair amount of rpm potential (trading reliability). To raise it 20% is totally possible.
Add these all together comes out to about 100% potential power increase with your 3mm stroker, or about 34hp.
About 40-45hp would be near maximum for an all-out narrow powerband, high rpm drag engine.

So, now that you know how it works, getting back to you original question:
"what sort of modifying to the port i will have to do with this to get the most gain with the stroker"?
You can see the stroker truthfully represents only a 10% increase of power (compression and displacement).
It is the port timing affecting the rpm range that can give you the real (20%) power boost. This you can do without the stroker.

To prove it to yourself, raise the cylinder by adding an extra basegasket and get the head back in place by leaving out the headgasket and just using Yamabond or Hylomar sealer. Yes it will work for a test. I have not done it with a Blaster but have done it with Rotex engines. You can file or sand (sandpaper on glass) the head and cylinder flat if you want to run it longer like this. This effects raising the ports without actually grinding the cylinder out. It allows you to test and feel the effect of increasing port timing without ruining a cylinder. It will raise your rpm range and hp, but kill some low rpm power, which a quad could really use.

So, to answer your question, displacement and port timing are two different power effects. With the extra displacement, you can shove the powerband higher because you have the extra bit of displacement induced low end torque. You can also tweek the compression while at it. Vitos has thought it all out with their 1mm spacer under the cylinder with their 3mm stroker kit. Displacement, port timing and compression all boosted.

But then, you really don't need a stroker crank to get the rpm and compression gains...
 
do you know what sort of power yours was making after this ??

No cause the kid that had it before me ran the motor into the ground cylinder wise. And it 's not running right now cause money's been unexpeditly tight so none's going into the blasty.:-[
But all I gotta do Is bore it to. 50-60 over cause it's 40 over right now ...a ring clipped the exhaust port. But when it would happen to crank over from blowby it ran for sh*t wouldent rev, wouldent idle for more than 10 min.but It's all ported and stuff in my thread home port job. here's the link I think I did a pretty good job for a first time. first link is port, second id engine damage.
http://www.blasterforum.com/engine-13/home-port-job-d-48452/
http://www.blasterforum.com/engine-13/blew-its-stack-47495/
 
You can get 60+hp out of a knock down dragged out blaster motor.
You will need alcohol.

Yes, and likely 100 if you used a supercharger and a big clamp to hold the head and cylinder in place. :)
But we are stepping out of the realm of practicality aren't we?
I was kind of sticking with what was in the realm of practicality for most of us. Am I on the mark?

The 60 hp would be achieved with rpm and cylinder pressure, wouldn't it?
Alcohol and perhaps nitro-methane in such huge proportions that the sheer volumes help to cool the metal,
and if the spark should die during the run, the volume of liquid has a danger of hydro-locking the piston and bending a rod?
I've never played with alcohol and nitro-methane, other than glow plug RC engines. Sounds fun but spendy.
A Blaster would probably be a better place to play with it than a V8 if you didn't have a big budget.
I'd love to hear someone's experience.

I did work at a naval rebuild yard for a while. One of the things they rebuilt was some type of radial torpedo motor.
It was no more than about 1.5 foot in diameter, probably weighed no more than 100 lbs. I was told it made over 300hp.
Every so often they would fire one up and test run it for about a minute. It was quite an event when they did, and quite loud.

Steve
 
You need alky, a 240, and a stroker crank. No turbo, supercharger, N2O, or nitro.
Most of all good porting.
Cylinder presure as you call it is not necessary and will start to fight you at that level.
RPM's is where it's at.
Not really out of the relm for anyone.
BUT
You end up with a drag only motor with no low end torque. It would not be a trail bike at all.
 
i have recently ported my own cylinder and thort you lot would love sum pics so i will try to get them on now :D:D
 

Attachments

  • IMG-20121001-00260.jpg
    IMG-20121001-00260.jpg
    92.1 KB · Views: 487
  • IMG-20120930-00256.jpg
    IMG-20120930-00256.jpg
    94.3 KB · Views: 479
  • IMG-20121001-00261.jpg
    IMG-20121001-00261.jpg
    96.9 KB · Views: 488
  • IMG-20121001-00262.jpg
    IMG-20121001-00262.jpg
    91 KB · Views: 507
  • IMG-20121001-00267.jpg
    IMG-20121001-00267.jpg
    109.9 KB · Views: 527