Object: The goals of this research were to make Performance Enhanced Model(PE) taken the largest performance index (PI) through artificial variation of principle components calculated by principle component analysis for trial data, and to verify the effect through comparing kinematic factors between trial data (Raw) and PE. Method: Ten subjects (5 men, 5 women) were recruited and 80% of their maximal record was considered. The PI is a regression equation. In order to develop PE, we extracted Principle components from trial position data (by Principle Components Analysis (PCA)). Before PCA, we made 17 position data to 3 row matrix according to components. We calculated 3 eigen value (principle components) through PCA. And except Y (medial-lateral direction) component (because motion of Y component is small), principle components of X (anterior-posterior direction) and Z (vertical direction) components were changed as following. Changed principle components = principle components + principle components × k. After changing the each principle component, we reconstructed position data using the changed principle components and calculated performance index (PI). A Paired t-test was used to compare Raw data and Performance Enhanced Model data. The level of statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. Result: The PI was significantly increased about 12.9kg at PE (101.92±6.25) when compared to the Raw data (91.29±7.10). It means that performance can be increased by optimizing 3D positions. The difference of kinematic factors as follows : the movement distance of the bar from start to lock out was significantly larger (about 1cm) for PE, the width of anterior-posterior bar position in full phase was significantly wider (about 1.3cm) for PE and the horizontal displacement toward the weightlifter after beginning of descent from maximal height was significantly greater (about 0.4cm) for PE. Additionally, the minimum knee angle in the 2-pull phase was significantly smaller (approximately 2.7cm) for the PE compared to that of the Raw. PE was decided at proximal position from the Raw (origin point (0,0)) of PC variation). Conclusion: PI was decided at proximal position from the Raw (origin point (0,0)) of PC variation). This means that Performance Enhanced Model was decided by similar motion to the Raw without a great change. Therefore, weightlifters could be accept Performance Enhanced Model easily, comfortably and without large stress. The Performance Enhance Model can provide training direction for athletes to improve their weightlifting records.